1. The Ario-maniacs, as it appears, having once made up their minds to transgress and revolt from the Truth, are strenuous in appropriating the words of Scripture, ‘When the impious cometh into a depth of evils, he despiseth 2786 ;’ for refutation does not stop them, nor perplexity abash them; but, as having ‘a whore’s forehead,’ they ‘refuse to be ashamed 2787 ’ before all men in their irreligion. For whereas the passages which they alleged, ‘The Lord created me 2788 ,’ and ‘Made better than the Angels 2789 ,’ and ‘First-born 2790 ,’ and ‘Faithful to Him that made Him 2791 ’ have a right sense 2792 , and inculcate religiousness towards Christ, so it is that these men still, as if bedewed with the serpent’s poison, not seeing what they ought to see, nor understanding what they read, as if in vomit from the depth of their irreligious heart, have next proceeded to disparage our Lord’s words, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me 2793 ;’ saying, ‘How can the One be contained in the Other and the Other in the One?’ or ‘How at all can the Father who is the greater be contained in the Son who is the less?’ or ‘What wonder, if the Son is in the Father,’ considering it is written even of us, ‘In Him we live and move and have our being 2794 ?’ And this state of mind is consistent with their perverseness, who think God to be material, and understand not what is ‘True Father’ and ‘True Son,’ nor ‘Light Invisible’ and ‘Eternal,’ and Its ‘Radiance Invisible,’ nor ‘Invisible Subsistence,’ and ‘Immaterial Expression’ and ‘Immaterial Image.’ For did they know, they would not dishonour and ridicule the Lord of glory, nor interpreting things immaterial after a material manner, pervert good words. It were sufficient indeed, on hearing only words which are the Lord’s, at once to believe, since the faith of simplicity is better than an elaborate process of persuasion; but since they have endeavoured to profane even this passage to their own heresy, it becomes necessary to expose their perverseness and to shew the mind of the truth, at least for the security of the faithful. For when it is said, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me,’ They are not therefore, as these suppose, discharged into Each Other, filling the One the Other, as in the case of empty vessels, so that the Son fills the emptiness of the Father and the Father that of the Son 2795 , and Each of Them by Himself is not complete and perfect (for this is proper to bodies, and therefore the mere assertion of it is full of irreligion), for the Father is full and perfect, and the Son is the Fulness of Godhead. Nor again, as God, by coming into the Saints, strengthens them, thus is He also in the Son. For He is Himself the Father’s Power and Wisdom, and by partaking of Him things originate are sanctified in the Spirit; but the Son Himself is not Son by participation, but is the Father’s own Offspring 2796 . Nor again is the Son in the Father, in the sense of the passage, ‘In Him we live and move and have our being;’ for, He as being from the Fount 2797 of the Father is the Life, in which all things are both quickened and consist; for the Life does not live in life 2798 , else it would not be Life, but rather He gives life to all things.
2. But now let us see what Asterius the Sophist says, the retained pleader 2799 for the heresy. In imitation then of the Jews so far, he writes as follows; ‘It is very plain that He has said, that He is in the Father and the Father again in Him, for this reason, that neither the word on which He was discoursing is, as He says, His own, but the Father’s, nor the works belong to Him, but to the Father who gave Him the power.’ Now this, if uttered at random by a little child, had been excused from his age; but when one who bears the title of Sophist, and professes universal knowledge 2800 , is the writer, what a serious condemnation does he deserve! And does he not shew himself a stranger to the Apostle 2801 , as being puffed up with persuasive words of wisdom, and thinking thereby to succeed in deceiving, not understanding himself what he says nor whereof he affirms 2802 ? For what the Son has said as proper and suitable to a Son only, who is Word and Wisdom and Image of the Father’s Essence, that he levels to all the creatures, and makes common to the Son and to them; and he says, lawless 2803 man, that the Power of the Father receives power, that from this his irreligion it may follow to say that in a son 2804 the Son was made a son, and the Word received a word’s authority; and, far from granting that He spoke this as a Son, He ranks Him with all things made as having learned it as they have. For if the Son said, ‘I am in the Father and the Father in Me,’ because His discourses were not His own words but the Father’s, and so of His works, then,—since David says, ‘I will hear what the Lord God shall say in me 2805 ,’ and again Solomon 2806 , ‘My words are spoken by God,’ and since Moses was minister of words which were from God, and each of the Prophets spoke not what was his own but what was from God, ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ and since the works of the Saints, as they professed, were not their own but God’s who gave the power, Elijah for instance and Elisha invoking God that He Himself would raise the dead, and Elisha saying to Naaman, on cleansing him from the leprosy, ‘that thou mayest know that there is a God in Israel 2807 ,’ and Samuel too in the days of the harvest praying to God to grant rain, and the Apostles saying that not in their own power they did miracles but in the Lord’s grace—it is plain that, according to Asterius such a statement must be common to all, so that each of them is able to say, ‘I in the Father and the Father in me;’ and as a consequence that He is no longer one Son of God and Word and Wisdom, but, as others, is only one out of many.
3. But if the Lord said this, His words would not rightly have been, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me,’ but rather, ‘I too am in the Father, and the Father is in Me too,’ that He may have nothing of His own and by prerogative 2808 , relatively to the Father, as a Son, but the same grace in common with all. But it is not so, as they think; for not understanding that He is genuine Son from the Father, they belie Him who is such, whom alone it befits to say, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me.’ For the Son is in the Father, as it is allowed us to know, because the whole Being of the Son is proper to the Father’s essence 2809 , as radiance from light, and stream from fountain; so that whoso sees the Son, sees what is proper to the Father, and knows that the Son’s Being, because from the Father, is therefore in the Father. For the Father is in the Son, since the Son is what is from the Father and proper to Him, as in the radiance the sun, and in the word the thought, and in the stream the fountain: for whoso thus contemplates the Son, contemplates what is proper to the Father’s Essence, and knows that the Father is in the Son. For whereas the Form 2810 and Godhead of the Father is the Being of the Son, it follows that the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son 2811 .
4. On this account and reasonably, having said before, ‘I and the Father are One,’ He added, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me, 2812 ’ by way of shewing the identity 2813 of Godhead and the unity of Essence. For they are one, not 2814 as one thing divided into two parts, and these nothing but one, nor as one thing twice named, so that the Same becomes at one time Father, at another His own Son, for this Sabellius holding was judged an heretic. But They are two, because the Father is Father and is not also Son, and the Son is Son and not also Father 2815 ; but the nature is one; (for the offspring is not unlike 2816 its parent, for it is his image), and all that is the Father’s, is the Son’s 2817 . Wherefore neither is the Son another God, for He was not procured from without, else were there many, if a godhead be procured foreign from the Father’s 2818 ; for if the Son be other, as an Offspring, still He is the Same as God; and He and the Father are one in propriety and peculiarity of nature, and in the identity of the one Godhead, as has been said. For the radiance also is light, not second to the sun, nor a different light, nor from participation of it, but a whole and proper offspring of it. And such an offspring is necessarily one light; and no one would say that they are two lights 2819 , but sun and radiance two, yet one the light from the sun enlightening in its radiance all things. So also the Godhead of the Son is the Father’s; whence also it is indivisible; and thus there is one God and none other but He. And so, since they are one, and the Godhead itself one, the same things are said of the Son, which are said of the Father, except His being said to be Father 2820 :—for instance 2821 , that He is God, ‘And the Word was God 2822 ;’ Almighty, ‘Thus saith He which was and is and is to come, the Almighty 2823 ;’ Lord, ‘One Lord Jesus Christ 2824 ;’ that He is Light, ‘I am the Light 2825 ;’ that He wipes out sins, ‘that ye may know,’ He says, ‘that the Son of man hath power upon earth to forgive sins 2826 ;’ and so with other attributes. For ‘all things,’ says the Son Himself, ‘whatsoever the Father hath, are Mine 2827 ;’ and again, ‘And Mine are Thine.’
5. And on hearing the attributes of the Father spoken of a Son, we shall thereby see the Father in the Son; and we shall contemplate the Son in the Father, when what is said of the Son is said of the Father also. And why are the attributes of the Father ascribed to the Son, except that the Son is an Offspring from Him? and why are the Son’s attributes proper to the Father, except again because the Son is the proper Offspring of His Essence? And the Son, being the proper Offspring of the Father’s Essence, reasonably says that the Father’s attributes are His own also; whence suitably and consistently with saying, ‘I and the Father are One,’ He adds, ‘that ye may know that I am in the Father and the Father in Me 2828 .’ Moreover, He has added this again, ‘He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father 2829 ;’ and there is one and the same sense in these three 2830 passages. For he who in this sense understands that the Son and the Father are one, knows that He is in the Father and the Father in the Son; for the Godhead of the Son is the Father’s, and it is in the Son; and whoso enters into this, is convinced that ‘He that hath seen the Son, hath seen the Father;’ for in the Son is contemplated the Father’s Godhead. And we may perceive this at once from the illustration of the Emperor’s image. For in the image is the shape and form of the Emperor, and in the Emperor is that shape which is in the image. For the likeness of the Emperor in the image is exact 2831 ; so that a person who looks at the image, sees in it the Emperor; and he again who sees the Emperor, recognises that it is he who is in the image 2832 . And from the likeness not differing, to one who after the image wished to view the Emperor, the image might say, ‘I and the Emperor are one; for I am in him, and he in me; and what thou seest in me, that thou beholdest in him, and what thou hast seen in him, that thou holdest in me 2833 .’ Accordingly he who worships the image, in it worships the Emperor also; for the image is his form and appearance. Since then the Son too is the Father’s Image, it must necessarily be understood that the Godhead and propriety of the Father is the Being of the Son.
6. And this is what is said, ‘Who being in the form of God 2834 ,’ and ‘the Father in Me.’ Nor is this Form 2835 of the Godhead partial merely, but the fulness of the Father’s Godhead is the Being of the Son, and the Son is whole God. Therefore also, being equal to God, He ‘thought it not a prize to be equal to God;’ and again since the Godhead and the Form of the Son is none other’s than the Father’s 2836 , this is what He says, ‘I in the Father.’ Thus ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself 2837 ;’ for the propriety of the Father’s Essence is that Son, in whom the creation was then reconciled with God. Thus what things the Son then wrought are the Father’s works, for the Son is the Form of that Godhead of the Father, which wrought the works. And thus he who looks at the Son, sees the Father; for in the Father’s Godhead is and is contemplated the Son; and the Father’s Form which is in Him shews in Him the Father; and thus the Father is in the Son. And that propriety and Godhead which is from the Father in the Son, shews the Son in the Father, and His inseparability from Him; and whoso hears and beholds that what is said of the Father is also said of the Son, not as accruing to His Essence by grace or participation, but because the very Being of the Son is the proper Offspring of the Father’s Essence, will fitly understand the words, as I said before, ‘I in the Father, and the Father in Me;’ and ‘I and the Father are One 2838 .’ For the Son is such as the Father is, because He has all that is the Father’s. Wherefore also is He implied together with the Father. For, a son not being, one cannot say father; whereas when we call God a Maker, we do not of necessity intimate the things which have come to be; for a maker is before his works 2839 . But when we call God Father, at once with the Father we signify the Son’s existence. Therefore also he who believes in the Son, believes also in the Father: for he believes in what is proper to the Father’s Essence; and thus the faith is one in one God. And he who worships and honours the Son, in the Son worships and honours the Father; for one is the Godhead; and therefore one 2840 the honour and one the worship which is paid to the Father in and through the Son. And he who thus worships, worships one God; for there is one God and none other than He. Accordingly when the Father is called the only God, and we read that there is one God 2841 , and ‘I am,’ and ‘beside Me there is no God,’ and ‘I the first and I the last 2842 ,’ this has a fit meaning. For God is One and Only and First; but this is not said to the denial of the Son 2843 , perish the thought; for He is in that One, and First and Only, as being of that One and Only and First the Only Word and Wisdom and Radiance. And He too is the First, as the Fulness of the Godhead of the First and Only, being whole and full God 2844 . This then is not said on His account, but to deny that there is other such as the Father and His Word.
Footnotes
393:2786Prov. xviii. 3, LXX.
393:2787Jer. iii. 3.
393:2788Supr. ch. xix.
393:2789Ch. xiii.
393:2790Ch. xxi.
393:2791Ch. xiv.
393:2792ii. 44, n. 1.
393:2793John xiv. 10.
393:2794Acts xvii. 28. Vid. supr. ii. 41, note 11. The doctrine of the περιχώρησις, which this objection introduces, is the test of orthodoxy opposed to Arianism. Cf. de Syn. 15, n. 4. This is seen clearly in the case of Eusebius, whose language approaches to Catholic more nearly than Arians in general. After all his strong assertions, the question recurs, is our Lord a distinct being from God, as we are, or not? he answers in the affirmative, vid. supr. p. 75, n. 7, whereas we believe that He is literally and numerically one with the Father, and therefore His Person dwells in the Father’s Person by an ineffable union. And hence the language of Dionysius [of Rome] supr. de Decr. 26. ‘the Holy Ghost must repose and habitate in God,’ ἐμφιλοχωρεῖν τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐνδιαιτᾶσθαι. And hence the strong figure of S. Jerome (in which he is followed by S. Cyril, Thesaur. p. 51), ‘Filius locus est Patris, sicut et Pater locus est Filii.’ in Ezek. iii. 12. So Athan. contrasts the creatures who are ἐν μεμερισμένοις τόποις and the Son. Serap. iii. 4. Cf. even in the Macrostich Creed, language of this character, viz. ‘All the Father embosoming the Son, and all the Son hanging and adhering to the Father, and alone resting on the Father’s breast continually.’ De Syn. 26 (7), where vid. note 3.
394:2795This is not inconsistent with S. Jerome as quoted in the foregoing note. Athan. merely means that such illustrations cannot be taken literally, as if spoken of natural subjects. The Father is the τόπος or locus of the Son, because when we contemplate the Son in His fulness as ὅλος θεός, we merely view the Father as that Person in whom God the Son is; our mind abstracts His Essence which is the Son for the moment from Him, and regards Him merely as Father. Thus in Illud. Omn. 4, supr. p. 89. It is, however, but an operation of the mind, and not a real emptying of Godhead from the Father, if such words may be used. Father and Son are both the same God, though really and eternally distinct from each other; and Each is full of the Other, that is, their Essence is one and the same. This is insisted on by S. Cyril, in Joan. p. 28. And by S. Hilary, Trin. vii. fin. vid. also iii. 23. Cf. the quotation from S. Anselm made by Petavius, de Trin. iv. 16 fin. [Cf. D.C.B. s.v. Metangismonitae.]
394:2796Vid. de Decr. 10, n. 4, 19, n. 3; Or. i. 15, n. 6. On the other hand Eusebius considers the Son, like a creature, ἐξ αὐτῆς τῆς πατρικῆς [not οὐσίας, but] μετουσίας, ὥσπερ ἀπὸ πηγῆς, ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν προχεομένης πληρούμενον. Eccl. Theol. i. 2. words which are the more observable, the nearer they approach to the language of Athan. in the text and elsewhere. Vid. infr. by way of contrast, οὐδὲ κατὰ μετουσίαν αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ᾽ ὅλον ἴδιον αὐτοῦ γέννημα. 4.
394:2797De Decr. 15, n. 9.
394:2798i.e. Son does not live by the gift of life, for He is life, and does but give it, not receive. S. Hilary uses different language with the same meaning, de Trin. ii. 11. Other modes of expression for the same mystery are found infr. 3. also 6 fin. Vid. de Syn. 45, n. 1. and Didymus ἡ πατρικὴ θεότης. p. 82. and S. Basil, ἐξ οὗ ἔχει τὸ εἶναι. contr. Eunom. ii. 12 fin. Just above Athan. says that ‘the Son is the fulness of the Godhead.’ Thus the Father is the Son’s life because the Son is from Him, and the Son the Father’s because the Son is in Him. All these are but different ways of signifying the περιχώρησις
394:2799συνηγόρου, infr. §60.
394:2800πάντα γινώσκειν ἐπαγγελλόμενος. Gorgias, according to Cicero de fin. ii. init. was the first who ventured in public to say προβάλλετε, ‘give me a question.’ This was the ἐπάγγελμα of the Sophists; of which Aristotle speaks. Rhet. ii. 24 fin. Vid. Cressol. Theatr. Rhet. iii. 11.
394:28011 Cor. ii. 4.
394:28021 Tim. i. 7.
394:2803παράνομος. infr. 47, c. Hist. Ar. 71, 75, 79. Ep. Æg. 16, d. Vid. ἄνομος. 2 Thess. ii. 8.
394:2804ἐν υἱ& 254·, but ἐν τῷ υἱ& 254·. Ep. Æg. 14 fin. vid. Or. ii. 22, note 2.
394:2805Ps. lxxxv. 8, LXX.
394:28061 Kings 8:59, 1 Kings 10:241 Kings viii. 59, or x. 24?
395:28072 Kings 5:8, 15.
395:2808Or. ii. 19, n. 6.
395:2809Since the Father and the Son are the numerically One God, it is but expressing this in other words to say that the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father, for all They have and all They are is common to Each, excepting Their being Father and Son. A περιχώρησις of Persons is implied in the Unity of Essence. This is the connexion of the two texts so often quoted; ‘the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son,’ because ‘the Son and the Father are one.’ And the cause of this unity and περιχώρησις is the Divine γέννησις. Thus S. Hilary, Trin. ii. 4. vid. Or. ii. 33, n. 1.
395:2810εἴδους. Petavius here prefers the reading ἰδίου; θεότης and τὸ ἱδιον occur together infr. 6. and 56. εἶδος occurs Orat. i. 20, a. de Syn. 52. vid. de Syn. 52, n. 6. infr. 6, 16, Ep. Æg. 17, contr. Sabell. Greg. 8, c. 12, vid. infr. §§6, 16, notes.
395:2811In accordance with §1, note 10, Thomassin observes that by the mutual coinherence or indwelling of the Three Blessed Persons is meant ‘not a commingling as of material liquids, nor as of soul with body, nor as the union of our Lord’s Godhead and humanity, but it is such that the whole power, life, substance, wisdom, essence, of the Father, should be the very essence, substance, wisdom, life, and power of the Son.’ de Trin. xxviii. 1. S. Cyril adopts Athan.’s language to express this doctrine in Joan. p. 105. de Trin. vi. p. 621, in Joan. p. 168. Vid. infr. ταὐτότης οὐσίας, 21. πατρικὴ θεότης τοῦ υἱοῦ, 26. and 41. and de Syn. 45, n. 1. vid. also Damasc. F. O. i. 8. pp. 139, 140.
395:2812John x. 30.
395:2813De Syn. 45, n. 1.
395:2814Infr. Orat. iv. 9.
395:2815Infr. 11.
395:2816ἀνόμοιον; and so ἀνόμοιος κατὰ πάντα. Orat. i. 6. κατ᾽ οὐσίαν. 17. Orat. ii. 43. τῆς οὐσίας. infr. 14. vid. ἀνομοιότης. infr. 8, c.
395:2817Cf. in illud. Omn. 4. ‘As the Father is I am (ὁ ὤν) so His Word is I Am and God over all.’ Serap. i. 28, a; ib. ii. 2.
395:2818Cf. i. 6.
395:2819Doctrine of the Una Res, de Syn. 45, n. 1.
395:2820Ib. 49, n. 4.
395:2821Parallel to de Syn. 49.
395:2822John i. 1.
395:2823Rev. i. 8.
395:28241 Cor. viii. 6.
395:2825John viii. 12.
395:2826Luke v. 24.
395:2827John xvi. 15; xvii. 10.
396:2828John 10:30, 38; xiv. 10.
396:2829John 14.9.
396:2830Here these three texts, which so often occur together, are recognized as ‘three;’ so are they by Eusebius Eccl. Theol. iii. 19; and he says that Marcellus and ‘those who Sabellianize with him,’ among whom he included Catholics, were in the practice of adducing them, θρυλλοῦντες; which bears incidental testimony to the fact that the doctrine of the περιχώρησις was the great criterion between orthodox and Arian. Many instances of the joint use of the three are given supr. i. 34, n. 7. to which may be added Orat. ii. 54 init. iii. 16 fin. 67 fin. iv. 17, a. Serap. ii. 9, c. Serm. Maj. de fid. 29. Cyril. de Trin. p. 554. in Joann. p. 168. Origen Periarch. p. 56. Hil. Trin. ix. 1. Ambros. Hexaem. 6. August. de Cons. Ev. i. 7.
396:2831ἀπαράλλακτος, de Syn. 23, n. 1.
396:2832Vid. Basil. Hom. contr. Sab. p. 192. The honour paid to the Imperial Statues is well known. Ambros. in Psalm cxviii. x. 25. vid. also Chrysost. Hom. on Statues, passim, fragm. in Act. Conc. vii. (t. 4, p. 89. Hard.) Socr. vi. 18. The Seventh Council speaks of the images sent by the Emperors into provinces instead of their coming in person; Ducange in v. Lauratum. Vid. a description of the imperial statutes and their honours in Gothofred, Cod. Theod. t. 5, pp. 346, 7. and in Philostorg. xii. 12. vid. also Molanus de Imaginibus ed. Paquot, p. 197.
396:2833Athanasius guards against what is defective in this illustration in the next chapter, but independent of such explanation a mistake as to his meaning would be impossible; and the passage affords a good instance of the imperfect and partial character of all illustrations of the Divine Mystery. What it is taken to symbolize is the unity of the Father and Son, for the Image is not a Second Emperor but the same. vid. Sabell. Greg. 6. But no one, who bowed before the Emperor’s Statue can be supposed to have really worshipped it; whereas our Lord is the Object of supreme worship, which terminates in Him, as being really one with Him whose Image He is. From the custom of paying honour to the Imperial Statues, the Cultus Imaginum was introduced into the Eastern Church. The Western Church, not having had the civil custom, resisted. vid. Döllinger, Church History, vol. 3. p. 55. E. Tr. The Fathers, e.g. S. Jerome, set themselves against the civil custom, as idolatrous, comparing it to that paid to Nebuchadnezzar’s statue. vid. Hieron. in Dan. iii. 18. Incense was burnt before those of the Emperors; as afterwards before the images of the Saints.
396:2834Phil. ii. 6.
396:2835εἶδος, vid. infr. 16, note.
396:2836Here first the Son’s εἶδος is the εἶδος of the Father, then the Son is the εἶδος of the Father’s Godhead, and then in the Son is the εἶδος of the Father. These expressions are equivalent, if Father and Son are, each separately, ὅλος θεός. vid. infr. §16, note. S. Greg. Naz. uses the word ὀπίσθια (Exod. xxxiii. 23), which forms a contrast to εἶδος, for the Divine Works. Orat. 28, 3.
396:28372 Cor. v. 19.
396:2838John xiv. 10; x. 30.
396:2839Vid. supr. de Decr. 30; Or. i. 33. This is in opposition to the Arians, who said that the title Father implied priority of existence. Athan. says that the title ‘Maker’ does, but that the title ‘father’ does not. vid. supr. p. 76, n. 3; Or. i. 29, n. 10: ii. 41, n. 11.
397:2840Athan. de Incarn. c. Ar. 19, c. vid. Ambros. de fid. iii. cap. 12, 13. Naz. Orat. 23, 8. Basil. de Sp. S. n. 64.
397:2841Mark xii. 29.
397:2842Exod. 3:14, Deut. 32:39, Isa. 44:6Ex. iii. 14; Deut. xxxii. 39, LXX.; Is. xliv. 6
397:2843De Decr. 19, n. 6.
397:2844Vid. supr. 1, note 10; ii. 41 fin. also infr. iv. 1. Pseudo-Ath. c. Sab. Greg. 5–12. Naz. Orat. 40, 41. Synes. Hymn. iii. pp. 328, 9. Ambros. de Fid. i. n. 18. August. Ep. 170, 5. vid. Or. ii. 38, n. 6. and infr. note on 36 fin.
Chapter XXIV.—Texts Explained; Eighthly, John xvii. 3. and the Like. Our Lord’s divinity cannot interfere with His Father’s prerogatives, as the One God, which were so earnestly upheld by the Son. ‘One’ is used in contrast to false gods and idols, not to the Son, through whom the Father spoke. Our Lord adds His Name to the Father’s, as included in Him. The Father the First, not as if the Son were not First too, but as Origin.
7. Now that this is the sense of the Prophet is clear and manifest to all; but since the irreligious men, alleging such passages also, dishonour the Lord and reproach us, saying, ‘Behold God is said to be One and Only and First; how say ye that the Son is God? for if He were God, He had not said, “I Alone,” nor “God is One 2845 ;”’ it is necessary to declare the sense of these phrases in addition, as far as we can, that all may know from this also that the Arians are really contending with God 2846 . If there then is rivalry of the Son towards the Father, then be such words uttered against Him; and if according to what is said to David concerning Adonijah and Absalom 2847 , so also the Father looks upon the Son, then let Him utter and urge such words against Himself, lest He the Son, calling Himself God, make any to revolt from the Father. But if he who knows the Son, on the contrary, knows the Father, the Son Himself revealing Him to him, and in the Word he shall rather see the Father, as has been said, and if the Son on coming, glorified not Himself but the Father, saying to one who came to Him, ‘Why callest thou Me good? none is good save One, that is, God 2848 ;’ and to one who asked, what was the great commandment in the Law, answering, ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is One Lord 2849 ;’ and saying to the multitudes, ‘I came down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him that sent Me 2850 ;’ and teaching the disciples, ‘My Father is greater than I,’ and ‘He that honoureth Me, honoureth Him that sent Me 2851 ;’ if the Son is such towards His own Father, what is the difficulty 2852 , that one must need take such a view of such passages? and on the other hand, if the Son is the Father’s Word, who is so wild, besides these Christ-opposers, as to think that God has thus spoken, as traducing and denying His own Word? This is not the mind of Christians; perish the thought; for not with reference to the Son is it thus written, but for the denial of those falsely called gods, invented by men.
8. And this account of the meaning of such passages is satisfactory; for since those who are devoted to gods falsely so called, revolt from the True God, therefore God, being good and careful for mankind, recalling the wanderers, says, ‘I am Only God,’ and ‘I Am,’ and ‘Besides Me there is no God,’ and the like; that He may condemn things which are not, and may convert all men to Himself. And as, supposing in the daytime when the sun was shining, a man were rudely to paint a piece of wood, which had not even the appearance of light, and call that image the cause of light, and if the sun with regard to it were to say, ‘I alone am the light of the day, and there is no other light of the day but I,’ he would say this, with regard, not to his own radiance, but to the error arising from the wooden image and the dissimilitude of that vain representation; so it is with ‘I am,’ and ‘I am Only God,’ and ‘There is none other besides Me,’ viz. that He may make men renounce falsely called gods, and that they may recognise Him the true God instead. Indeed when God said this, He said it through His own Word, unless forsooth the modern 2853 Jews add this too, that He has not said this through His Word; but so hath He spoken, though they rave, these followers of the devil 2854 . For the Word of the Lord came to the Prophet, and this was what was heard; nor is there a thing which God says or does, but He says and does it in the Word. Not then with reference to Him is this said, O Christ’s enemies, but to things foreign to Him and not from 2855 Him. For according to the aforesaid illustration, if the sun had spoken those words, he would have been setting right the error and have so spoken, not as having his radiance without him, but in the radiance shewing his own light. Therefore not for the denial of the Son, nor with reference to Him, are such passages, but to the overthrow of falsehood. Accordingly God spoke not such words to Adam at the beginning, though His Word was with Him, by whom all things came to be; for there was no need, before idols came in; but when men made insurrection against the truth and named for themselves gods such as they would 2856 , then it was that need arose of such words, for the denial of gods that were not. Nay I would add, that they were said even in anticipation of the folly of these Christ-opposers 2857 , that they might know, that whatsoever god they devise external to the Father’s Essence, he is not True God, nor Image and Son of the Only and First.
9. If then the Father be called the only true God, this is said not to the denial of Him who said, ‘I am the Truth 2858 ,’ but of those on the other hand who by nature are not true, as the Father and His Word are. And hence the Lord Himself added at once, ‘And Jesus Christ whom Thou didst send 2859 .’ Now had He been a creature, He would not have added this, and ranked Himself with His Creator (for what fellowship is there between the True and the not true?); but as it is, by adding Himself to the Father, He has shewn that He is of the Father’s nature; and He has given us to know that of the True Father He is True Offspring. And John too, as he had learned 2860 , so he teaches this, writing in his Epistle, ‘And we are in the True, even in His Son Jesus Christ; This is the True God and eternal life 2861 .’ And when the Prophet says concerning the creation, ‘That stretcheth forth the heavens alone 2862 ,’ and when God says, ‘I only stretch out the heavens,’ it is made plain to every one, that in the Only is signified also the Word of the Only, in whom ‘all things were made,’ and without whom ‘was made not one thing.’ Therefore, if they were made through the Word, and yet He says, ‘I Only,’ and together with that Only is understood the Son, through whom the heavens were made, so also then, if it be said, ‘One God,’ and ‘I Only,’ and ‘I the First,’ in that One and Only and First is understood the Word coexisting, as in the Light the Radiance. And this can be understood of no other than the Word alone. For all other things subsisted out of nothing through the Son, and are greatly different in nature; but the Son Himself is natural and true Offspring from the Father; and thus the very passage which these insensates have thought fit to adduce, ‘I the First,’ in defence of their heresy, doth rather expose their perverse spirit. For God says, ‘I the First and I the Last;’ if then, as though ranked with the things after Him, He is said to be first of them, so that they come next to Him, then certainly you will have shewn that He Himself precedes the works in time only 2863 ; which, to go no further, is extreme irreligion; but if it is in order to prove that He is not from any, nor any before Him, but that He is Origin and Cause of all things, and to destroy the Gentile fables, that He has said ‘I the First,’ it is plain also, that when the Son is called First-born, this is done not for the sake of ranking Him with the creation, but to prove the framing and adoption of all things 2864 through the Son. For as the Father is First, so also is He both First 2865 , as Image of the First, and because the First is in Him, and also Offspring from the Father, in whom the whole creation is created and adopted into sonship.
Footnotes
397:2845Deut. xxxii. 39; vi. 4, &c.
397:2846θεομάχοι. vid. Acts v. 39.
397:28472 Sam. xv. 13; 1 Kings i. 11.
397:2848Luke xviii. 19, and vid. Basil. Ep. 236, 1.
397:2849Mark xii. 29.
397:2850John vi. 38; xiv. 28.
397:2851John 5:23, John 13:20John v. 23, cf. xiii. 20.
397:2852§58, note.
398:2853οἱ νῦν, cf. Or. ii. 1, note 6, and Hist. Ar. 61, fin.
398:2854διαβολικοί. vid. supr. p. 187, and de Decr. 5, note 2. vid. also Orat. ii. 38, a. 73, a. 74 init. Ep. Æg. 4 and 6. In the passage before us there seems an allusion to false accusation or lying, which is the proper meaning of the word; διαβάλλων occurs shortly before. And so in Apol. ad Const. when he calls Magnentius διάβολος, it is as being a traitor, 7. and soon after he says that his accuser was τὸν διαβόλου πρόπον ἀναλαβών, where the word has no article, and διαβέβλημαι and διεβλήθην have preceded. vid. also Hist. Ar. 52 fin. And so in Sent. D. his speaking of the Arians’ ‘father the devil,’ 3, c. is explained 4, b. by τοὺς πατέρας διαβαλλόντων and τῆς εἰς τὸν ἐπίσκοπον διαβολῆς.
398:2855παρά, vid. §24 end, and John xv. 26
398:2856οὓς ἤθελον, infr. §10, n. 1.
398:2857Who worship one whom they themselves call a creature, vid. supr. Or. i. 8, n. 8, ii. 14, n. 7, 21, n. 2, and below, §16 notes.
398:2858John xiv. 6.
398:2859John 17.3.
398:2860μαθὼν ἐδίδαξε, de Decr. 7, n. 8; Or. ii. 1, note 6a.
398:28611 John v. 20.
398:2862Isa. 1:0, Isa. 44:24.
398:2863He says that in ‘I the first’ the question of time does not come in, else creatures would come ‘second’ to the Creator, as if His and their duration admitted of a common measure. ‘First’ then does not imply succession, but is equivalent to ἀρχή; a word which, as ‘Father,’ does not imply that the Son is not from eternity.
398:2864ii. 62, n. 2.
398:2865It is no inconsistency to say that the Father is first, and the Son first also, for comparison or number does not enter into mystery. Since Each is ὅλος θεὸς, Each, as contemplated by our finite reason, at the moment of contemplation excludes the Other. Though we ‘say’ Three Persons, Person hardly denotes one abstract ‘idea,’ certainly not as containing under it three individual subjects, but it is a ‘term’ applied to the One God in three ways. It is the doctrine of the Fathers, that, though we use words expressive of a Trinity, yet that God is beyond number, and that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, though eternally distinct from each other, can scarcely be viewed together in common, except as ‘One’ substance, as if they could not be generalized into Three Any whatever; and as if it were, strictly speaking, incorrect to speak of ‘a’ Person, or otherwise than of ‘the’ Person, whether of Father, or of Son, or of Spirit. The question has almost been admitted by S. Austin, whether it is not possible to say that God is ‘One’ Person (Trin. vii. 8), for He is wholly and entirely Father, and at the same time wholly and entirely Son, and wholly and entirely Holy Ghost. Some references to the Fathers shall be given on that subject, infr. 36 fin. vid. also supr. §6, n. 11. Meanwhile the doctrine here stated will account for such expressions as ‘God from God,’ i.e. the One God (who is the Son) from the One God (who is the Father); vid. supr. de Syn. 52, note 8. Again, ἡ οὐσία αὕτη τῆς οὐσίας τῆς πατρικῆς ἐστὶ γέννημα. de Syn. 48, b. Vid. also infr. Orat. iv. 1 and 2.
Chapter XXV.—Texts Explained; Ninthly, John x. 30; xvii. 11, &c. Arian explanation, that the Son is one with the Father in will and judgment; but so are all good men, nay things inanimate; contrast of the Son. Oneness between Them is in nature, because oneness in operation. Angels not objects of prayer, because they do not work together with God, but the Son; texts quoted. Seeing an Angel, is not seeing God. Arians in fact hold two Gods, and tend to Gentile polytheism. Arian explanation that the Father and Son are one as we are one with Christ, is put aside by the Regula Fidei, and shewn invalid by the usage of Scripture in illustrations; the true force of the comparison; force of the terms used. Force of ‘in us;’ force of ‘as;’ confirmed by S. John. In what sense we are ‘in God’ and His ‘sons.’
10. However here too they introduce their private fictions, and contend that the Son and the Father are not in such wise ‘one,’ or ‘like,’ as the Church preaches, but, as they themselves would have it 2866 . For they say, since what the Father wills, the Son wills also, and is not contrary either in what He thinks or in what He judges, but is in all respects concordant 2867 with Him, declaring doctrines which are the same, and a word consistent and united with the Father’s teaching, therefore it is that He and the Father are One; and some of them have dared to write as well as say this 2868 . Now what can be more unseemly or irrational than this? for if therefore the Son and the Father are One and if in this way the Word is like the Father, it follows forthwith 2869 that the Angels 2870 too, and the other beings above us, Powers and Authorities, and Thrones and Dominions, and what we see, Sun and Moon, and the Stars, should be sons also, as the Son; and that it should be said of them too, that they and the Father are one, and that each is God’s Image and Word. For what God wills, that will they; and neither in judging nor in doctrine are they discordant, but in all things are obedient to their Maker. For they would not have remained in their own glory, unless, what the Father willed, that they had willed also. He, for instance, who did not remain, but went astray, heard the words, ‘How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning 2871 ?’ But if this be so, how is only He Only-begotten Son and Word and Wisdom? or how, whereas so many are like the Father, is He only an Image? for among men too will be found many like the Father, numbers, for instance, of martyrs, and before them the Apostles and Prophets, and again before them the Patriarchs. And many now too keep the Saviour’s command, being merciful ‘as their Father which is in heaven 2872 ,’ and observing the exhortation, ‘Be ye therefore followers of God as dear children, and walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us 2873 ;’ many too have become followers of Paul as he also of Christ 2874 . And yet no one of these is Word or Wisdom or Only-begotten Son or Image; nor did any one of them make bold to say, ‘I and the Father are One,’ or, ‘I in the Father, and the Father in Me 2875 ;’ but it is said of all of them, ‘Who is like unto Thee among the gods, O Lord? and who shall be likened to the Lord among the sons of Gods 2876 ?’ and of Him on the contrary that He only is Image true and natural of the Father. For though we have been made after the Image 2877 , and called both image and glory of God, yet not on our own account still, but for that Image and true Glory of God inhabiting us, which is His Word, who was for us afterwards made flesh, have we this grace of our designation.
11. This their notion then being evidently unseemly and irrational as well as the rest, the likeness and the oneness must be referred to the very Essence of the Son; for unless it be so taken, He will not be shown to have anything beyond things originate, as has been said, nor will He be like the Father, but He will be like the Father’s doctrines; and He differs from the Father, in that the Father is Father 2878 , but the doctrines and teaching are the Father’s. If then in respect to the doctrines and the teaching the Son is like the Father, then the Father according to them will be Father in name only, and the Son will not be an exact Image, or rather will be seen to have no propriety at all or likeness of the Father; for what likeness or propriety has he who is so utterly different from the Father? for Paul taught like the Saviour, yet was not like ‘Him in essence 2879 .’ Having then such notions, they speak falsely; whereas the Son and the Father are one in such wise as has been said, and in such wise is the Son like the Father Himself and from Him, as we may see and understand son to be towards father, and as we may see the radiance towards the sun. Such then being the Son, therefore when the Son works, the Father is the Worker 2880 , and the Son coming to the Saints, the Father is He who cometh in the Son 2881 , as He promised when He said, ‘I and My Father will come, and will make Our abode with him 2882 ;’ for in the Image is contemplated the Father, and in the Radiance is the Light. Therefore also, as we said just now, when the Father gives grace and peace, the Son also gives it, as Paul signifies in every Epistle, writing, ‘Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.’ For one and the same grace is from the Father in the Son, as the light of the sun and of the radiance is one, and as the sun’s illumination is effected through the radiance; and so too when he prays for the Thessalonians, in saying, ‘Now God Himself even our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ, may He direct our way unto you 2883 ,’ he has guarded the unity of the Father and of the Son. For he has not said, ‘May they direct,’ as if a double grace were given from two Sources, This and That, but ‘May He direct,’ to shew that the Father gives it through the Son;—at which these irreligious ones will not blush, though they well might.
12. For if there were no unity, nor the Word the own Offspring of the Father’s Essence, as the radiance of the light, but the Son were divided in nature from the Father, it were sufficient that the Father alone should give, since none of originate things is a partner with his Maker in His givings; but, as it is, such a mode of giving shews the oneness of the Father and the Son. No one, for instance, would pray to receive from God and the Angels 2884 , or from any other creature, nor would any one say, ‘May God and the Angel give thee;’ but from Father and the Son, because of Their oneness and the oneness of Their giving. For through the Son is given what is given; and there is nothing but the Father operates it through the Son; for thus is grace secure to him who receives it. And if the Patriarch Jacob, blessing his grandchildren Ephraim and Manasses, said, ‘God which fed me all my life long unto this day, the Angel which delivered me from all evil, bless the lads 2885 ,’ yet none of created and natural Angels did he join to God their Creator, nor rejecting God that fed him, did he from Angel ask the blessing on his grandsons; but in saying, ‘Who delivered me from all evil,’ he shewed that it was no created Angel, but the Word of God, whom he joined to the Father in his prayer, through whom, whomsoever He will, God doth deliver. For knowing that He is also called the Father’s ‘Angel of great Counsel 2886 ,’ he said that none other than He was the Giver of blessing, and Deliverer from evil. Nor was it that he desired a blessing for himself from God but for his grandchildren from the Angel, but whom He Himself had besought saying, ‘I will not let Thee go except Thou bless me 2887 ’ (for that was God, as he says himself, ‘I have seen God face to face’), Him he prayed to bless also the sons of Joseph. It is proper then to an Angel to minister at the command of God, and often does he go forth to cast out the Amorite, and is sent to guard the people in the way; but these are not his doings, but of God who commanded and sent him, whose also it is to deliver, whom He will deliver. Therefore it was no other than the Lord God Himself whom he had seen, who said to him, ‘And behold I am with thee, to guard thee in all the way whither thou 2888 goest;’ and it was no other than God whom he had seen, who kept Laban from his treachery, ordering him not to speak evil words to Jacob; and none other than God did he himself beseech, saying, ‘Rescue me from the hand of my brother Esau, for I fear him 2889 ;’ for in conversation too with his wives he said, ‘God hath not suffered Laban to injure me.’
13. Therefore it was none other than God Himself that David too besought concerning his deliverance, ‘When I was in trouble, I called upon the Lord, and He heard me; deliver my soul, O Lord, from lying lips and from a deceitful tongue 2890 .’ To Him also giving thanks he spoke the words of the Song in the seventeenth Psalm, in the day in which the Lord delivered him from the hand of all his enemies and from the hand of Saul, saying, ‘I will love Thee, O Lord my strength; the Lord is my strong rock and my defence and deliverer 2891 .’ And Paul, after enduring many persecutions, to none other than God gave thanks, saying, ‘Out of them all the Lord delivered me; and He will deliver in Whom we trust 2892 .’ And none other than God blessed Abraham and Isaac; and Isaac praying for Jacob, said, ‘May God bless thee and increase thee and multiply thee, and thou shalt be for many companies of nations, and may He give thee the blessing of Abraham my father 2893 .’ But if it belong to none other than God to bless and to deliver, and none other was the deliverer of Jacob than the Lord Himself and Him that delivered him the Patriarch besought for his grandsons, evidently none other did he join to God in his prayer, than God’s Word, whom therefore he called Angel, because it is He alone who reveals the Father. Which the Apostle also did when he said, ‘Grace unto you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ 2894 .’ For thus the blessing was secure, because of the Son’s indivisibility from the Father, and for that the grace given by Them is one and the same. For though the Father gives it, through the Son is the gift; and though the Son be said to vouchsafe it, it is the Father who supplies it through and in the Son; for ‘I thank my God,’ says the Apostle writing to the Corinthians, ‘always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you in Christ Jesus 2895 .’ And this one may see in the instance of light and radiance; for what the light enlightens, that the radiance irradiates; and what the radiance irradiates, from the light is its enlightenment. So also when the Son is beheld, so is the Father, for He is the Father’s radiance; and thus the Father and the Son are one.
14. But this is not so with things originate and creatures; for when the Father works, it is not that any Angel works, or any other creature; for none of these is an efficient cause 2896 , but they are of things which come to be; and moreover being separate and divided from the only God, and other in nature, and being works, they can neither work what God works, nor, as I said before, when God gives grace, can they give grace with Him. Nor, on seeing an Angel would a man say that he had seen the Father; for Angels, as it is written, are ‘ministering spirits sent forth to minister 2897 ,’ and are heralds of gifts given by Him through the Word to those who receive them. And the Angel on his appearance, himself confesses that he has been sent by his Lord; as Gabriel confessed in the case of Zacharias, and also in the case of Mary, bearer of God 2898 . And he who beholds a vision of Angels, knows that he has seen the Angel and not God. For Zacharias saw an Angel; and Isaiah saw the Lord. Manoah, the father of Samson, saw an Angel; but Moses beheld God. Gideon saw an Angel, but to Abraham appeared God. And neither he who saw God, beheld an Angel, nor he who saw an Angel, considered that he saw God; for greatly, or rather wholly, do things by nature originate differ from God the Creator. But if at any time, when the Angel was seen, he who saw it heard God’s voice, as took place at the bush; for ‘the Angel of the Lord was seen in a flame of fire out of the bush, and the Lord called Moses out of the bush, saying, I am the God of thy father, the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob 2899 ,’ yet was not the Angel the God of Abraham, but in the Angel God spoke. And what was seen was an Angel; but God spoke in him 2900 . For as He spoke to Moses in the pillar of a cloud in the tabernacle, so also God appears and speaks in Angels. So again to the son of Nun He spake by an Angel. But what God speaks, it is very plain He speaks through the Word, and not through another. And the Word, as being not separate from the Father, nor unlike and foreign to the Father’s Essence, what He works, those are the Father’s works, and His framing of all things is one with His; and what the Son gives, that is the Father’s gift. And he who hath seen the Son, knows that, in seeing Him, he has seen, not Angel, nor one merely greater than Angels, nor in short any creature, but the Father Himself. And he who hears the Word, knows that he hears the Father; as he who is irradiated by the radiance, knows that he is enlightened by the sun.
15. For divine Scripture wishing us thus to understand the matter, has given such illustrations, as we have said above, from which we are able both to press the traitorous Jews, and to refute the allegation of Gentiles who maintain and think, on account of the Trinity, that we profess many gods 2901 . For, as the illustration shows, we do not introduce three Origins or three Fathers, as the followers of Marcion and Manichæus; since we have not suggested the image of three suns, but sun and radiance. And one is the light from the sun in the radiance; and so we know of but one origin; and the All-framing Word we profess to have no other manner of godhead, than that of the Only God, because He is born from Him. Rather then will the Ario-maniacs with reason incur the charge of polytheism or else of atheism 2902 , because they idly talk of the Son as external and a creature, and again the Spirit as from nothing. For either they will say that the Word is not God; or saying that He is God 2903 , because it is so written, but not proper to the Father’s Essence, they will introduce many because of their difference of kind (unless forsooth they shall dare to say that by participation only, He, as all things else, is called God; though, if this be their sentiment, their irreligion is the same, since they consider the Word as one among all things). But let this never even come into our mind. For there is but one form 2904 of Godhead, which is also in the Word; and one God, the Father, existing by Himself according as He is above all, and appearing in the Son according as He pervades all things, and in the Spirit according as in Him He acts in all things through the Word 2905 . For thus we confess God to be one through the Triad, and we say that it is much more religious than the godhead of the heretics with its many kinds 2906 , and many parts, to entertain a belief of the One Godhead in a Triad.
16. For if it be not so, but the Word is a creature and a work out of nothing, either He is not True God because He is Himself one of the creatures, or if they name Him God from regard for the Scriptures, they must of necessity say that there are two Gods 2907 , one Creator, the other creature, and must serve two Lords, one Unoriginate, and the other originate and a creature; and must have two faiths, one in the True God, and the other in one who is made and fashioned by themselves and called God. And it follows of necessity in so great blindness, that, when they worship the Unoriginate, they renounce the originate, and when they come to the creature, they turn from the Creator. For they cannot see the One in the Other, because their natures and operations are foreign and distinct 2908 . And with such sentiments, they will certainly be going on to more gods, for this will be the essay 2909 of those who revolt from the One God. Wherefore then, when the Arians have these speculations and views, do they not rank themselves with the Gentiles? for they too, as these, worship the creature rather than God the Creator of all 2910 , and though they shrink from the Gentile name, in order to deceive the unskilful, yet they secretly hold a like sentiment with them. For their subtle saying which they are accustomed to urge, We say not two ‘Unoriginates 2911 ,’ they plainly say to deceive the simple; for in their very professing ‘We say not two Unoriginates,’ they imply two Gods, and these with different natures, one originate and one Unoriginate. And though the Greeks worship one Unoriginate and many originate, but these one Unoriginate and one originate, this is no difference from them; for the God whom they call originate is one out of many, and again the many gods of the Greeks have the same nature with this one, for both he and they are creatures. Unhappy are they, and the more for that their hurt is from thinking against Christ; for they have fallen from the truth, and are greater traitors than the Jews in denying the Christ, and they wallow 2912 with the Gentiles, hateful 2913 as they are to God, worshipping the creature and many deities. For there is One God, and not many, and One is His Word, and not many; for the Word is God, and He alone has the Form 2914 of the Father. Being then such, the Saviour Himself troubled the Jews with these words, ‘The Father Himself which hath sent Me, hath borne witness of Me; ye have neither heard His voice at any time nor seen His Form; and ye have not His Word abiding in you; for whom He hath sent, Him ye believe not 2915 .’ Suitably has He joined the ‘Word’ to the ‘Form,’ to shew that the Word of God is Himself Image and Expression and Form of His Father; and that the Jews who did not receive Him who spoke to them, thereby did not receive the Word, which is the Form of God. This too it was that the Patriarch Jacob having seen, received a blessing from Him and the name of Israel instead of Jacob, as divine Scripture witnesses, saying, ‘And as he passed by the Form of God, the Sun rose upon him 2916 .’ And This it was who said, ‘He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father,’ and, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me,’ and, ‘I and the Father are one 2917 ;’ for thus God is One, and one the faith in the Father and Son; for, though the Word be God, the Lord our God is one Lord; for the Son is proper to that One, and inseparable according to the propriety and peculiarity of His Essence.
17. The Arians, however, not even thus abashed, reply, ‘Not as you say, but as we will 2918 ;’ for, whereas you have overthrown our former expedients, we have invented a new one, and it is this:—So are the Son and the Father One, and so is the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father, as we too may become one in Him. For this is written in the Gospel according to John, and Christ desired it for us in these words, ‘Holy Father, keep through Thine own Name, those whom Thou hast given Me, that they may be one, as We are 2919 .’ And shortly after; ‘Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their Word; that they all may be one, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me. And the glory which Thou gavest Me I have given them, that they may be one, even as We are one; I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that Thou didst send Me 2920 .’ Then, as having found an evasion, these men of craft 2921 add, ‘If, as we become one in the Father, so also He and the Father are one, and thus He too is in the Father, how pretend you from His saying, “I and the Father are One,” and “I in the Father and the Father in Me,” that He is proper and like 2922 the Father’s Essence? for it follows either that we too are proper to the Father’s Essence, or He foreign to it, as we are foreign.’ Thus they idly babble; but in this their perverseness I see nothing but unreasoning audacity and recklessness from the devil 2923 , since it is saying after his pattern, ‘We will ascend to heaven, we will be like the Most High.’ For what is given to man by grace, this they would make equal to the Godhead of the Giver. Thus hearing that men are called sons, they thought themselves equal to the True Son by nature such 2924 . And now again hearing from the Saviour, ‘that they may be one as We are 2925 ,’ they deceive themselves, and are arrogant enough to think that they may be such as the Son is in the Father and the Father in the Son; not considering the fall of their ‘father the devil 2926 ,’ which happened upon such an imagination.
18. If then, as we have many times said, the Word of God is the same with us, and nothing differs from us except in time, let Him be like us, and have the same place with the Father as we have; nor let Him be called Only-begotten, nor Only Word or Wisdom of the Father; but let the same name be of common application to all us who are like Him. For it is right, that they who have one nature, should have their name in common, though they differ from each other in point of time. For Adam was a man, and Paul a man, and he who is now born is a man, and time is not that which alters the nature of the race 2927 . If then the Word also differs from us only in time, then we must be as He. But in truth neither we are Word or Wisdom, nor is He creature or work; else why are we all sprung from one, and He the Only Word? but though it be suitable in them thus to speak, in us at least it is unsuitable to entertain their blasphemies. And yet, needless 2928 though it be to refine upon 2929 these passages, considering their so clear and religious sense, and our own orthodox belief, yet that their irreligion may be shewn here also, come let us shortly, as we have received from the fathers, expose their heterodoxy from the passage. It is a custom 2930 with divine Scripture to take the things of nature as images and illustrations for mankind; and this it does, that from these physical objects the moral impulses of man may be explained; and thus their conduct shewn to be either bad or righteous. For instance, in the case of the bad, as when it charges, ‘Be ye not like to horse and mule which have no understanding 2931 .’ Or as when it says, complaining of those who have become such, ‘Man, being in honour, hath no understanding, but is compared unto the beasts that perish.’ And again, ‘They were as wanton horses 2932 .’ And the Saviour to expose Herod said, ‘Tell that fox 2933 ;’ but, on the other hand, charged His disciples, ‘Behold I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves; be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves 2934 .’ And He said this, not that we may become in nature beasts of burden, or become serpents and doves; for He hath not so made us Himself, and therefore nature does not allow of it; but that we might eschew the irrational motions of the one, and being aware of the wisdom of that other animal, might not be deceived by it, and might take on us the meekness of the dove.
19. Again, taking patterns for man from divine subjects, the Saviour says; ‘Be ye merciful, as your Father which is in heaven is merciful 2935 ;’ and, ‘Be ye perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect 2936 .’ And He said this too, not that we might become such as the Father; for to become as the Father, is impossible for us creatures, who have been brought to be out of nothing; but as He charged us, ‘Be ye not like to horse,’ not lest we should become as draught animals, but that we should not imitate their want of reason, so, not that we might become as God, did He say, ‘Be ye merciful as your Father,’ but that looking at His beneficent acts, what we do well, we might do, not for men’s sake, but for His sake, so that from Him and not from men we may have the reward. For as, although there be one Son by nature, True and Only-begotten, we too become sons, not as He in nature and truth, but according to the grace of Him that calleth, and though we are men from the earth, are yet called gods 2937 , not as the True God or His Word, but as has pleased God who has given us that grace; so also, as God do we become merciful, not by being made equal to God, nor becoming in nature and truth benefactors (for it is not our gift to benefit but belongs to God), but in order that what has accrued to us from God Himself by grace, these things we may impart to others, without making distinctions, but largely towards all extending our kind service. For only in this way can we anyhow become imitators, and in no other, when we minister to others what comes from Him. And as we put a fair and right 2938 sense upon these texts, such again is the sense of the lection in John. For he does not say, that, as the Son is in the Father, such we must become:—whence could it be? when He is God’s Word and Wisdom, and we were fashioned out of the earth, and He is by nature and essence Word and true God (for thus speaks John, ‘We know that the Son of God is come, and He hath given us an understanding to know Him that is true, and we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ; this is the true God and eternal life 2939 ’) and we are made sons through Him by adoption and grace, as partaking of His Spirit (for ‘as many as received Him,’ he says, ‘to them gave He power to become children of God, even to them that believe on His Name 2940 ’), and therefore also He is the Truth (saying, ‘I am the Truth,’ and in His address to His Father, He said, ‘Sanctify them through Thy Truth, Thy Word is Truth 2941 ’); but we by imitation 2942 become virtuous 2943 and sons:—therefore not that we might become such as He, did He say ‘that they may be one as We are;’ but that as He, being the Word, is in His own Father, so that we too, taking an examplar and looking at Him, might become one towards each other in concord and oneness of spirit, nor be at variance as the Corinthians, but mind the same thing, as those five thousand in the Acts 2944 , who were as one.
20. For it is as ‘sons,’ not as the Son; as ‘gods,’ not as He Himself; and not as the Father, but ‘merciful as the Father.’ And, as has been said, by so becoming one, as the Father and the Son, we shall be such, not as the Father is by nature in the Son and the Son in the Father, but according to our own nature, and as it is possible for us thence to be moulded and to learn how we ought to be one, just as we learned also to be merciful. For like things are naturally one with like; thus all flesh is ranked together in kind 2945 ; but the Word is unlike us and like the Father. And therefore, while He is in nature and truth one with His own Father, we, as being of one kind with each other (for from one were all made, and one is the nature of all men), become one with each other in good disposition 2946 , having as our copy the Son’s natural unity with the Father. For as He taught us meekness from Himself, saying, ‘Learn of Me for I am meek and lowly in heart 2947 ,’ not that we may become equal to Him, which is impossible, but that looking towards Him, we may remain meek continually, so also here wishing that our good disposition towards each other should be true and firm and indissoluble, from Himself taking the pattern, He says, ‘that they may be one as We are,’ whose oneness is indivisible; that is, that they learning from us of that indivisible Nature, may preserve in like manner agreement one with another. And this imitation of natural conditions is especially safe for man, as has been said; for, since they remain and never change, whereas the conduct of men is very changeable, one may look to what is unchangeable by nature, and avoid what is bad and remodel himself on what is best.
21. And for this reason also the words, ‘that they may be one in Us,’ have a right sense. If, for instance, it were possible for us to become as the Son in the Father, the words ought to run, ‘that they may be one in Thee,’ as the Son is in the Father; but, as it is, He has not said this; but by saying ‘in Us’ He has pointed out the distance and difference; that He indeed is alone in the Father alone, as Only Word and Wisdom; but we in the Son, and through Him in the Father. And thus speaking, He meant this only, ‘By Our unity may they also be so one with each other, as We are one in nature and truth; for otherwise they could not be one, except by learning unity in Us.’ And that ‘in Us’ has this signification, we may learn from Paul, who says, ‘These things I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos, that ye may learn in us not to be puffed up above that is written 2948 .’ The words ‘in Us’ then, are not ‘in the Father,’ as the Son is in Him; but imply an example and image, instead of saying, ‘Let them learn of Us.’ For as Paul to the Corinthians, so is the oneness of the Son and the Father a pattern and lesson to all, by which they may learn, looking to that natural unity of the Father and the Son, how they themselves ought to be one in spirit towards each other. Or if it needs to account for the phrase otherwise, the words ‘in Us’ may mean the same as saying, that in the power of the Father and the Son they may be one, speaking the same things 2949 ; for without God this is impossible. And this mode of speech also we may find in the divine writings, as ‘In God will we do great acts;’ and ‘In God I shall leap over the wall 2950 ;’ and ‘In Thee will we tread down our enemies 2951 .’ Therefore it is plain, that in the Name of Father and Son we shall be able, becoming one, to hold firm the bond of charity. For, dwelling still on the same thought, the Lord says, ‘And the glory which Thou gavest Me, I have given to them, that they may be one as We are one.’ Suitably has He here too said, not, ‘that they may be in Thee as I am,’ but ‘as We are;’ now he who says ‘as’ 2952 , signifies not identity, but an image and example of the matter in hand.
22. The Word then has the real and true identity of nature with the Father; but to us it is given to imitate it, as has been said; for He immediately adds, ‘I in them and Thou in Me; that they may be made perfect in one.’ Here at length the Lord asks something greater and more perfect for us; for it is plain that the Word has come to be in us 2953 , for He has put on our body. ‘And Thou Father in Me;’ ‘for I am Thy Word, and since Thou art in Me, because I am Thy Word, and I in them because of the body, and because of Thee the salvation of men is perfected in Me, therefore I ask that they also may become one, according to the body that is in Me and according to its perfection; that they too may become perfect, having oneness with It, and having become one in It; that, as if all were carried by Me, all may be one body and one spirit, and may grow up unto a perfect man 2954 .’ For we all, partaking of the Same, become one body, having the one Lord in ourselves. The passage then having this meaning, still more plainly is refuted the heterodoxy of Christ’s enemies. I repeat it; if He had said simply and absolutely 2955 ‘that they may be one in Thee,’ or ‘that they and I may be one in Thee,’ God’s enemies had had some plea, though a shameless one; but in fact He has not spoken simply, but, ‘As Thou, Father, in Me, and I in Thee, that they may be all one.’ Moreover, using the word ‘as,’ He signifies those who become distantly as He is in the Father; distantly not in place but in nature; for in place nothing is far from God 2956 , but in nature only all things are far from Him. And, as I said before, whoso uses the particle ‘as’ implies, not identity, nor equality, but a pattern of the matter in question, viewed in a certain respect 2957 .
23. Indeed we may learn also from the Saviour Himself, when He says, ‘For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth 2958 .’ For Jonah was not as the Saviour, nor did Jonah go down to hades; nor was the whale hades; nor did Jonah, when swallowed up, bring up those who had before been swallowed by the whale, but he alone came forth, when the whale was bidden. Therefore there is no identity nor equality signified in the term ‘as,’ but one thing and another; and it shews a certain kind 2959 of parallel in the case of Jonah, on account of the three days. In like manner then we too, when the Lord says ‘as,’ neither become as the Son in the Father, nor as the Father is in the Son. For we become one as the Father and the Son in mind and agreement 2960 of spirit, and the Saviour will be as Jonah in the earth; but as the Saviour is not Jonah, nor, as he was swallowed up, so did the Saviour descend into hades, but it is but a parallel, in like manner, if we too become one, as the Son in the Father, we shall not be as the Son, nor equal to Him; for He and we are but parallel. For on this account is the word ‘as’ applied to us; since things differing from others in nature, become as they, when viewed in a certain relation 2961 . Wherefore the Son Himself, simply and without any condition is in the Father; for this attribute He has by nature; but for us, to whom it is not natural, there is needed an image and example, that He may say of us, ‘As Thou in Me, and I in Thee.’ ‘And when they shall be so perfected,’ He says, ‘then the world knows that Thou hast sent Me, for unless I had come and borne this their body, no one of them had been perfected, but one and all had remained corruptible. 2962 Work Thou then in them, O Father, and as Thou hast given to Me to bear this, grant to them Thy Spirit, that they too in It may become one, and may be perfected in Me. For their perfecting shews that Thy Word has sojourned among them; and the world seeing them perfect and full of God 2963 , will believe altogether that Thou hast sent Me, and I have sojourned here. For whence is this their perfecting, but that I, Thy Word, having borne their body, and become man, have perfected the work, which Thou gavest Me, O Father? And the work is perfected, because men, redeemed from sin, no longer remain dead; but being deified 2964 , have in each other, by looking at Me, the bond of charity 2965 .’
24. We then, by way of giving a rude view of the expressions in this passage, have been led into many words, but blessed John will shew from his Epistle the sense of the words, concisely and much more perfectly than we can. And he will both disprove the interpretation of these irreligious men, and will teach how we become in God and God in us; and how again we become One in Him, and how far the Son differs in nature from us, and will stop the Arians from any longer thinking that they shall be as the Son, lest they hear it said to them, ‘Thou art a man and not God,’ and ‘Stretch not thyself, being poor, beside a rich man 2966 .’ John then thus writes; ‘Hereby know we that we dwell in Him and He in us, because He hath given us of His Spirit 2967 .’ Therefore because of the grace of the Spirit which has been given to us, in Him we come to be, and He in us 2968 ; and since it is the Spirit of God, therefore through His becoming in us, reasonably are we, as having the Spirit, considered to be in God, and thus is God in us. Not then as the Son in the Father, so also we become in the Father; for the Son does not merely partake the Spirit, that therefore He too may be in the Father; nor does He receive the Spirit, but rather He supplies It Himself to all; and the Spirit does not unite the Word to the Father 2969 , but rather the Spirit receives from the Word. And the Son is in the Father, as His own Word and Radiance; but we, apart from the Spirit, are strange and distant from God, and by the participation of the Spirit we are knit into the Godhead; so that our being in the Father is not ours, but is the Spirit’s which is in us and abides in us, while by the true confession we preserve it in us, John again saying, ‘Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him and he in God 2970 .’ What then is our likeness and equality to the Son? rather, are not the Arians confuted on every side? and especially by John, that the Son is in the Father in one way, and we become in Him in another, and that neither we shall ever be as He, nor is the Word as we; except they shall dare, as commonly, so now to say, that the Son also by participation of the Spirit and by improvement of conduct 2971 came to be Himself also in the Father. But here again is an excess of irreligion, even in admitting the thought. For He, as has been said, gives to the Spirit, and whatever the Spirit hath, He hath from 2972 the Word.
25. The Saviour, then, saying of us, ‘As Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they too may be one in Us,’ does not signify that we were to have identity with Him; for this was shewn from the instance of Jonah; but it is a request to the Father, as John has written, that the Spirit should be vouchsafed through Him to those who believe, through whom we are found to be in God, and in this respect to be conjoined in Him. For since the Word is in the Father, and the Spirit is given from 2973 the Word, He wills that we should receive the Spirit, that, when we receive It, thus having the Spirit of the Word which is in the Father, we too may be found on account of the Spirit to become One in the Word, and through Him in the Father. And if He say, ‘as we,’ this again is only a request that such grace of the Spirit as is given to the disciples may be without failure or revocation 2974 . For what the Word has by nature 2975 , as I said, in the Father, that He wishes to be given to us through the Spirit irrevocably; which the Apostle knowing, said, ‘Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?’ for ‘the gifts of God’ and ‘grace of His calling are without repentance 2976 .’ It is the Spirit then which is in God, and not we viewed in our own selves; and as we are sons and gods 2977 because of the Word in us 2978 , so we shall be in the Son and in the Father, and we shall be accounted to have become one in Son and in Father, because that that Spirit is in us, which is in the Word which is in the Father. When then a man falls from the Spirit for any wickedness, if he repent upon his fall, the grace remains irrevocably to such as are willing 2979 ; otherwise he who has fallen is no longer in God (because that Holy Spirit and Paraclete which is in God has deserted him), but the sinner shall be in him to whom he has subjected himself, as took place in Saul’s instance; for the Spirit of God departed from him and an evil spirit was afflicting him 2980 . God’s enemies hearing this ought to be henceforth abashed, and no longer to feign themselves equal to God. But they neither understand (for ‘the irreligious,’ he saith, ‘does not understand knowledge’ 2981 ) nor endure religious words, but find them heavy even to hear.
Footnotes
399:2866ὡς αὐτοὶ θέλουσι. vid. §8, n. 12. ‘not as you say, but as we will.’ This is a common phrase with Athan. vid. supr. Or. i. 13, n. 6. and especially Hist. Ar. 52, n. 4. (vid. also Sent. Dion. 4, 14). It is here contrasted to the Church’s doctrine, and connected with the word ἴδιος· for which de Syn. 3, n. 6; Or. i. 37, n. 1. Vid. also Letter 54. fin. Also contr. Apoll. ii. 5 init. in contrast with the εὐαγγελικὸς ὅρος.
399:2867σύμφωνος. vid. infr. 23, de Syn. 48, and 53, n. 9. the Arian συμφωνία is touched on de Syn. 23, n. 3. Besides Origen, Novatian, the Creed of Lucian, and (if so) S. Hilary, as mentioned in the former of these notes, ‘one’ is explained as oneness of will by S. Hippolytus, contr. Noet. 7, where he explains John 10:30, John 17:22John x. 30. by xvii. 22. like the Arians; and, as might be expected, by Eusebius Eccl. Theol. iii. p. 193. and by Asterius ap. Euseb. contr. Marc. pp. 28, 37. The passages of the Fathers in which this text is adduced are collected by Maldonat. in loc.
399:2868Asterius, §2, init.
399:2869ὥρα. vid. de Syn. 34, n. 4. also Orat. ii. 6, b. iv. 19, c. d. Euseb. contr. Marc. p. 47, b. p. 91, b. Cyril. Dial. p. 456. Thesaur. p. 255 fin.
399:2870This argument is found de Syn. 48. vid. also Cyril. de Trin. i. p. 407.
399:2871Is. xiv. 12.
399:2872Luke vi. 36 (cf. Tisch. in loc.)
399:2873Eph. 5:1, 2.
399:28741 Cor. xi. 1.
399:2875John x. 30; xiv. 10.
399:2876Vid. Ps. 86:8, Ps. 89:6.
399:2877Aug. de Trin. vii. fin.
399:2878Cf. Serap. i. 16. de Syn. 51. and infr. §19, note. And so S. Cyril, cf. Or. i. 21–24, de Decr. 11, n. 6, Thesaur. p. 133, Naz. Orat. 29, 5. vid. also 23, 6 fin. 25, 16. vid. also the whole of Basil, adv. Eun. ii. 23. ‘One must not say,’ he observes, ‘that these names properly and primarily, κυρίως καὶ πρώτως belong to men, and are given by us but by a figure καταχρηστικῶς (ii. 39, n. 7) to God. For our Lord Jesus Christ, referring us back to the Origin of all and True Cause of beings says, “Call no one your father upon earth, for One is your Father, which is in heaven.”’ He adds, that if He is properly and not metaphorically even our Father (de Decr. 31, n. 5), much more is He the πατὴρ τοῦ κατὰ φύσιν υἱοῦ. Vid. also Euseb. contr. Marc. p. 22, c. Eccl. Theol. i. 12. fin. ii. 6. Marcellus, on the other hand, said that our Lord was κυρίως λόγος, not κυρίως υἱ& 231·ς. ibid. ii. 10 fin. vid. supr. ii. 19, note 3.
400:2879κατ᾽ οὐσίαν ὅμοιος, Or. i. 21, n. 8.
400:2880Supr. §6.
400:2881And so ἐργαζομένου τοῦ πατρὸς, ἐργάζεσθαι καὶ τὸν υἱ& 231·ν. In illud Omn. 1, d. Cum luce nobis prodeat, In Patre totus Filius, et totus in Verbo Pater. Hymn. Brev. in fer. 2. Ath. argues from this oneness of operation the oneness of substance. And thus S. Chrysostom on the text under review argues that if the Father and Son are one κατὰ τὴν δύναμιν, they are one also in οὐσία. in Joan. Hom. 61, 2, d. Tertullian in Prax. 22. and S. Epiphanius, Hær. 57. p. 488. seem to say the same on the same text. vid. Lampe in loc. And so S. Athan. τριὰς ἀδιαίρετος τῇ φύσει, καὶ μία ταύτης ἡ ἐνέργεια. Serap. i. 28, f. ἓν θέλημα πατρὸς καὶ υἱοῦ καὶ βούλημα, ἐπεὶ καὶ ἡ φύσις μία. In illud Omn. 5. Various passages of the Fathers to the same effect (e.g. of S. Ambrose, si unius voluntatis et operationis, unius est essentiæ, de Sp. ii. 12. fin. and of S. Basil, ὦν μία ἐνέργεια, τούτων καὶ οὐσία μία, of Greg. Nyss. and Cyril. Alex.) are brought together in the Lateran Council. Concil. Hard. t. 3, p. 859, &c. The subject is treated at length by Petavius Trin. iv. 15.
400:2882John xiv. 23.
400:28831 Thess. iii. 11.
400:2884Vid. Basil de Sp. S. c. 13. Chrysostom on Col. 2. And Theodoret on Col. iii. 17. says, ‘Following this rule, the Synod of Laodicea, with a view to cure this ancient disorder, passed a decree against the praying to Angels, and leaving our Lord Jesus Christ.’ ‘All supplication, prayer, intercession, and thanksgiving is to be addressed to the Supreme God, through the High Priest who is above all Angels, the Living Word and God.…But angels we may not fitly call upon, since we have not obtained a knowledge of them which is above men.’ Origen contr. Cels. v. 4, 5. vid. also for similar statements Voss. de Idololatr. i. 9. The doctrine of the Gnostics, who worshipped Angels, is referred to supr. Orat. i. 56, fin. note 1.
400:2885Gen. 48:15, 16. vid. Serap. i. 14. And on the doctrine vid. de Syn. 27 (15, 16). Infr. §14, he shews that his doctrine, when fully explained, does not differ from S. Augustine, for he says, ‘what was seen was an Angel, but God spoke in him,’ i.e. sometimes the Son is called an Angel, but when an Angel was seen, it was not the Son; and if he called himself God, it was not he who spoke, but the Son was the unseen speaker. vid. Benedictine Monitum in Hil. Trin. iv. For passages vid. Tertull. de Præscr. p. 447, note f. Oxf. Transl.
400:2886Is. ix. 6, LXX.
400:2887Gen. 32:26, 30.
401:2888Gen. xxviii. 15, LXX.
401:2889Gen. 31:7, Gen. 32:11.
401:2890Ps. 20:1, 2.
401:2891Ps. 18:1, 2.
401:2892Vid. 2 Tim. 3:11, 2 Cor. 1:10.
401:2893Gen. 28:3, 4, LXX.
401:2894Rom. i. 7, &c.
401:28951 Cor. i. 4.
401:2896Or. ii. 21, n. 2.
401:2897Heb. i. 14.
401:2898τῆς θεοτόκου Μαρίας. [Prolegg. ch. iv. §5.] vid. also infr. 29, 33. Orat. iv. 32. Incarn. c. Ar. 8, 22. supr. Or. i. 45, n. 3. As to the history of this title, Theodoret, who from his party would rather be disinclined towards it, says that the most ancient (τῶν πάλαι καὶ πρόπαλαι) heralds of the orthodox faith taught to name and believe the Mother of the Lord θεοτόκον, according to ‘the Apostolical tradition.’ Hær. iv. 12. And John of Antioch, whose championship of Nestorius and quarrel with S. Cyril are well known, writes to the former. ‘This title no ecclesiastical teacher has put aside; those who have used it are many and eminent, and those who have not used it have not attacked those who used it.’ Concil. Eph. part i. c. 25 (Labb.). Socrates Hist. vii. 32. says that Origen, in the first tome of his Comment on the Romans (vid. de la Rue in Rom. lib. i. 5. the original is lost), treated largely of the word; which implies that it was already in use. ‘Interpreting,’ he says, ‘how θεοτόκος is used, he discussed the question at length.’ Constantine implies the same in a passage which divines, e.g. Pearson (On the Creed, notes on Art. 3.), have not dwelt upon (or rather have apparently overlooked, in arguing from Ephrem. ap. Phot. Cod. 228, p. 776. that the literal phrase ‘Mother of God’ originated in S. Leo). [See vol. 1, p. 569 of this Series.]
401:2899Vid. Ex. iii. 2-6.
402:2900§12, note 2.
402:2901Serap. i. 28 fin. Naz. Orat. 23, 8. Basil. Hom. 24 init. Nyssen. Orat. Catech. 3. p. 481.
402:2902Infr. §64. Ep. Æg. 14.
402:2903Infr. §16, notes.
402:2904εἶδος.
402:2905And so infr. 25, 36 fin. Serap. i. 20, b. vid. also ibid. 28, f. a. 30, a. 31, d. iii. 1, b. 5 init. et fin. Eulogius ap. Phot. cod. p. 865. Damascen. F. O. i. 7. Basil de Sp. S. 47, e. Cyr. Cat. xvi. 4. ibid. 24. Pseudo-Dion. de Div. Nom. i. p. 403. Pseudo-Athan. c. Sab. Greg. 10, e.
402:2906πολυειδοῦς
402:2907Vid. p. 75, note 7; de Syn. 27 (2), and 50, note 5. The Arians were in the dilemma of holding two gods or worshipping the creature, unless they denied to our Lord both divinity and worship. vid. de Decr. 6, note 5, Or. i. 30, n. 1. But ‘every substance,’ says S. Austin, ‘which is not God, is a creature, and which is not a creature, is God.’ de Trin. i. 6. And so S. Cyril in Joan. p. 52. vid. also Naz. Orat. 31, 6. Basil. contr. Eunom. ii. 31.
402:2908§11, n. 4.
402:2909ἐπιχείρημα, de Decr. 1, note.
402:2910Vid. supr. ii. 14, n. 7. Petavius gives a large collection of passages, de Trin. ii. 12. §5. from the Fathers in proof of the worship of Our Lord evidencing His Godhead. On the Arians as idolaters vid. supr. Or. i. 8, n. 8. also Ep. Æg. 4, 13. and Adelph. 3 init. Serap. i. 29, d. Theodoret in Rom. i. 25.
402:2911Or. i. 30, n. 1.
403:2912συγκυλίονται, vid. Orat. i. 23. ii. 1 init.; Decr. 9 fin.; Gent. 19, c. cf. 2 Pet. ii. 22.
403:2913θεοστυγεῖς, infr. Letter 54. 1 fin.
403:2914εἶδος· also in Gen. 32:30, 31. Sept. [a substitute for Heb. ‘face.’] vid. Justin Tryph. 126. and supr. de Syn. 56, n. 6. for the meaning of the word. It was just now used for ‘kind.’ Athan. says, de Syn. ubi supr. ‘there is but one form of Godhead;’ yet the word is used of the Son as synonymous with ‘image.’ It would seem as if there are a certain class of words, all expressive of the One Divine Substance, which admit of more appropriate application either ordinarily or under circumstances, to This or That Divine Person who is also that One Substance. Thus ‘Being’ is more descriptive of the Father as the πηγὴ θεότητος, and He is said to be ‘the Being of the Son;’ yet the Son is really the One Supreme Being also. On the other hand the words μορφὴ and εἶδος [on them see Lightfoot, Philipp. p. 128] are rather descriptive of the Divine Substance in the Person of the Son, and He is called ‘the form of the Father,’ yet there is but one Form and Face of Divinity, who is at once Each of Three Persons; while ‘Spirit’ is appropriated to the Third Person, though God is a Spirit. Thus again S. Hippolytus says ἐκ [τοῦ πατρὸς] δύναμις λόγος, yet shortly before, after mentioning the Two Persons, he adds, δύναμιν δὲ μίαν, contr. Noet. 7 and 11. And thus the word ‘Subsistence,’ ὑπόστασις, which expresses the One Divine Substance, has been found more appropriate to express that Substance viewed personally. Other words may be used correlatively of either Father or Son; thus the Father is the Life of the Son, the Son the Life of the Father; or, again, the Father is in the Son and the Son in the Father. Others in common, as ‘the Father’s Godhead is the Son’s,’ ἡ πατρικὴ υἱοῦ θεότης, as indeed the word οὐσία itself. Other words on the contrary express the Substance in This or That Person only, as ‘Word,’ ‘Image,’ &c.
403:2915John v. 37.
403:2916Gen. xxxii. 31, LXX.
403:2917John 14:9, 10; x. 30.
403:2918§10, n. 1.
403:2919John xvii. 11.
403:2920John 17.20-23.
403:2921οἱ δόλιοι. crafty as they are, also infr. 59.
403:2922Or. i. 21, n. 8, cf. infr. §67.
403:2923διαβολικήν vid. §8, n. 10., cf. Isa. xiv. 14.
403:2924Supr. p. 171, note 5.
403:2925John viii. 44.
403:2926ii. 73, n. 7.
404:2927De Decr. 10; Or. i. 26, n. 1.
404:2928Cf. Hist. Ar. 80, n. 11.
404:2929περιεργάζεσθαι· vid. Or. ii. 34, n. 5.
404:2930Orat. ii. 53, n. 4; Orat. iv. 33 init.
404:2931Ps. xxxii. 9; xlix. 20.
404:2932Jer. v. 8.
404:2933Luke xiii. 32.
404:2934Matt. x. 16.
404:2935Luke vi. 36.
404:2936Matt. v. 48.
404:2937θεοί, §§23 end, 25, and ii. 70, n. 1.
404:2938ii. 44, n. 1.
404:29391 John v. 20.
404:2940John i. 12.
404:2941John 14:6, John 17:17.
404:2942κατὰ μίμησιν. Clem. Alex. Pædag. i. 3. p. 102. ed. Pott. Naz. Ep. 102. p. 95. (Ed. Ben.) Leo in various places, supr. ii. 55, n. 1. Iren. Hær. v. 1. August. Serm. 101, 6. August. Trin. iv. 17. also ix. 21. and Eusebius, κατὰ τὴν αὐτοῦ μίμησιν. Eccl. Theol. iii. 19, a. For inward grace as opposed to teaching, vid. supr. Orat. ii. 56, n. 5, and 79, n. 10.
404:2943ἐνάρετοι so πανάρετος Clem. Rom. Ep. i.
405:2944Acts 4:4, 32.
405:2945Cf. ii. 23, 42.
405:2946διαθέσει, de Decr. 2, note 5; Ep. ad Mon. (1) init. Hipp. c. Noet. 7.
405:2947Matt. xi. 29.
405:29481 Cor. iv. 6.
405:2949Vid. 1 Cor. i. 10
405:2950Ps. lx. 12; xviii. 29.
405:2951Ps. xliv. 5. Vid. Olear. de Styl. N. T. p. 4. (ed. 1702.) [Winer. xlviii. a.]
405:2952This remark which comes in abruptly is pursued presently, vid. §23.
405:2953Cf. de Decr. 31. fin.
406:2954Vid. Eph. iv. 13
406:2955Cf. ii. 62, n. 13.
406:2956Vid. de Decr. 11, n. 5, which is explained by the present passage. When Ath. there says, ‘without all in nature,’ he must mean as here, ‘far from all things in nature.’ S. Clement loc. cit. gives the same explanation, as there noticed. It is observable that the contr. Sab. Greg. 10 (which the Benedictines consider not Athan.’s) speaks as de Decr. supr. Eusebius says the same thing, de Incorpor. i. init. ap. Sirm. Op. p. 68. vid. S. Ambros. Quomodo creatura in Deo esse potest, &c. de Fid. i. 106. and supr. §1, n. 10.
406:2957Vid. Glass. Phil. Sacr. iii. 5. can. 27. and Dettmars, de Theol. Orig. ap. Lumper. Hist. Patr. t. 10, p. 212. Vid. also supr. ii. 55, n. 8.
406:2958Matt. xii. 40.
406:2959ὁμοιότητά πως, and so at the end of 22. κατά τι θεωρούμενον. [A note, discussing certain views of Coplestone, Toplady, and Blanco White, is omitted here.]
406:2960συμφωνία, 10, n. 2.
406:2961Cyril in Joan. p. 227, &c.
406:2962Cf. ii. 65, n. 3.
406:2963θεοφορουμένους. ii. 70, n. 1.
406:2964§19. n. 3.
406:2965σύνδεσμον τῆς ἀγαπῆς, 21. circ. fin.
406:2966Ez. xxviii. 2; Prov. xxiii. 4, LXX.
406:29671 John iv. 13.
406:2968Cf. 22, n. 6.
407:2969[i.e. not by grace] Vid. the end of this section and 25 init. supr. Or. i. 15. also Cyril Hier. Cat. xvi. 24. Epiph. Ancor. 67 init. Cyril in Joan. pp. 929, 930.
407:29701 John iv. 15.
407:2971βελτιώσει πράξεως, and so ad Afros. τρόπων βελτίωσις. 8. Supr. Or. i. 37, 43. it is rather some external advance.
407:2972§8, note 11.
407:2973ἐκ.
407:2974Cf. ii. 63, n. 8.
407:2975κατὰ φύσιν, supr. de Decr. 31, n. 5.
407:2976Rom. 8:35, Rom. 11:29Rom. viii. 35; vid. xi. 29.
407:2977θεοί, Or. ii. 70, n. 1.
407:2978Cf. ii. 59, n. 5.
407:2979Cf. Or. i. 37, end.
407:29801 Sam. xvi. 14.
407:2981Prov. xxix. 7. νοεῖ, Ath. συνήσει.
Chapter XXVI.—Introductory to Texts from the Gospels on the Incarnation. Enumeration of texts still to be explained. Arians compared to the Jews. We must recur to the Regula Fidei. Our Lord did not come into, but became, man, and therefore had the acts and affections of the flesh. The same works divine and human. Thus the flesh was purified, and men were made immortal. Reference to I Pet. iv. 1.
26. For behold, as if not wearied in their words of irreligion, but hardened with Pharaoh, while they hear and see the Saviour’s human attributes in the Gospels 2982 , they have utterly forgotten, like the Samosatene, the Son’s paternal Godhead 2983 , and with arrogant and audacious tongue they say, ‘How can the Son be from the Father by nature, and be like Him in essence,’ who says, ‘All power is given unto Me;’ and ‘The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the Son;’ and ‘The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into His hand; he that believeth in the Son hath everlasting life;’ and again, ‘All things were delivered unto Me of My Father, and no one knoweth the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him;’ and again, ‘All that the Father hath given unto Me, shall come to Me 2984 .’ On this they observe, ‘If He was, as ye say, Son by nature, He had no need to receive, but He had by nature as a Son.’ “Or how can He be the natural and true Power of the Father, who near upon the season of the passion says, ‘Now is My soul troubled, and what shall I say? Father, save Me from this hour; but for this came I unto this hour. Father, glorify Thy Name. Then came there a voice from heaven, saying, I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again 2985 .’ And He said the same another time; ‘Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me;’ and ‘When Jesus had thus said, He was troubled in spirit and testified and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray Me 2986 .’” Then these perverse men argue; ‘If He were Power, He had not feared, but rather He had supplied power to others.’ Further they say; ‘If He were by nature the true and own Wisdom of the Father,’ how is it written, ‘And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man 2987 ?’ In like manner, when He had come into the parts of Cæsarea Philippi, He asked the disciples whom men said that He was; and when He was at Bethany He asked where Lazarus lay; and He said besides to His disciples, ‘How many loaves have ye 2988 ? How then,’ say they, ‘is He Wisdom, who increased in wisdom and was ignorant of what He asked of others?’ This too they urge; “How can He be the own Word of the Father, without whom the Father never was, through whom He makes all things, as ye think, who said upon the Cross ‘My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?’ and before that had prayed, ‘Glorify Thy Name,’ and, ‘O Father, glorify Thou Me with the glory which I had with Thee before the world was.’ And He used to pray in the deserts and charge His disciples to pray lest they should enter into temptation; and, ‘The spirit indeed is willing,’ He said, ‘but the flesh is weak.’ And, ‘Of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, nor the Angels, neither the Son 2989 .’” Upon this again say the miserable men, “If the Son were, according to your interpretation 2990 , eternally existent with God, He had not been ignorant of the Day, but had known as Word; nor had been forsaken as being coexistent; nor had asked to receive glory, as having it in the Father; nor would have prayed at all; for, being the Word, He had needed nothing; but since He is a creature and one of things originate, therefore He thus spoke, and needed what He had not; for it is proper to creatures to require and to need what they have not.”
27. This then is what the irreligious men allege in their discourses; and if they thus argue, they might consistently speak yet more daringly; ‘Why did the Word become flesh at all?’ and they might add; ‘For how could He, being God, become man?’ or, ‘How could the Immaterial bear a body?’ or they might speak with Caiaphas still more Judaically, ‘Wherefore at all did Christ, being a man, make Himself God 2991 ?’ for this and the like the Jews then muttered when they saw, and now the Ario-maniacs disbelieve when they read, and have fallen away into blasphemies. If then a man should carefully parallel the words of these and those, he will of a certainty find them both arriving at the same unbelief, and the daring of their irreligion equal, and their dispute with us a common one. For the Jews said; ‘How, being a man, can He be God?’ And the Arians, ‘If He were very God from God, how could He become man?’ And the Jews were offended then and mocked, saying, ‘Had He been Son of God, He had not endured the Cross;’ and the Arians standing over against them, urge upon us, ‘How dare ye say that He is the Word proper to the Father’s Essence, who had a body, so as to endure all this?’ Next, while the Jews sought to kill the Lord, because He said that God was His own Father and made Himself equal to Him, as working what the Father works, the Arians also, not only have learned to deny, both that He is equal to God and that God is the own and natural Father of the Word, but those who hold this they seek to kill. Again, whereas the Jews said, ‘Is not this the Son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how then is it that He saith, Before Abraham was, I am, and I came down from heaven 2992 ?’ the Arians on the other hand make response 2993 and say conformably, ‘How can He be Word or God who slept as man, and wept, and inquired?’ Thus both parties deny the Eternity and Godhead of the Word in consequence of those human attributes which the Saviour took on Him by reason of that flesh which He bore.
28. Such error then being Judaic, and Judaic after the mind of Judas the traitor, let them openly confess themselves scholars of Caiaphas and Herod, instead of cloking Judaism with the name of Christianity, and let them deny outright, as we have said before, the Saviour’s appearance in the flesh, for this doctrine is akin to their heresy; or if they fear openly to Judaize and be circumcised 2994 , from servility towards Constantius and for their sake whom they have beguiled, then let them not say what the Jews say; for if they disown the name, let them in fairness renounce the doctrine. For we are Christians, O Arians, Christians we; our privilege is it well to know the Gospels concerning the Saviour, and neither, with Jews to stone Him, if we hear of His Godhead and Eternity, nor with you to stumble at such lowly sayings as He may speak for our sakes as man. If then you would become Christians 2995 , put off Arius’s madness, and cleanse 2996 with the words of religion those ears of yours which blaspheming has defiled; knowing that, by ceasing to be Arians, you will cease also from the malevolence of the present Jews. Then at once will truth shine on you out of darkness, and ye will no longer reproach us with holding two Eternals 2997 , but ye will yourselves acknowledge that the Lord is God’s true Son by nature, and not as merely eternal 2998 , but revealed as co-existing in the Father’s eternity. For there are things called eternal of which He is Framer; for in the twenty-third Psalm it is written, ‘Lift up your gates, O ye rulers, and be ye lift up, ye everlasting gates 2999 ;’ and it is plain that through Him these things were made; but if even of things everlasting He is the Framer, who of us shall be able henceforth to dispute that He is anterior to those things eternal, and in consequence is proved to be Lord not so much from His eternity, as in that He is God’s Son; for being the Son, He is inseparable from the Father, and never was there when He was not, but He was always; and being the Father’s Image and Radiance, He has the Father’s eternity. Now what has been briefly said above may suffice to shew their misunderstanding of the passages they then alleged; and that of what they now allege from the Gospels they certainly give an unsound interpretation 3000 , we may easily see, if we now consider the scope 3001 of that faith which we Christians hold, and using it as a rule, apply ourselves, as the Apostle teaches, to the reading of inspired Scripture. For Christ’s enemies, being ignorant of this scope, have wandered from the way of truth, and have stumbled 3002 on a stone of stumbling, thinking otherwise than they should think.
29. Now the scope and character of Holy Scripture, as we have often said, is this,—it contains a double account of the Saviour; that He was ever God, and is the Son, being the Father’s Word and Radiance and Wisdom 3003 ; and that afterwards for us He took flesh of a Virgin, Mary Bearer of God 3004 , and was made man. And this scope is to be found throughout inspired Scripture, as the Lord Himself has said, ‘Search the Scriptures, for they are they which testify of Me 3005 .’ But lest I should exceed in writing, by bringing together all the passages on the subject, let it suffice to mention as a specimen, first John saying, ‘In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him, and without Him was made not one thing 3006 ;’ next, ‘And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of one Only-begotten from the Father 3007 ;’ and next Paul writing, ‘Who being in the form of God, thought it not a prize to be equal with God, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and being found in fashion like a man, He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross 3008 .’ Any one, beginning with these passages and going through the whole of the Scripture upon the interpretation 3009 which they suggest, will perceive how in the beginning the Father said to Him, ‘Let there be light,’ and ‘Let there be a firmament,’ and ‘Let us make man 3010 ;’ but in fulness of the ages, He sent Him into the world, not that He might judge the world, but that the world by Him might be saved, and how it is written ‘Behold, the Virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a Son, and they shall call his Name Emmanuel, which, being interpreted, is God with us 3011 .’
30. The reader then of divine Scripture may acquaint himself with these passages from the ancient books; and from the Gospels on the other hand he will perceive that the Lord became man; for ‘the Word,’ he says, ‘became flesh, and dwelt among us 3012 .’ And He became man, and did not come into man; for this it is necessary to know, lest perchance these irreligious men fall into this notion also, and beguile any into thinking, that, as in former times the Word was used to come into each of the Saints, so now He sojourned in a man, hallowing him also, and manifesting 3013 Himself as in the others. For if it were so, and He only appeared in a man, it were nothing strange, nor had those who saw Him been startled, saying, Whence is He? and wherefore dost Thou, being a man, make Thyself God? for they were familiar with the idea, from the words, ‘And the Word of the Lord came’ to this or that of the Prophets 3014 . But now, since the Word of God, by whom all things came to be, endured to become also Son of man, and humbled Himself, taking a servant’s form, therefore to the Jews the Cross of Christ is a scandal, but to us Christ is ‘God’s power’ and ‘God’s wisdom 3015 ;’ for ‘the Word,’ as John says, ‘became flesh’ (it being the custom 3016 of Scripture to call man by the name of ‘flesh,’ as it says by Joel the Prophet, ‘I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh;’ and as Daniel said to Astyages, ‘I do not worship idols made with hands, but the Living God, who hath created the heaven and the earth, and hath sovereignty over all flesh 3017 ;’ for both he and Joel call mankind flesh).
31. Of old time He was wont to come to the Saints individually, and to hallow those who rightly 3018 received Him; but neither, when they were begotten was it said that He had become man, nor, when they suffered, was it said that He Himself suffered. But when He came among us from Mary once at the end of the ages for the abolition of sin (for so it was pleasing to the Father, to send His own Son ‘made of a woman, made under the Law’), then it is said, that He took flesh and became man, and in that flesh He suffered for us (as Peter says, ‘Christ therefore having suffered for us in the flesh 3019 ,’ that it might be shewn, and that all might believe, that whereas He was ever God, and hallowed those to whom He came, and ordered all things according to the Father’s will 3020 , afterwards for our sakes He became man, and ‘bodily 3021 ,’ as the Apostle says, the Godhead dwelt in the flesh; as much as to say, ‘Being God, He had His own body, and using this as an instrument 3022 , He became man for our sakes.’ And on account of this, the properties of the flesh are said to be His, since He was in it, such as to hunger, to thirst, to suffer, to weary, and the like, of which the flesh is capable; while on the other hand the works proper to the Word Himself, such as to raise the dead, to restore sight to the blind, and to cure the woman with an issue of blood, He did through His own body 3023 . And the Word bore the infirmities of the flesh, as His own, for His was the flesh; and the flesh ministered to the works of the Godhead, because the Godhead was in it, for the body was God’s 3024 . And well has the Prophet said ‘carried 3025 ;’ and has not said, ‘He remedied our infirmities,’ lest, as being external to the body, and only healing it, as He has always done, He should leave men subject still to death; but He carries our infirmities, and He Himself bears our sins, that it might be shewn that He has become man for us, and that the body which in Him bore them, was His own body; and, while He received no hurt 3026 Himself by ‘bearing our sins in His body on the tree,’ as Peter speaks, we men were redeemed from our own affections 3027 , and were filled with the righteousness 3028 of the Word.
32. Whence it was that, when the flesh suffered, the Word was not external to it; and therefore is the passion said to be His: and when He did divinely His Father’s works, the flesh was not external to Him, but in the body itself did the Lord do them. Hence, when made man, He said 3029 , ‘If I do not the works of the Father, believe Me not; but if I do, though ye believe not Me, believe the works, that ye may know that the Father is in Me and I in Him.’ And thus when there was need to raise Peter’s wife’s mother, who was sick of a fever, He stretched forth His hand humanly, but He stopped the illness divinely. And in the case of the man blind from the birth, human was the spittle which He gave forth from the flesh, but divinely did He open the eyes through the clay. And in the case of Lazarus, He gave forth a human voice as man; but divinely, as God, did He raise Lazarus from the dead 3030 . These things were so done, were so manifested, because He had a body, not in appearance, but in truth 3031 ; and it became the Lord, in putting on human flesh, to put it on whole with the affections proper to it; that, as we say that the body was His own, so also we may say that the affections of the body were proper to Him alone, though they did not touch Him according to His Godhead. If then the body had been another’s, to him too had been the affections attributed; but if the flesh is the Word’s (for ‘the Word became flesh’), of necessity then the affections also of the flesh are ascribed to Him, whose the flesh is. And to whom the affections are ascribed, such namely as to be condemned, to be scourged, to thirst, and the cross, and death, and the other infirmities of the body, of Him too is the triumph and the grace. For this cause then, consistently and fittingly such affections are ascribed not to another 3032 , but to the Lord; that the grace also may be from Him 3033 , and that we may become, not worshippers of any other, but truly devout towards God, because we invoke no originate thing, no ordinary 3034 man, but the natural and true Son from God, who has become man, yet is not the less Lord and God and Saviour.
33. Who will not admire this? or who will not agree that such a thing is truly divine? for if the works of the Word’s Godhead had not taken place through the body, man had not been deified; and again, had not the properties of the flesh been ascribed to the Word, man had not been thoroughly delivered from them 3035 ; but though they had ceased for a little while, as I said before, still sin had remained in him and corruption, as was the case with mankind before Him; and for this reason:—Many for instance have been made holy and clean from all sin; nay, Jeremiah was hallowed 3036 even from the womb, and John, while yet in the womb, leapt for joy at the voice of Mary Bearer of God 3037 ; nevertheless ‘death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression 3038 ;’ and thus man remained mortal and corruptible as before, liable to the affections proper to their nature. But now the Word having become man and having appropriated 3039 what pertains to the flesh, no longer do these things touch the body, because of the Word who has come in it, but they are destroyed 3040 by Him, and henceforth men no longer remain sinners and dead according to their proper affections, but having risen according to the Word’s power, they abide 3041 ever immortal and incorruptible. Whence also, whereas the flesh is born of Mary Bearer of God 3042 , He Himself is said to have been born, who furnishes to others an origin of being; in order that He may transfer our origin into Himself, and we may no longer, as mere earth, return to earth, but as being knit into the Word from heaven, may be carried to heaven by Him. Therefore in like manner not without reason has He transferred to Himself the other affections of the body also; that we, no longer as being men, but as proper to the Word, may have share in eternal life. For no longer according to our former origin in Adam do we die; but henceforward our origin and all infirmity of flesh being transferred to the Word, we rise from the earth, the curse from sin being removed, because of Him who is in us 3043 , and who has become a curse for us. And with reason; for as we are all from earth and die in Adam, so being regenerated from above of water and Spirit, in the Christ we are all quickened; the flesh being no longer earthly, but being henceforth made Word 3044 , by reason of God’s Word who for our sake ‘became flesh.’
34. And that one may attain to a more exact knowledge of the impassibility of the Word’s nature and of the infirmities ascribed to Him because of the flesh, it will be well to listen to the blessed Peter; for he will be a trustworthy witness concerning the Saviour. He writes then in his Epistle thus; ‘Christ then having suffered for us in the flesh 3045 .’ Therefore also when He is said to hunger and thirst and to toil and not to know, and to sleep, and to weep, and to ask, and to flee, and to be born, and to deprecate the cup, and in a word to undergo all that belongs to the flesh 3046 , let it be said, as is congruous, in each case ‘Christ then hungering and thirsting “for us in the flesh;”’ and saying ‘He did not know, and being buffeted, and toiling “for us in the flesh;”’ and ‘being exalted too, and born, and growing “in the flesh;”’ and ‘fearing and hiding “in the flesh;”’ and ‘saying, “If it be possible let this cup pass from Me 3047 ,” and being beaten, and receiving, “for us in the flesh;”’ and in a word all such things ‘for us in the flesh.’ For on this account has the Apostle himself said, ‘Christ then having suffered,’ not in His Godhead, but ‘for us in the flesh,’ that these affections may be acknowledged as, not proper to the very Word by nature, but proper by nature to the very flesh.
Let no one then stumble at what belongs to man, but rather let a man know that in nature the Word Himself is impassible, and yet because of that flesh which He put on, these things are ascribed to Him, since they are proper to the flesh, and the body itself is proper to the Saviour. And while He Himself, being impassible in nature, remains as He is, not harmed 3048 by these affections, but rather obliterating and destroying them, men, their passions as if changed and abolished 3049 in the Impassible, henceforth become themselves also impassible and free 3050 from them for ever, as John taught, saying, ‘And ye know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him is no sin 3051 .’ And this being so, no heretic shall object, ‘Wherefore rises the flesh, being by nature mortal? and if it rises, why not hunger too and thirst, and suffer, and remain mortal? for it came from the earth, and how can its natural condition pass from it?’ since the flesh is able now to make answer to this so contentious heretic, ‘I am from earth, being by nature mortal, but afterwards I have become the Word’s flesh,’ and He ‘carried’ my affections, though He is without them; and so I became free from them, being no more abandoned to their service because of the Lord who has made me free from them. For if you object to my being rid of that corruption which is by nature, see that you object not to God’s Word having taken my form of servitude; for as the Lord, putting on the body, became man, so we men are deified by the Word as being taken to Him through His flesh, and henceforward inherit life ‘everlasting.’
35. These points we have found it necessary first to examine, that, when we see Him doing or saying aught divinely through the instrument 3052 of His own body, we may know that He so works, being God, and also, if we see Him speaking or suffering humanly, we may not be ignorant that He bore flesh and became man, and hence He so acts and so speaks. For if we recognise what is proper to each, and see and understand that both these things and those are done by One 3053 , we are right in our faith, and shall never stray. But if a man looking at what is done divinely by the Word, deny the body, or looking at what is proper to the body, deny the Word’s presence in the flesh, or from what is human entertain low thoughts concerning the Word, such a one, as a Jewish vintner 3054 , mixing water with the wine, shall account the Cross an offence, or as a Gentile, will deem the preaching folly. This then is what happens to God’s enemies the Arians; for looking at what is human in the Saviour, they have judged Him a creature. Therefore they ought, looking also at the divine works of the Word, to deny 3055 the origination of His body, and henceforth to rank themselves with Manichees 3056 . But for them, learn they, however tardily, that ‘the Word became flesh;’ and let us, retaining the general scope 3057 of the faith, acknowledge that what they interpret ill, has a right interpretation 3058 .
Footnotes
407:2982This Oration alone, and this entirely, treats of texts from the Gospels; hitherto from the Gospel according to St. John, and now chiefly from the first three. Hence they lead Athan. to treat more distinctly of the doctrine of the Incarnation, and to anticipate a refutation of both Nestorius and Eutyches.
407:2983§1, n. 13.
408:2984Matt. xxviii. 18; John v. 22; iii. 35, 36; Matt. xi. 27; John vi. 37; infr. §§35–41.
408:2985John 12:27, 28.
408:2986Matt. xxvi. 39; John xiii. 21; infr. §§53–58.
408:2987Luke ii. 52; infr. §§50–53.
408:2988Matt. xvi. 13; John xi. 34; Mark vi. 38; infr. §27.
408:2989Matt. xxvii. 46; John xii. 28; xvii. 5; Matt. xxvi. 41; Mark xiii. 32; infr. §§42–50.
408:2990διάνοιαν, ii. 44, a. 53, c.; iv. 17, d. &c.
408:2991De Decr. 1; Or. i. 4.
408:2992John vi. 42; viii. 58.
408:2993ἐπακούουσιν. Montfaucon (Onomasticon in t. 2 fin.) so interprets this word. vid. Apol. contr. Ar. 88. note 7.
409:2994Or. i. 38.
409:2995Apol. Fug. 27, n. 10.
409:2996De Decr. 2, n. 9, c. Sab. Greg. 6 fin.
409:2997Cf. de Decr. 25, n. 4. The peculiarity of the Catholic doctrine, as contrasted with the heresies on the subject of the Trinity, is that it professes a mystery. It involves, not merely a contradiction in the terms used, which would be little, for we might solve it by assigning different senses to the same word, or by adding some limitation (e.g. if it were said that Satan was an Angel and not an Angel, or man was mortal and immortal), but an incongruity in the ideas which it introduces. To say that the Father is wholly and absolutely the one infinitely-simple God, and then that the Son is also, and yet that the Father is eternally distinct from the Son, is to propose ideas which we cannot harmonize together; and our reason is reconciled to this state of the case only by the consideration (though fully by means of it) that no idea of ours can embrace the simple truth, so that we are obliged to separate it into portions, and view it in aspects, and adumbrate it under many ideas, if we are to make any approximation towards it at all; as in mathematics we approximate to a circle by means of a polygon, great as is the dissimilarity between the two figures. [Cf. Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) b.]
409:2998οὐχ ἁπλῶς ἀ& 188·διος, i.e. ἀΐδιος is not one of our Lord’s highest titles, for things have it which the Son Himself has created, and whom of course He precedes. Instead of two ἀΐδια then, as the Arians say, there are many ἀΐδια; and our Lord’s high title is not this, but that He is ‘the Son,’ and thereby ‘eternal in the Father’s eternity,’ or there was not ever when He was not, and ‘Image’ and ‘Radiance.’ The same line of thought is implied throughout his proof of our Lord’s eternity in Orat. i. ch. 4 6. This is worth remarking, as constituting a special distinction between ancient and modern Scripture proofs of the doctrine, and as coinciding with what was said supr. Or. ii. 1, n. 13, 44, n. 1. His mode of proof is still more brought out by what he proceeds to say about the σκοπός, or general bearing or drift of the Christian faith, and its availableness as a κανὼν or rule of interpretation.
409:2999Ps. xxiv. 7.
409:3000Cf. 26, n. 9.
409:3001σκοπὸς, vid. 58. fin.
409:3002Rom. ix. 32.
409:3003Or. i. 28, n. 5.
409:3004θεοτόκου. vid. supr. 14, n. 3. Vid. S. Cyril’s quotations in his de Recta Fide, p. 49, &c.; and Cyril himself, Adv. Nest. i. p. 18. Procl. Hom. i. p. 60. Theodor. ap. Conc. Eph. (p. 1529. Labbe.) Cassian. Incarn. iv. 2. Hil. Trin. ii. 25. Ambros. Virgin. i. n. 47. Chrysost. ap. Cassian. Incarn. vii. 30. Jerom. in Ezek. 44 init. Capreolus of Carthage, ap. Sirm. Opp. t. i. p. 216. August. Serm. 291, 6. Hippolytus, ap. Theod. Eran. i. p. 55, &c. Ignatius, Ep. ad Eph. 7.
409:3005John v. 39.
409:3006John 1.1-3.
409:3007John 1.14.
409:3008Phil. ii. 6-8.
410:3009Cf. 26, n. 9.
410:3010Gen. 1:3, 6, 26; de Syn. 28 (14).
410:3011Matt. i. 23.
410:3012John i. 14.
410:3013τούτῳ χρώμενος ὀργάνῳ infr.42. and ὄργανον πρὸς τὴν ἐνέργειαν καὶ τὴν ἔκλαμψιν τῆς θεότητος. 53. This was a word much used afterwards by the Apollinarians, who looked on our Lord’s manhood as merely a manifestation of God. vid. Or. ii. 8, n. 3. vid. σχῆμα ὀργανικὸν in Apoll. i. 2, 15. vid. a parallel in Euseb. Laud. Const. p. 536. However, it is used freely by Athan. e.g. infr. 35, 53. Incarn. 8, 9, 41, 43, 44. This use of ὄργανον must not be confused with its heretical application to our Lord’s Divine Nature, vid. Basil de Sp. S. n. 19 fin. of which de Syn. 27 (3). It may be added that φανέρωσις is a Nestorian as well as Eutychian idea; Facund. Tr. Cap. ix. 2, 3. and the Syrian use of parsopa Asseman. B. O. t. 4. p. 219. Thus both parties really denied the Atonement. vid. supr. Or. i. 60, n. 5; ii. 8, n. 4.
410:3014Ad Epict. 11, ad Max. 2.
410:30151 Cor. i. 24.
410:3016Infr. iv. 33 init.
410:3017Joel ii. 28; Bel and Dr. 5.
410:3018Or. i. 39, n. 4.
410:3019Gal. iv. 4; 1 Pet. iv. 1.
410:3020κατὰ τὸ βούλημα. vid. Orat. i. 63. infr. §63, notes. Cf. supr. ii. 31, n. 7, for passages in which Ps. xxxiii. 9. is taken to shew the unity of Father and Son from the instantaneousness of the accomplishment upon the willing, as well as the Son’s existence before creation. Hence the Son not only works κατὰ τὸ βούλημα, but is the βουλὴ of the Father. ibid. note 8. For the contrary Arian view, even when it is highest, vid Euseb. Eccl. Theol. iii. 3. quoted ii. 64, n. 5. In that passage the Father’s νεύματα are spoken of, a word common with the Arians. Euseb. ibid. p. 75, a. de Laud. Const. p. 528, Eunom. Apol. 20 fin. The word is used of the Son’s command given to the creation, in Athan. contr. Gent. e.g. 42, 44, 46. S. Cyril. Hier. frequently as the Arians, uses it of the Father. Catech. x. 5, xi. passim, xv. 25, &c. The difference between the orthodox and Arian views on this point is clearly drawn out by S. Basil contr. Eunom. i. 21.
410:3021Col. ii. 9.
410:3022τούτῳ χρώμενος ὀργάνῳ infr.42. and ὄργανον πρὸς τὴν ἐνέργειαν καὶ τὴν ἔκλαμψιν τῆς θεότητος. 53. This was a word much used afterwards by the Apollinarians, who looked on our Lord’s manhood as merely a manifestation of God. vid. Or. ii. 8, n. 3. vid. σχῆμα ὀργανικὸν in Apoll. i. 2, 15. vid. a parallel in Euseb. Laud. Const. p. 536. However, it is used freely by Athan. e.g. infr. 35, 53. Incarn. 8, 9, 41, 43, 44. This use of ὄργανον must not be confused with its heretical application to our Lord’s Divine Nature, vid. Basil de Sp. S. n. 19 fin. of which de Syn. 27 (3). It may be added that φανέρωσις is a Nestorian as well as Eutychian idea; Facund. Tr. Cap. ix. 2, 3. and the Syrian use of parsopa Asseman. B. O. t. 4. p. 219. Thus both parties really denied the Atonement. vid. supr. Or. i. 60, n. 5; ii. 8, n. 4.
410:3023Orat. iv. 6. and fragm. ex Euthym. p. 1275. ed. Ben. This interchange [of language] is called theologically the ἀντίδοσις or communicatio ἰδιωμάτων. Nyssen. in Apoll. t. 2. pp. 697, 8. Leon. Ep. 28, 51. Ambros. de fid. ii. 58. Nyssen. de Beat. p. 767. Cassian. Incarn. vi. 22. Aug. contr. Serm. Ar. c. 8 init. Plain and easy as such statements seem, they are of the utmost importance in the Nestorian and Eutychian controversies.
410:3024θεοῦ ἦν σῶμα. also ad Adelph. 3. ad Max. 2. and so τὴν πτωχεύσασαν φύσιν θεοῦ ὅλην γενομένην. c. Apoll. ii. 11. τὸ πάθος τοῦ λόγου. ibid. 16, c. σὰρξ τοῦ λόγου. infr. 34. σῶμα σοφίας infr.53. also Or. ii. 10, n. 7. πάθος Χριστοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ μου. Ignat. Rom. 6. ὁ θεὸς πέπονθεν. Melit. ap. Anast. Hodeg. 12. Dei passiones. Tertull. de Carn. Christ. 5. Dei interemptores. ibid. caro Deitatis. Leon. Serm. 65 fin. Deus mortuus et sepultus. Vigil. c. Eut. ii. p. 502. vid. supr. Or. i. 45, n. 3. Yet Athan. objects to the phrase, ‘God suffered in the flesh,’ i.e. as used by the Apollinarians. vid. contr. Apoll. ii. 13 fin. [Cf. Harnack, Dogmg. ed. 1. vol. i. pp. 131, 628. notes.]
411:3025Is. liii. 4.
411:3026οὐδὲν ἐβλάπτετο. (1 Pet. ii. 24.) Cf. de Incarn. 17, 54, 34; Euseb. de Laud. Const. p. 536. and 538. also Dem. Evang. vii. p. 348. Vigil. contr. Eutych. ii. p. 503. (B. P. ed. 1624.) Anast. Hodeg. c. 12. p. 220 (ed. 1606.) also p. 222. Vid also the beautiful passage in Pseudo-Basil: Hom. in Sanct. Christ. Gen. (t. 2. p. 596. ed. Ben.) also Rufin. in Symb. 12. Cyril. Quod unus est Christus. p. 776. Damasc. F. O. iii. 6 fin. August. Serm. 7. p. 26 init. ed. 1842. Suppl. 1.
411:3027παθῶν, vid. §33, n. 2.
411:3028Orat. i. 51.
411:3029John 10:37, 38. vid. Incarn. 18. Cf. Leo, Serm. 54, 2. ‘Suscepit nos in suam proprietatem illa natura, quæ nec nostris sua, nec suis nostra consumeret, &c.’ Serm. 72, p. 286, vid. also Ep. 165, 6. Serm. 30, 5. Cyril Cat. iv. 9. Amphiloch. ap. Theod. Eran. i. p. 66. also pp. 30, 87, 8. ed. 1614.
411:3030Cf. Leo’s Tome (Ep. 28.) 4. ‘When He touched the leper, it was the man that was seen; but something beyond man, when He cleansed him, &c.’ Ambros. Epist. i. 46, n. 7. Hil. Trin. x. 23 fin. vid. infr. 56 note, and S. Leo’s extracts in his Ep. 165. Chrysol. Serm. 34 and 35. Paul. ap. Conc. Eph. (p. 1620. Labbe.) These are instances of what is theologically called the θεανδρικὴ ἐνέργεια [a condemned formula], i.e. the union of the energies of both Natures in one act.
411:3031μὴ φαντασί& 139· ἀλλ᾽ ἀληθῶς. vid. Incarn. 18, d. ad Epict. 7, c. The passage is quoted by S. Cyril. Apol. adv. Orient p. 194.
411:3032οὐκ ἄλλου, ἀλλὰ τοῦ κυρίου· and so οὐκ ἑτέρου τινός, Incarn. 18; also Orat. i. 45. supr. p. 244. and Orat. iv. 35. Cyril Thes. p. 197. and Anathem. 11. who defends the phrase against the Orientals.
411:3033Cf. Procl. ad Armen. p. 615, ed. 1630.
411:3034κοινόν opposed to ἴδιον. vid. infr. §51, Cyril Epp. p. 23, e. communem, Ambros. de Fid. i. 94.
411:3035Or. i. 5 n. 5, ii. 56 n. 5, 68, n. 1, infr. note 6.
411:3036Vid. Jer. i. 5. And so S. Jerome, S. Leo, &c., as mentioned in Corn. a Lap. in loc. S. Jerome implies a similar gift in the case of Asella, ad Marcell. (Ep. xxiv. 2.) And so S. John Baptist, Maldon. in Luc. i. 16. It is remarkable that no ancient writer (unless indeed we except S. Austin), [Patrol. Lat. xlvii. 1144?] refers to the instance of S. Mary;—perhaps from the circumstance of its not being mentioned in Scripture.
411:3037θεοτόκου. For instances of this word vid. Alexandr. Ep. ad Alex. ap. Theodor. H. E. i. 4. p. 745. (al. 20). Athan. (supra); Cyril. Cat. x. 19. Julian Imper. ap. Cyril c. Jul. viii. p. 262. Amphiloch. Orat. 4. p. 41. (if Amphil.) ed. 1644. Nyssen. Ep. ad Eustath. p. 1093. Chrysost. apud. Suicer Symb. p. 240. Greg. Naz. Orat. 29, 4 Ep. 181. p. 85. ed. Ben. Antiochus and Ammon. ap. Cyril. de Recta Fid. pp. 49, 50. Pseudo-Dion. contr. Samos. 5. Pseudo-Basil. Hom. t. 2. p. 600 ed. Ben.
411:3038Rom. v. 14.
411:3039ἰδιοποιουμένου. vid. also [Incar. 8.] infr. §38. ad Epict. 6, e. fragm. ex Euthym. (t. i. p. 1275. ed. Ben.) Cyril. in Joann. p. 151, a. For ἴδιον, which occurs so frequently here, vid. Cyril. Anathem. 11. And οἰκείωται. contr. Apoll. ii. 16, e. Cyril. Schol. de Incarn. p. 782, d. Concil. Eph. pp. 1644, d. 1697, b. (Hard.) Damasc. F. O. iii. 3. p. 208. ed. Ven. Vid. Petav. de Incarn. iv. 15.
412:3040Vid. Or. i. §§45, 46, ii. 65, note. Vid. also iv. 33. Incarn. c. Arian. 12. contr. Apoll. i. 17. ii. 6. ‘Since God the Word willed to annul the passions, whose end is death, and His deathless nature was not capable of them…He is made flesh of the Virgin, in the way He knoweth, &c.’ Procl. ad Armen. p. 616. also Leo. Serm. 22. pp. 69. 71. Serm. 26. p. 88. Nyssen contr. Apoll. t. 2 p. 696. Cyril. Epp. p. 138, 9. in Joan. p. 95. Chrysol. Serm. 148.
412:3041ii. 69, n. 3, &c.
412:3042θεοτόκου. supr. 14, n. 3. For ‘mater Dei’ vid. before S. Leo, Ambros. de Virg. ii. 7. Cassian. Incarn. ii. 5. vii. 25. Vincent. Lir. Commonit. 21. It is obvious that θεοτόκος, though framed as a test against Nestorians, was equally effective against Apollinarians [?] and Eutychians, who denied that our Lord had taken human flesh at all, as is observed by Facundus Def. Trium. Cap. i. 4. Cf. Cyril. Epp. pp. 106, 7. Yet these sects, as the Arians, maintained the term. vid. supr. Or. ii. 8, n. 5.
412:3043ii. 59. n. 5.
412:3044λογωθείσης τῆς σαρκὄς. This strong term is here applied to human nature generally; Damascene speaks of the λόγωσις of the flesh, but he means especially our Lord’s flesh. F. O. iv. 18. p. 286. (Ed. Ven.) for the words θεοῦσθαι, &c. vid. supr. ii. 70, n. 1.
412:30451 Pet. iv. 1.
412:3046Cf. Chrysost. in Joann. Hom. 67. 1 and 2. Cyril de Rect. Fid. p. 18. ‘As a man He doubts, as a man He is troubled; it is not His Power (virtus) that is troubled, not His Godhead, but His soul, &c.’ Ambros. de Fid. ii. n. 56. vid. a beautiful passage in S. Basil’s Hom. iv. 5. in which he insists on our Lord’s having wept to shew us how to weep neither too much nor too little.
412:3047Mat. xxvi. 39.
412:3048βλαπτόμενος, §31, n. 15.
412:3049Cf. 33, n. 6.
412:3050Vid. Or. ii. 56, n. 5. Cf. Cyril. de Rect. Fid. p. 18.
412:30511 John iii. 5.
413:3052Cf. 31, n. 10.
413:3053Vid. infr. 39–41. and 56, n. 7. Cf. Procl. ad Armen. p. 615. Leo’s Tome (Ep. 28, 3) also Hil. Trin. ix. 11 fin. ‘Vagit infans, sed in cœlo est, &c.’ ibid. x. 54. Ambros. de Fid. ii. 77. Erat vermis in cruce sed dimittebat peccata. Non habebat speciem, sed plenitudinem divinitatis, &c. Id. Epist. i. 46, n. 5. Theoph. Ep. Pasch. 6. ap. Conc. Ephes. p. 1404. Hard.
413:3054Vid. Is. i. 22, LXX.; Or. ii. 80; de Decr. 10.
413:3055Thus heresies are partial views of the truth, starting from some truth which they exaggerate, and disowning and protesting against other truth, which they fancy inconsistent with it. vid. supr. Or. i. 26, n. 2.
413:3056De Syn. 33; Or. i. 8.
413:3057Cf. §28, n. 11.
413:3058Cf. §30, n. 7.
Chapter XXVII.—Texts Explained; Tenthly, Matthew xi. 27; John iii. 35, &c. These texts intended to preclude the Sabellian notion of the Son; they fall in with the Catholic doctrine concerning the Son; they are explained by ‘so’ in John v. 26. (Anticipation of the next chapter.) Again they are used with reference to our Lord’s human nature; for our sake, that we might receive and not lose, as receiving in Him. And consistently with other parts of Scripture, which shew that He had the power, &c., before He received it. He was God and man, and His actions are often at once divine and human.
35 (continued). For, ‘The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into His hand;’ and, ‘All things were given unto Me of My Father;’ and, ‘I can do nothing of Myself, but as I hear, I judge 3059 ;’ and the like passages do not shew that the Son once had not these prerogatives—(for had not He eternally what the Father has, who is the Only Word and Wisdom of the Father in essence, who also says, ‘All that the Father hath are Mine 3060 ,’ and what are Mine, are the Father’s? for if the things of the Father are the Son’s and the Father hath them ever, it is plain that what the Son hath, being the Father’s, were ever in the Son),—not then because once He had them not, did He say this, but because, whereas the Son hath eternally what He hath, yet He hath them from the Father.
36. For lest a man, perceiving that the Son has all that the Father hath, from the exact likeness and identity of that He hath, should wander into the irreligion of Sabellius, considering Him to be the Father, therefore He has said ‘Was given unto Me,’ and ‘I received,’ and ‘Were delivered to Me 3061 ,’ only to shew that He is not the Father, but the Father’s Word, and the Eternal Son, who because of His likeness to the Father, has eternally what He has from Him, and because He is the Son, has from the Father what He has eternally. Moreover that ‘Was given’ and ‘Were delivered,’ and the like, do not impair 3062 the Godhead of the Son, but rather shew Him to be truly 3063 Son, we may learn from the passages themselves. For if all things are delivered unto Him, first, He is other than that all which He has received; next, being Heir of all things, He alone is the Son and proper according to the Essence of the Father. For if He were one of all, then He were not ‘heir of all 3064 ,’ but every one had received according as the Father willed and gave. But now, as receiving all things, He is other than them all, and alone proper to the Father. Moreover that ‘Was given’ and ‘Were delivered’ do not shew that once He had them not, we may conclude from a similar passage, and in like manner concerning them all; for the Saviour Himself says, ‘As the Father hath life in Himself, so hath He given also to the Son to have life in Himself 3065 .’ Now from the words ‘Hath given,’ He signifies that He is not the Father; but in saying ‘so,’ He shews the Son’s natural likeness and propriety towards the Father. If then once the Father had not, plainly the Son once had not; for as the Father, ‘so’ also the Son has. But if this is irreligious to say, and religious on the contrary to say that the Father had ever, is it not unseemly in them when the Son says that, ‘as’ the Father has, ‘so’ also the Son has, to say that He has not ‘so 3066 ,’ but otherwise? Rather then is the Word faithful, and all things which He says that He has received, He has always, yet has from the Father; and the Father indeed not from any, but the Son from the Father. For as in the instance of the radiance, if the radiance itself should say, ‘All places the light hath given me to enlighten, and I do not enlighten from myself, but as the light wills,’ yet, in saying this, it does not imply that it once had not, but it means, ‘I am proper to the light, and all things of the light are mine;’ so, and much more, must we understand in the instance of the Son. For the Father, having given all things to the Son, in the Son still 3067 hath all things; and the Son having, still the Father hath them; for the Son’s Godhead is the Father’s Godhead, and thus the Father in the Son exercises His Providence 3068 over all things.
37. And while such is the sense of expressions like these, those which speak humanly concerning the Saviour admit of a religious meaning also. For with this end have we examined them beforehand, that, if we should hear Him asking where Lazarus is laid 3069 , or when He asks on coming into the parts of Cæsarea, ‘Whom do men say that I am?’ or, ‘How many loaves have ye?’ and, ‘What will ye that I shall do unto you 3070 ?’ we may know, from what has been already said, the right 3071 sense of the passages, and may not stumble as Christ’s enemies the Arians. First then we must put this question to the irreligious, why they consider Him ignorant? for one who asks, does not for certain ask from ignorance; but it is possible for one who knows, still to ask concerning what He knows. Thus John was aware that Christ, when asking, ‘How many loaves have ye?’ was not ignorant, for he says, ‘And this He said to prove him, for He Himself knew what He would do 3072 .’ But if He knew what He was doing, therefore not in ignorance, but with knowledge did He ask. From this instance we may understand similar ones; that, when the Lord asks, He does not ask in ignorance, where Lazarus lies, nor again, whom men do say that He is; but knowing the thing which He was asking, aware what He was about to do. And thus with ease is their clever point exploded; but if they still persist 3073 on account of His asking, then they must be told that in the Godhead indeed ignorance is not, but to the flesh ignorance is proper, as has been said. And that this is really so, observe how the Lord who inquired where Lazarus lay, Himself said, when He was not on the spot but a great way off, ‘Lazarus is dead 3074 ,’ and where he was dead; and how that He who is considered by them as ignorant, is He Himself who foreknew the reasonings of the disciples, and was aware of what was in the heart of each, and of ‘what was in man,’ and, what is greater, alone knows the Father and says, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me. 3075 ’
38. Therefore this is plain to every one, that the flesh indeed is ignorant, but the Word Himself, considered as the Word, knows all things even before they come to be. For He did not, when He became man, cease to be God 3076 ; nor, whereas He is God does He shrink from what is man’s; perish the thought; but rather, being God, He has taken to Him the flesh, and being in the flesh deifies the flesh. For as He asked questions in it, so also in it did He raise the dead; and He shewed to all that He who quickens the dead and recalls the soul, much more discerns the secret of all. And He knew where Lazarus lay, and yet He asked; for the All-holy Word of God, who endured all things for our sakes, did this, that so carrying our ignorance, He might vouchsafe to us the knowledge of His own only and true Father, and of Himself, sent because of us for the salvation of all, than which no grace could be greater. When then the Saviour uses the words which they allege in their defence, ‘Power is given to Me,’ and, ‘Glorify Thy Son,’ and Peter says, ‘Power is given unto Him,’ we understand all these passages in the same sense, that humanly because of the body He says all this. For though He had no need, nevertheless He is said to have received what He received humanly, that on the other hand, inasmuch as the Lord has received, and the grant is lodged with Him, the grace may remain sure. For while mere man receives, he is liable to lose again (as was shewn in the case of Adam, for he received and he lost 3077 ), but that the grace may be irrevocable, and may be kept sure 3078 by men, therefore He Himself appropriates 3079 the gift; and He says that He has received power, as man, which He ever had as God, and He says, ‘Glorify Me,’ who glorifies others, to shew that He hath a flesh which has need of these things. Wherefore, when the flesh receives, since that which receives is in Him, and by taking it He hath become man, therefore He is said Himself to have received.
39. If then (as has many times been said) the Word has not become man, then ascribe to the Word, as you would have it, to receive, and to need glory, and to be ignorant; but if He has become man (and He has become), and it is man’s to receive, and to need, and to be ignorant, wherefore do we consider the Giver as receiver, and the Dispenser to others do we suspect to be in need, and divide the Word from the Father as imperfect and needy, while we strip human nature of grace? For if the Word Himself, considered as Word, has received and been glorified for His own sake, and if He according to His Godhead is He who is hallowed and has risen again, what hope is there for men? for they remain as they were, naked, and wretched, and dead, having no interest in the things given to the Son. Why too did the Word come among us, and become flesh? if that He might receive these things, which He says that He has received, He was without them before that, and of necessity will rather owe thanks Himself to the body 3080 , because, when He came into it, then He receives these things from the Father, which He had not before His descent into the flesh. For on this shewing He seems rather to be Himself promoted because of the body 3081 , than the body promoted because of Him. But this notion is Judaic. But if that He might redeem mankind 3082 , the Word did come among us; and that He might hallow and deify them, the Word became flesh (and for this He did become), who does not see that it follows, that what He says that He received, when He became flesh, that He mentions, not for His own sake, but for the flesh? for to it, in which He was speaking, pertained the gifts given through Him from the Father. But let us see what He asked, and what the things altogether were which He said that He had received, that in this way also they may be brought to feeling. He asked then glory, yet He had said, ‘All things were delivered unto Me 3083 .’ And after the resurrection, He says that He has received all power; but even before that He had said, ‘All things were delivered unto Me,’ He was Lord of all, for ‘all things were made by Him;’ and ‘there is One Lord by whom are all things 3084 .’ And when He asked glory, He was as He is, the Lord of glory; as Paul says, ‘If they had known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory 3085 ;’ for He had that glory which He asked when He said, ‘the glory which I had with Thee before the world was 3086 .’
40. Also the power which He said He received after the resurrection, that He had before He received it, and before the resurrection. For He of Himself rebuked Satan, saying, ‘Get thee behind Me, Satan 3087 ;’ and to the disciples He gave the power against him, when on their return He said, ‘I beheld Satan, as lightning, fall from heaven 3088 .’ And again, that what He said that He had received, that He possessed before receiving it, appears from His driving away the demons, and from His unbinding what Satan had bound, as He did in the case of the daughter of Abraham; and from His remitting sins, saying to the paralytic, and to the woman who washed His feet, ‘Thy sins be forgiven thee 3089 ;’ and from His both raising the dead, and repairing the first nature of the blind, granting to him to see. And all this He did, not waiting till He should receive, but being ‘possessed of power 3090 .’ From all this it is plain that what He had as Word, that when He had become man and was risen again, He says that He received humanly 3091 ; that for His sake men might henceforward upon earth have power against demons, as having become partakers of a divine nature; and in heaven, as being delivered from corruption, might reign everlastingly. Thus we must acknowledge this once for all, that nothing which He says that He received, did He receive as not possessing before; for the Word, as being God, had them always; but in these passages He is said humanly to have received, that, whereas the flesh received in Him, henceforth from it the gift might abide 3092 surely for us. For what is said by Peter, ‘receiving from God honour and glory, Angels being made subject unto Him 3093 ,’ has this meaning. As He inquired humanly, and raised Lazarus divinely, so ‘He received’ is spoken of Him humanly, but the subjection of the Angels marks the Word’s Godhead.
41. Cease then, O abhorred of God 3094 , and degrade not the Word; nor detract from His Godhead, which is the Father’s 3095 , as though He needed or were ignorant; lest ye be casting your own arguments against the Christ, as the Jews who once stoned Him. For these belong not to the Word, as the Word; but are proper to men and, as when He spat, and stretched forth the hand, and called Lazarus, we did not say that the triumphs were human, though they were done through the body, but were God’s, so, on the other hand, though human things are ascribed to the Saviour in the Gospel, let us, considering the nature of what is said and that they are foreign to God, not impute them to the Word’s Godhead, but to His manhood. For though ‘the Word became flesh,’ yet to the flesh are the affections proper; and though the flesh is possessed by God in the Word, yet to the Word belong the grace and the power. He did then the Father’s works through the flesh; and as truly contrariwise were the affections of the flesh displayed in Him; for instance, He inquired and He raised Lazarus, He chid 3096 His Mother, saying, ‘My hour is not yet come,’ and then at once He made the water wine. For He was Very God in the flesh, and He was true flesh in the Word. Therefore from His works He revealed both Himself as Son of God, and His own Father, and from the affections of the flesh He shewed that He bore a true body, and that it was His own.
Footnotes
413:3059John iii. 35; Matt. xi. 27; John v. 30
413:3060John xvi. 15; xvii. 10.
413:3061John x. 18; Mat. xxviii. 18.
413:3062Or. i. 45; ad Adelph. 4.
413:3063Or. ii. 19, n. 3.
413:3064Heb. i. 2.
413:3065John v. 26.
414:3066Or. ii. 55, n. 8.
414:3067πάλιν. vid. Or. i. 15, n. 6. Thus iteration is not duplication in respect to God; though how this is, is the inscrutable Mystery of the Trinity in Unity. Nothing can be named which the Son is in Himself, as distinct from the Father; we are but told His relation towards the Father, and thus the sole meaning we are able to attach to Person is a relation of the Son towards the Father; and distinct from and beyond that relation, He is but the One God, who is also the Father. This sacred subject has been touched upon supr. Or. iii. 9, n. 8. In other words, there is an indestructible essential relation existing in the One Indivisible infinitely simple God, such as to constitute Him, viewed on each side of that relation (what in human language we call) Two (and in like manner Three), yet without the notion of number really coming in. When we speak of ‘Person,’ we mean nothing more than the One God in substance, viewed relatively to Him the One God, as viewed in that Correlative which we therefore call another Person. These various statements are not here intended to explain, but to bring home to the mind what it is which faith receives. We say ‘Father, Son, and Spirit,’ but when we would abstract a general idea of Them in order to number Them, our abstraction really does hardly more than carry us back to the One Substance. Such seems the meaning of such passages as Basil. Ep. 8, 2; de Sp. S. c. 18; Chrysost. in Joan. Hom. ii. 3 fin. ‘In respect of the Adorable and most Royal Trinity, ‘first’ and ‘second’ have no place; for the Godhead is higher than number and times.’ Isid. Pel. Ep. 3, 18. Eulog. ap. Phot. 230. p. 864. August. in Joan. 39, 3 and 4; de Trin. v. 10. ‘Unity is not number, but is itself the principle of all things.’ Ambros. de Fid. i. n. 19. ‘A trine numeration then does not make number, which they rather run into, who make some difference between the Three.’ Boeth. Trin. unus Deus, p. 959. The last remark is found in Naz. Orat. 31, 18. Many of these references are taken from Thomassin de Trin. 17.
414:3068§§11, n. 4, 15, n. 11.
414:3069Vid. infr. 46; John xi. 34.
414:3070Matt. xvi. 13; Mark vi. 38; Matt. xx. 32
414:3071ii. 44, n. 1.
414:3072John vi. 6.
414:3073Petavius refers to this passage in proof that S. Athanasius did not in his real judgment consider our Lord ignorant, but went on to admit it in argument after having first given his own real opinion. vid. §45, n. 2.
414:3074John xi. 14.
414:3075John ii. 25; xiv. 11.
414:3076Or. ii. 8, n. 3.
415:3077Or. ii. 68.
415:3078ii. 69, n. 3.
415:3079ἰδιοποιεῖται, cf. 33, n. 5.
415:3080Infr. 51.
415:3081Or. i. 38.
415:3082Redemption an internal work. vid. supr. ii. 55, n. 1.
415:3083Luke x. 22.
415:30841 Cor. viii. 6.
415:30851 Cor. ii. 8.
415:3086Joh. xvii. 5.
415:3087Luke iv. 8.
415:3088Luke 10:18, 19.
415:3089Vid. Luke 13:16, Matt. 9:5, Luke 7:48Matt. ix. 5; Luke vii. 48.
415:3090Is. ix. 6, LXX.
415:3091Or. i. 45.
416:3092διαμείνῃ, Or. ii. 69, 3.
416:30932 Pet. i. 17; 1 Pet. iii. 22.
416:3094θεοστυγεῖς, supr. §16, n. 7. infr. §58, de Mort. Ar. 1. In illud Omn. 6.
416:3095§1, n. 11.
416:3096John ii. 4. ἐπέπληττε; and so ἐπετίμησε, Chrysost. in loc. Joan. and Theophyl. ὡς δεσπότης ἐπιτιμᾷ, Theodor. Eran. ii. p. 106. ἐντρέπει, Anon. ap. Corder. Cat. in loc. μέμφεται, Alter Anon. ibid. ἐπιτιμᾶ οὐκ ἀτιμάζων ἀλλὰ διορθούμενος, Euthym. in loc. οὐκ ἐπέπληξεν, Pseudo-Justin. Quæst. ad Orthod. 136. It is remarkable that Athan. dwells on these words as implying our Lord’s humanity (i.e. because Christ appeared to decline a miracle), when one reason assigned for them by the Fathers is that He wished, in the words τί μοι καί σοι, to remind S. Mary that He was the Son of God and must be ‘about His Father’s business.’ ‘Repeliens ejus intempestivam festinationem,’ Iren. Hær. iii. 16, n. 7. It is observable that ἐπιπλήττει and ἐπιτιμᾷ are the words used by Cyril, &c. (infr. §54, note 4), for our Lord’s treatment of His own sacred body. But they are very vague words, and have a strong meaning or not, as the case may be.
Chapter XXVIII.—Texts Explained; Eleventhly, Mark xiii. 32 and Luke ii. 52 Arian explanation of the former text is against the Regula Fidei; and against the context. Our Lord said He was ignorant of the Day, by reason of His human nature. If the Holy Spirit knows the Day, therefore the Son knows; if the Son knows the Father, therefore He knows the Day; if He has all that is the Father’s, therefore knowledge of the Day; if in the Father, He knows the Day in the Father; if He created and upholds all things, He knows when they will cease to be. He knows not as Man, argued from Matt. xxiv. 42. As He asked about Lazarus’s grave, &c., yet knew, so He knows; as S. Paul says, ‘whether in the body I know not,’ &c., yet knew, so He knows. He said He knew not for our profit, that we be not curious (as in Acts i. 7, where on the contrary He did not say He knew not). As the Almighty asks of Adam and of Cain, yet knew, so the Son knows[as God]. Again, He advanced in wisdom also as man, else He made Angels perfect before Himself. He advanced, in that the Godhead was manifested in Him more fully as time went on.
42. These things being so, come let us now examine into ‘But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, neither the Angels of God, nor the Son 3097 ;’ for being in great ignorance as regards these words, and being stupefied 3098 about them, they think they have in them an important argument for their heresy. But I, when the heretics allege it and prepare themselves with it, see in them the giants 3099 again fighting against God. For the Lord of heaven and earth, by whom all things were made, has to litigate before them about day and hour; and the Word who knows all things is accused by them of ignorance about a day; and the Son who knows the Father is said to be ignorant of an hour of a day; now what can be spoken more contrary to sense, or what madness can be likened to this? Through the Word all things have been made, times and seasons and night and day and the whole creation; and is the Framer of all said to be ignorant of His work? And the very context of the lection shews that the Son of God knows that hour and that day, though the Arians fall headlong in their ignorance. For after saying, ‘nor the Son,’ He relates to the disciples what precedes the day, saying, ‘This and that shall be, and then the end.’ But He who speaks of what precedes the day, knows certainly the day also, which shall be manifested subsequently to the things foretold. But if He had not known the hour, He had not signified the events before it, as not knowing when it should be. And as any one, who, by way of pointing out a house or city to those who were ignorant of it, gave an account of what comes before the house or city, and having described all, said, ‘Then immediately comes the city or the house,’ would know of course where the house or the city was (for had he not known, he had not described what comes before lest from ignorance he should throw his hearers far out of the way, or in speaking he should unawares go beyond the object), so the Lord saying what precedes that day and that hour, knows exactly, nor is ignorant, when the hour and the day are at hand.
43. Now why it was that, though He knew, He did not tell His disciples plainly at that time, no one may be curious 3100 where He has been silent; for ‘Who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been His counsellor 3101 ?’ but why, though He knew, He said, ‘no, not the Son knows,’ this I think none of the faithful is ignorant, viz. that He made this as those other declarations as man by reason of the flesh. For this as before is not the Word’s deficiency 3102 , but of that human nature 3103 whose property it is to be ignorant. And this again will be well seen by honestly examining into the occasion, when and to whom the Saviour spoke thus. Not then when the heaven was made by Him, nor when He was with the Father Himself, the Word ‘disposing all things 3104 ,’ nor before He became man did He say it, but when ‘the Word became flesh 3105 .’ On this account it is reasonable to ascribe to His manhood everything which, after He became man, He speaks humanly. For it is proper to the Word to know what was made, nor be ignorant either of the beginning or of the end of these (for the works are His), and He knows how many things He wrought, and the limit of their consistence. And knowing of each the beginning and the end, He knows surely the general and common end of all. Certainly when He says in the Gospel concerning Himself in His human character, ‘Father, the hour is come, glorify Thy Son 3106 ,’ it is plain that He knows also the hour of the end of all things, as the Word, though as man He is ignorant of it, for ignorance is proper to man 3107 , and especially ignorance of these things. Moreover this is proper to the Saviour’s love of man; for since He was made man, He is not ashamed, because of the flesh which is ignorant 3108 , to say ‘I know not,’ that He may shew that knowing as God, He is but ignorant according to the flesh 3109 . And therefore He said not, ‘no, not the Son of God knows,’ lest the Godhead should seem ignorant, but simply, ‘no, not the Son,’ that the ignorance might be the Son’s as born from among men.
44. On this account, He alludes to the Angels, but He did not go further and say, ‘not the Holy Ghost;’ but He was silent, with a double intimation; first that if the Spirit knew, much more must the Word know, considered as the Word, from whom the Spirit receives 3110 ; and next by His silence about the Spirit, He made it clear, that He said of His human ministry, ‘no, not the Son.’ And a proof of it is this; that, when He had spoken humanly 3111 ‘No, not the Son knows,’ He yet shews that divinely He knew all things. For that Son whom He declares not to know the day, Him He declares to know the Father; for ‘No one,’ He says, ‘knoweth the Father save the Son 3112 .’ And all men but the Arians would join in confessing, that He who knows the Father, much more knows the whole of the creation; and in that whole, its end. And if already the day and the hour be determined by the Father, it is plain that through the Son are they determined, and He knows Himself what through Him has been determined 3113 , for there is nothing but has come to be and has been determined through the Son. Therefore He, being the Framer of the universe, knows of what nature, and of what magnitude, and with what limits, the Father has willed it to be made; and in the how much and how far is included its period. And again, if all that is the Father’s, is the Son’s (and this He Himself has 3114 said), and it is the Father’s attribute to know the day, it is plain that the Son too knows it, having this proper to Him from the Father. And again, if the Son be in the Father and the Father in the Son, and the Father knows the day and the hour, it is clear that the Son, being in the Father and knowing the things of the Father, knows Himself also the day and the hour. And if the Son is also the Father’s Very Image, and the Father knows the day and the hour, it is plain that the Son has this likeness 3115 also to the Father of knowing them. And it is not wonderful if He, through whom all things were made, and in whom the universe consists, Himself knows what has been brought to be, and when the end will be of each and of all together; rather is it wonderful that this audacity, suitable as it is to the madness of the Ario-maniacs, should have forced us to have recourse to so long a defence. For ranking the Son of God, the Eternal Word, among things originate, they are not far from venturing to maintain that the Father Himself is second to the creation; for if He who knows the Father knows not the day nor the hour, I fear lest the knowledge of the creation, or rather of the lower portion of it, be greater, as they in their madness would say, than knowledge concerning the Father.
45. But for them, when they thus blaspheme the Spirit, they must expect no remission ever of such irreligion, as the Lord has said 3116 ; but let us, who love Christ and bear Christ within us, know that the Word, not as ignorant, considered as Word, has said ‘I know not,’ for He knows, but as shewing His manhood 3117 , in that to be ignorant is proper to man, and that He had put on flesh that was ignorant 3118 , being in which, He said according to the flesh, ‘I know not.’ And for this reason, after saying, ‘No not the Son knows,’ and mentioning the ignorance of the men in Noah’s day, immediately He added, ‘Watch therefore, for ye know not in what hour your Lord doth come,’ and again, ‘In such an hour as ye think not, the Son of man cometh 3119 .’ For I too, having become as you for you, said ‘no, not the Son.’ For, had He been ignorant divinely, He must have said, ‘Watch therefore, for I know not,’ and, ‘In an hour when I think not;’ but in fact this hath He not said; but by saying ‘Ye know not’ and ‘When ye think not,’ He has signified that it belongs to man to be ignorant; for whose sake He too having a flesh like theirs and having become man, said ‘No, not the Son knows,’ for He knew not in flesh, though knowing as Word. And again the example from Noah exposes the shamelessness of Christ’s enemies; for there too He said not, ‘I knew not,’ but ‘They knew not until the flood came 3120 .’ For men did not know, but He who brought the flood (and it was the Saviour Himself) knew the day and the hour in which He opened the cataracts of heaven and broke up the great deep, and said to Noah, ‘Come thou and all thy house into the ark 3121 .’ For were He ignorant, He had not foretold to Noah, ‘Yet seven days and I will bring a flood upon the earth.’ But if in describing the day He makes use of the parallel of Noah’s time, and He did know the day of the flood, therefore He knows also the day of His own coming.
46. Moreover, after narrating the parable of the Virgins, again He shews more clearly who they are who are ignorant of the day and the hour, saying, ‘Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor the hour 3122 .’ He who said shortly before, ‘No one knoweth, no not the Son,’ now says not ‘I know not,’ but ‘ye know not.’ In like manner then, when His disciples asked about the end, suitably said He then, ‘no, nor the Son,’ according to the flesh because of the body; that He might shew that, as man, He knows not; for ignorance is proper to man 3123 . If however He is the Word, if it is He who is to come, He to be Judge, He to be the Bridegroom, He knoweth when and in what hour He cometh, and when He is to say, ‘Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light 3124 .’ For as, on becoming man, He hungers and thirsts and suffers with men, so with men as man He knows not; though divinely, being in the Father Word and Wisdom, He knows, and there is nothing which He knows not. In like manner also about Lazarus 3125 He asks humanly, who was on His way to raise him, and knew whence He should recall Lazarus’s soul; and it was a greater thing to know where the soul was, than to know where the body lay; but He asked humanly, that He might raise divinely. So too He asks of the disciples, on coming into the parts of Cæsarea, though knowing even before Peter made answer. For if the Father revealed to Peter the answer to the Lord’s question, it is plain that through the Son 3126 was the revelation, for ‘No one knoweth the Son,’ saith He, ‘save the Father, neither the Father save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him 3127 .’ But if through the Son is revealed the knowledge both of the Father and the Son, there is no room for doubting that the Lord who asked, having first revealed it to Peter from the Father, next asked humanly; in order to shew, that asking after the flesh, He knew divinely what Peter was about to say. The Son then knew, as knowing all things, and knowing His own Father, than which knowledge nothing can be greater or more perfect.
47. This is sufficient to confute them; but to shew still further that they are hostile to the truth and Christ’s enemies, I could wish to ask them a question. The Apostle in the Second Epistle to the Corinthians writes, ‘I knew a man in Christ, above fourteen years ago, whether in the body I do not know, or whether out of the body I do not know; God knoweth 3128 .’ What now say ye? Knew the Apostle what had happened to him in the vision, though he says ‘I know not,’ or knew he not? If he knew not, see to it, lest, being familiar with error, ye err in the trespass 3129 of the Phrygians 3130 , who say that the Prophets and the other ministers of the Word know neither what they do nor concerning what they announce. But if he knew when he said ‘I know not,’ for he had Christ within him revealing to him all things, is not the heart of God’s enemies indeed perverted and ‘self-condemned?’ for when the Apostle says, ‘I know not,’ they say that he knows; but when the Lord says, ‘I know not,’ they say that He does not know. For if since Christ was within him, Paul knew that of which he says, ‘I know not,’ does not much more Christ Himself know, though He say, ‘I know not?’ The Apostle then, the Lord revealing it to him, knew what happened to him; for on this account he says, ‘I knew a man in Christ;’ and knowing the man, he knew also how the man was caught away. Thus Elisha, who beheld Elijah, knew also how he was taken up; but though knowing, yet when the sons of the Prophets thought that Elijah was cast upon one of the mountains by the Spirit, he knowing from the first what he had seen, tried to persuade them; but when they urged it, he was silent, and suffered them to go after him. Did he then not know, because he was silent? he knew indeed, but as if not knowing, he suffered them, that they being convinced, might no more doubt about the taking up of Elijah. Therefore much more Paul, himself being the person caught away, knew also how he was caught; for Elijah knew; and had any one asked, he would have said how. And yet Paul says ‘I know not,’ for these two reasons, as I think at least; one, as he has said himself, lest because of the abundance of the revelations any one should think of him beyond what he saw; the other, because, our Saviour having said ‘I know not,’ it became him also to say ‘I know not,’ lest the servant should appear above his Lord, and the disciple above his Master.
48. Therefore He who gave to Paul to know, much rather knew Himself; for since He spoke of the antecedents of the day, He also knew, as I said before, when the Day and when the Hour, and yet though knowing, He says, ‘No, not the Son knoweth.’ Why then said He at that time ‘I know not,’ what He as Lord 3131 , knew? as we may by searching conjecture, for our profit 3132 , as I think at least, did He this; and may He grant to what we are now proposing a true meaning! On both sides did the Saviour secure our advantage; for He has made known what comes before the end, that, as He said Himself, we might not be startled nor scared, when they happen, but from them may expect the end after them. And concerning the day and the hour He was not willing to say according to His divine nature, ‘I know,’ but after the flesh, ‘I know not,’ for the sake of the flesh which was ignorant 3133 , as I have said before; lest they should ask Him further, and then either He should have to pain the disciples by not speaking, or by speaking might act to the prejudice of them and us all. For whatever He does, that altogether He does for our sakes, since also for us ‘the Word became flesh.’ For us therefore He said ‘No, not the Son knoweth;’ and neither was He untrue in thus saying (for He said humanly, as man, ‘I know not’), nor did He suffer the disciples to force Him to speak, for by saying ‘I know not’ He stopped their inquiries. And so in the Acts of the Apostles it is written, when He went upon the Angels, ascending as man, and carrying up to heaven the flesh which He bore, on the disciples seeing this, and again asking, ‘When shall the end be, and when wilt Thou be present?’ He said to them more clearly, ‘It is not for you to know the times or the seasons which the Father hath put in His own power 3134 .’ And He did not then say, ‘No, not the Son,’ as He said before humanly, but, ‘It is not for you to know.’ For now the flesh had risen and put off its mortality and been deified; and no longer did it become Him to answer after the flesh when He was going into the heavens; but henceforth to teach after a divine manner, ‘It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father hath put in His own power; but ye shall receive Power 3135 .’ And what is that Power of the Father but the Son? for Christ is ‘God’s Power and God’s Wisdom.’
49. The Son then did know, as being the Word; for He implied this in what He said,—‘I know but it is not for you to know;’ for it was for your sakes that sitting also on the mount I said according to the flesh, ‘No, not the Son knoweth,’ for the profit of you and all. For it is profitable to you to hear so much both of the Angels and of the Son, because of the deceivers which shall be afterwards; that though demons should be transfigured as Angels, and should attempt to speak concerning the end, you should not believe, since they are ignorant; and that, if Antichrist too, disguising himself, should say, ‘I am Christ,’ and should try in his turn to speak of that day and end, to deceive the hearers, ye, having these words from Me, ‘No, not the Son,’ may disbelieve him also. And further, not to know when the end is, or when the day of the end, is expedient for man, lest knowing, they might become negligent of the time between, awaiting the days near the end; for they will argue that then only must they attend to themselves 3136 . Therefore also has He been silent of the time when each shall die, lest men, being elated on the ground of knowledge, should forthwith neglect themselves for the greater part of their time. Both then, the end of all things and the limit of each of us hath the Word concealed from us (for in the end of all is the end of each, and in the end of each the end of all is comprehended), that, whereas it is uncertain and always in prospect, we may advance day by day as if summoned, reaching forward to the things before us and forgetting the things behind 3137 . For who, knowing the day of the end, would not be dilatory with the interval? but, if ignorant, would not be ready day by day? It was on this account that the Saviour added, ‘Watch therefore, for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come;’ and, ‘In such an hour as ye think not, the Son of man cometh 3138 .’ For the advantage then which comes of ignorance has He said this; for in saying it, He wishes that we should always be prepared; ‘for you,’ He says, ‘know not; but I, the Lord, know when I come, though the Arians do not wait for Me, who am the Word of the Father.’
50. The Lord then, knowing what is good for us beyond ourselves, thus secured the disciples; and they, being thus taught, set right those of Thessalonica 3139 when likely on this point to run into error. However, since Christ’s enemies do not yield even to these considerations, I wish, though knowing that they have a heart harder than Pharaoh, to ask them again concerning this. In Paradise God asks, ‘Adam, where art Thou 3140 ’ and He inquires of Cain also, ‘Where is Abel thy brother 3141 ?’ What then say you to this? for if you think Him ignorant and therefore to have asked, you are already of the party of the Manichees, for this is their bold thought; but if, fearing the open name, ye force yourselves to say, that He asks knowing, what is there extravagant or strange in the doctrine, that ye should thus fall, on finding that the Son, in whom God then inquired, that same Son who now is clad in flesh, inquires of the disciples as man? unless forsooth, having become Manichees, you are willing to blame 3142 the question then put to Adam and all that you may give full play 3143 to your perverseness. For being exposed on all sides, you still make a whispering 3144 from the words of Luke, which are rightly said, but ill understood by you. And what this is, we must state, that so also their corrupt 3145 meaning may be shewn.
51. Now Luke says, ‘And Jesus advanced in wisdom and stature, and in grace with God and man 3146 .’ This then is the passage, and since they stumble in it, we are compelled to ask them, like the Pharisees and the Sadducees, of the person concerning whom Luke speaks. And the case stands thus. Is Jesus Christ man, as all other men, or is He God bearing flesh? If then He is an ordinary 3147 man as the rest, then let Him, as a man, advance; this however is the sentiment of the Samosatene, which virtually indeed you entertain also, though in name you deny it because of men. But if He be God bearing flesh, as He truly is, and ‘the Word became flesh,’ and being God descended upon earth, what advance had He who existed equal to God? or how had the Son increase, being ever in the Father? For if He who was ever in the Father, advanced, what, I ask, is there beyond the Father from which His advance might be made? Next it is suitable here to repeat what was said upon the point of His receiving and being glorified. If He advanced 3148 when He became man, it is plain that, before He became man, He was imperfect; and rather the flesh became to Him a cause of perfection, than He to the flesh. And again, if, as being the Word, He advances, what has He more to become than Word and Wisdom and Son and God’s Power? For the Word is all these, of which if one can anyhow partake as it were one ray, such a man becomes all perfect among men, and equal to Angels. For Angels, and Archangels, and Dominions, and all the Powers, and Thrones, as partaking the Word, behold always the face of His Father. How then does He who to others supplies perfection, Himself advance later than they? For Angels even ministered to His human birth, and the passage from Luke comes later than the ministration of the Angels. How then at all can it even come into thought of man? or how did Wisdom advance in wisdom? or how did He who to others gives grace (as Paul says in every Epistle, knowing that through Him grace is given, ‘The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all’), how did He advance in grace? for either let them say that the Apostle is untrue, and presume to say that the Son is not Wisdom, or else if He is Wisdom as Solomon said, and if Paul wrote, ‘Christ God’s Power and God’s Wisdom,’ of what advance did Wisdom admit further?
52. For men, creatures as they are, are capable in a certain way of reaching forward and advancing in virtue 3149 . Enoch, for instance, was thus translated, and Moses increased and was perfected; and Isaac ‘by advancing became great 3150 ;’ and the Apostle said that he ‘reached forth 3151 ’ day by day to what was before him. For each had room for advancing, looking to the step before him. But the Son of God, who is One and Only, what room had He for reaching forward? for all things advance by looking at Him; and He, being One and Only, is in the Only Father, from whom again He does not reach forward, but in Him abideth ever 3152 . To men then belongs advance; but the Son of God, since He could not advance, being perfect in the Father, humbled Himself for us, that in His humbling we on the other hand might be able to increase. And our increase is no other than the renouncing things sensible, and coming to the Word Himself; since His humbling is nothing else than His taking our flesh. It was not then the Word, considered as the Word, who advanced; who is perfect from the perfect Father 3153 , who needs nothing, nay brings forward others to an advance; but humanly is He here also said to advance, since advance belongs to man 3154 . Hence the Evangelist, speaking with cautious exactness 3155 , has mentioned stature in the advance; but being Word and God He is not measured by stature, which belongs to bodies. Of the body then is the advance; for, it advancing, in it advanced also the manifestation 3156 of the Godhead to those who saw it. And, as the Godhead was more and more revealed, by so much more did His grace as man increase before all men. For as a child He was carried to the Temple; and when He became a boy, He remained there, and questioned the priests about the Law. And by degrees His body increasing, and the Word manifesting Himself 3157 in it, He is confessed henceforth by Peter first, then also by all, ‘Truly this is the Son of God 3158 ;’ however wilfully the Jews, both the ancient and these modern 3159 , shut fast their eyes, lest they see that to advance in wisdom is not the advance of Wisdom Itself, but rather the manhood’s advance in It. For ‘Jesus advanced in wisdom and grace;’ and, if we may speak what is explanatory as well as true, He advanced in Himself; for ‘Wisdom builded herself an house,’ and in herself she gave the house advancement.
53. (What moreover is this advance that is spoken of, but, as I said before, the deifying and grace imparted from Wisdom to men, sin being obliterated in them and their inward corruption, according to their likeness and relationship to the flesh of the Word?) For thus, the body increasing in stature, there developed in it the manifestation of the Godhead also, and to all was it displayed that the body was God’s Temple 3160 , and that God was in the body. And if they urge, that ‘The Word become flesh’ is called Jesus, and refer to Him the term ‘advanced,’ they must be told that neither does this impair 3161 the Father’s Light 3162 , which is the Son, but that it still shews that the Word has become man, and bore true flesh. And as we said 3163 that He suffered in the flesh, and hungered in the flesh, and was fatigued in the flesh, so also reasonably may He be said to have advanced in the flesh; for neither did the advance, such as we have described it, take place with the Word external to the flesh, for in Him was the flesh which advanced and His is it called, and that as before, that man’s advance might abide 3164 and fail not, because of the Word which is with it. Neither then was the advance the Word’s, nor was the flesh Wisdom, but the flesh became the body of Wisdom 3165 . Therefore, as we have already said, not Wisdom, as Wisdom, advanced in respect of Itself; but the manhood advanced in Wisdom, transcending by degrees human nature, and being deified, and becoming and appearing to all as the organ 3166 of Wisdom for the operation and the shining forth 3167 of the Godhead. Wherefore neither said he, ‘The Word advanced,’ but Jesus, by which Name the Lord was called when He became man; so that the advance is of the human nature in such wise as we explained above.
Footnotes
416:3097Mark xiii. 32. S. Basil takes the words οὐδ᾽ ὁ υἱ& 231·ς, εἰ μὴ ὁ πατήρ, to mean, ‘nor does the Son know, except the Father knows,’ or ‘nor would the Son but for, &c.’ or ‘nor does the Son know, except as the Father knows.’ ‘The cause of the Son’s knowing is from the Father.’ Ep. 236, 2. S. Gregory alludes to the same interpretation, οὐδ᾽ ὁ υἱ& 232·ς ἢ ὡς ὅτι ὁ πατήρ. ‘Since the Father knows, therefore the Son.’ Naz. Orat. 30, 16. S. Irenæus seems to adopt the same when he says, ‘The Son was not ashamed to refer the knowledge of that day to the Father;’ Hær. ii. 28, n. 6. as Naz, supr. uses the words ἐπὶ τὴν αἰτίαν ἀναφερέσθω. And so Photius distinctly, εἰς ἀρχὴν ἀναφέρεται. ‘Not the Son, but the Father, that is, whence knowledge comes to the Son as from a fountain.’ Epp. p. 342. ed. 1651.
416:3098σκοτοδινιῶντες, de Decr. §18 init.; Or. ii. 40, n. 5.
416:3099γίγαντας θεομαχοῦντας, ii. 32, n. 4.
417:3100Cf. §18, n. 3.
417:3101Rom. xi. 34.
417:3102Or. i. 45.
417:3103Cf. ii. 45, n. 2.
417:3104Prov. viii. 27, LXX.
417:3105John i. 14.
417:3106John 17.1.
417:3107Though our Lord, as having two natures, had a human as well as a divine knowledge, and though that human knowledge was not only limited because human, but liable to ignorance in matters in which greater knowledge was possible; yet it is the doctrine of the [later] Church, that in fact He was not ignorant even in His human nature, according to its capacity, since it was from the first taken out of its original and natural condition, and ‘deified’ by its union with the Word. As then (supr. ii. 45, note 1) His manhood was created, yet He may not be called a creature even in His manhood, and as (supr. ii. 14, note 5) His flesh was in its abstract nature a servant, yet He is not a servant in fact, even as regards the flesh; so, though He took on Him a soul which left to itself had been partially ignorant, as other human souls, yet as ever enjoying the beatific vision from its oneness with the Word, it never was ignorant really, but knew all things which human soul can know. vid. Eulog. ap. Phot. 230. p. 884. As Pope Gregory expresses it, ‘Novit in natura, non ex natura humanitatis.’ Epp. x. 39. However, this view of the sacred subject was received by the Church only after S. Athanasius’s day, and it cannot be denied that others of the most eminent Fathers seem to impute ignorance to our Lord as man, as Athan. in this passage. Of course it is not meant that our Lord’s soul has the same perfect knowledge as He has as God. This was the assertion of a General of the Hermits of S. Austin at the time of the Council of Basel, when the proposition was formally condemned, animam Christi Deum videre tam clare et intense quam clare et intense Deus videt seipsum. vid. Berti Opp. t. 3. p. 42. Yet Fulgentius had said, ‘I think that in no respect was full knowledge of the Godhead wanting to that Soul, whose Person is one with the Word: whom Wisdom so assumed that it is itself that same Wisdom.’ ad Ferrand. iii. p. 223. ed. 1639. Yet, ad Trasmund. i. 7. he speaks of ignorance attaching to our Lord’s human nature.
417:3108Cf. §48.
417:3109And so Athan. ad Serap. ii. 9. S. Basil on the question being asked him by S. Amphilochius, says that he shall give him the answer he had ‘heard from a boy from the fathers,’ but which was more fitted for pious Christians than for cavillers, and that is, that ‘our Lord says many things to men in His human aspect; as “Give me to drink,”…yet He who asked was not flesh without a soul, but Godhead using flesh which had one.’ Ep. 236, 1. He goes on to suggest another explanation which has been mentioned §42, note 1. Cf. Cyril Trin. pp. 623, 4. vid. also Thes. p. 220. ‘As he submitted as man to hunger and thirst, so.…to be ignorant.” p. 221. vid. also Greg. Naz. Orat. 30, 15. Theodoret expresses the same opinion very strongly, speaking of a gradual revelation to the manhood from the Godhead, but in an argument where it was to his point to do so; in Anath. 4. t. v. p. 23. ed. Schulze. Theodore of Mopsuestia also speaks of a revelation made by the Word. ap. Leont. c. Nest (Canis. i. p. 579.)
417:3110Or. i. 47; Serap. i. 20 fin.
417:3111Leporius, in his Retractation, which S. Augustine subscribed, writes, ‘That I may in this respect also leave nothing to be cause of suspicion to any one, I then said, nay I answered when it was put to me, that our Lord Jesus Christ was ignorant as He was man, (secundum hominem). But now not only do I not presume to say so, but I even anathematize my former opinion expressed on this point,’ ap. Sirm. t. i. p. 210. A subdivision also of the Eutychians were called by the name of Agnoetæ from their holding that our Lord was ignorant of the day of judgment. ‘They said,’ says Leontius, ‘that He was ignorant of it, as we say that He underwent toil.’ de Sect. 5. circ. fin. Felix of Urgela held the same doctrine according to Agobard’s testimony, see §46, n. 2. Montfaucon observes on the text, that the assertion of our Lord’s ignorance ‘seems to have been condemned in no one in ancient times, unless joined to other error.’ And Petavius, after drawing out the authorities for and against it, says, ‘Of these two opinions, the latter, which is now received both by custom and by the agreement of divines, is deservedly preferred to the former. For it is more agreeable to Christ’s dignity, and more befitting His character and office of Mediator and Head, that is, Fountain of all grace and wisdom, and moreover of Judge, who is concerned in knowing the time fixed for exercising that function. In consequence, the former opinion, though formerly it received the countenance of some men of high eminence, was afterwards marked as a heresy.’ Incarn. xi. 1. §15.
418:3112Mat. xi. 27.
418:3113Or. ii. 41, iii. 9, 46.
418:3114John xvi. 15.
418:3115Basil. Ep. 236, 1. Cyril. Thes. p. 220. Ambros. de fid. v. 197. Hence the force of the word ‘living’ commonly joined to such words as εἴκων, σφραγίς, βουλή, ἐνέργεια, when speaking of our Lord, e.g. Naz. Orat. 30, 20, c. Vid. §63, fin. note.
418:3116Or. i. 50, n. 7.
418:3117It is a question to be decided, whether our Lord speaks of actual ignorance in His human Mind, or of the natural ignorance of that Mind considered as human; ignorance in or ex natura; or, which comes to the same thing, whether He spoke of a real ignorance, or of an economical or professed ignorance, in a certain view of His incarnation or office, as when He asked, ‘How many loaves have ye?’ when ‘He Himself knew what He would do,’ or as He is called sin, though sinless. Thus it has been noticed, supr. ii. 55, n. 7, that Ath. seems to make His infirmities altogether only imputative, not real, as if shewing that the subject had not in his day been thoroughly worked out. In like manner S. Hilary, who, if the passage be genuine, states so clearly our Lord’s ignorance, de Trin. ix. fin. yet, as Petavius observes, seems elsewhere to deny to Him those very affections of the flesh to which he has there paralleled it. And this view of Athan.’s meaning is favoured by the turn of his expressions. He says such a defect belongs to ‘that human nature whose property it is to be ignorant;’ §43. that ‘since He was made man, He is not ashamed, because of the flesh which is ignorant, to say, “I know not;”’ ibid. and, as here, that ‘as shewing His manhood, in that to be ignorant is proper to man, and that He had put on a flesh that was ignorant, being in which, He said according to the flesh, “I know not;”’ ‘that He might shew that as man He knows not;’ §46. that ‘as man’ (i.e. on the ground of being man, not in the capacity of man), ‘He knows not;’ ibid. and that, ‘He asks about Lazarus humanly,’ even when ‘He was on His way to raise him,’ which implied surely knowledge in His human nature. The reference to the parallel of S. Paul’s professed ignorance when he really knew, §47. leads us to the same suspicion. And so ‘for our profit as I think, did He this.’ §§48–50. The natural want of precision on such questions in the early ages was shewn or fostered by such words as οἰκονομικῶς, which, in respect of this very text, is used by S. Basil to denote both our Lord’s Incarnation, Ep. 236, 1 fin. and His gracious accommodation of Himself and His truth, Ep. 8, 6. and with the like variety of meaning, with reference to the same text, by Cyril. Trin. p. 623. and Thesaur. p. 224. (And the word dispensatio in like manner, Ben. note on Hil. x. 8.) In the latter Ep. S. Basil suggests that our Lord ‘economizes by a feigned ignorance.’ §6. And S. Cyril. Thesaur. p. 224. And even in de Trin. vi. he seems to recognise the distinction laid down just now between the natural and actual state of our Lord’s humanity; and so Hilary, Trin. ix. 62. And he gives reasons why He professed ignorance, n. 67. viz. as S. Austin words it, Christum se dixisse nescientem, in quo alios facit occultando nescientes. Ep. 180, 3. S. Austin follows him, saying, Hoc nescit quod nescienter facit. Trin. i. 23. Pope Gregory says that the text ‘is most certainly to be referred to the Son not as He is Head, but as to His body which we are.’ Ep x. 39. And S. Ambrose de fid. v. 222. And so Cæsarius, Qu. 20. and Photius Epp. p. 366. Chrysost. in Matt. Hom. 77, 3. Theodoret, however, but in controversy, is very severe on the principle of Economy. ‘If He knew the day, and wishing to conceal it, said He was ignorant, see what a blasphemy is the result. Truth tells an untruth.’ l. c, pp. 23, 4.
418:3118§48.
418:3119Matt. 24:42, 44.
419:3120Matt. xxiv. 39.
419:3121Gen. vii. 1.
419:3122Matt. xxv. 13.
419:3123The mode in which Athan. here expresses himself, is as if he did not ascribe ignorance literally, but apparent ignorance, to our Lord’s soul, vid. supr. 45. n. 2; not certainly in the broad sense in which heretics have done so. As Leontius, e.g. reports of Theodore of Mopsuestia, that he considered Christ ‘to be ignorant so far, as not to know, when He was tempted, who tempted Him;’ contr. Nest. iii. (Canis. t. i. p. 579.) and Agobard of Felix the Adoptionist that he held ‘Our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh truly to have been ignorant of the sepulchre of Lazarus, when He said to his sisters, ‘Where have ye laid him?’ and was truly ignorant of the day of judgment; and was truly ignorant what the two disciples were saying, as they walked by the way, of what had been done at Jerusalem; and was truly ignorant whether He was more loved by Peter than by the other disciples, when He said, ‘Simon Peter, Lovest thou Me more than these?’ B. P. t. 9. p. 1177. [Cf. Prolegg. ch. iv. §5.]
419:3124Eph. v. 14.
419:3125§37.
419:3126Cf. 44, n. 4.
419:3127Luke x. 22.
419:31282 Cor. xii. 2. S. Augustine understands the passage differently, i.e. that S. Paul really did not know whether or not he was in the body. Gen. ad lit. xii. 14.
419:3129παρανομίαν, §2, n. 5.
419:3130Cf. Jerome, ‘He speaks not in ecstasy, as Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla rave;’ Præf. in Naum. In like manner Tertullian speaks of ‘amentia, as the spiritalis vis qua constat prophetia;’ de Anim. 21. Cf. Eusebius, Hist. v. 16. Epiphanius too, noticing the failure of Maximilla’s prophecies, says, ‘Whatever the prophets have said, they spoke with understanding, following the sense.’ Hær. 48. p. 403. In the de Syn. 4. Athan. speaks of the Montanists as making a fresh beginning of Christianity; i.e. they were the first heretics who professed to prophesy and to introduce a new or additional revelation.
420:3131δεσποτὴς, §56, 6.
420:3132This expression, which repeatedly occurs in this and the following sections, surely implies that there was something economical in our Lord’s profession of ignorance. He said with a purpose, not as a mere plain fact or doctrine. [But see Prolegg. ch. iv. §5.]
420:313343, n. 9; 45, n. 3.
420:3134Acts i. 7.
420:3135Vid. Basil. Ep. 8, 6. Cyril. Thes. p. 222. Ambros. de fid. v. 212. Chrysost. and Hieron. in loc. Matt.
420:3136Vid. Hilar. in Matt. Comment. 26, 4; de Trin. ix. 67; Ambros. de Fid. v. c. 17. Isidor. Pelus. Epp. i. 117. Chrysost. in Matt. Hom. 77, 2 and 3.
421:3137Vid. Phil. iii. 13.
421:3138Matt. xxiv. 42; Luke xii. 40.
421:3139Vid. 2 Thess. 2:1, 2.
421:3140Gen. iii. 9; iv. 9. This seems taken from Origen, in Matt. t. 10. §14. vid. also Pope Gregory and Chrysost. infr.
421:3141S. Chrysostom, S. Ambrose, and Pope Gregory, in addition to the instances in the text, refer to ‘I will go down now, and see whether they have done, &c., and if not, I will know.’ Gen. xviii. 21. ‘The Lord came down to see the city and the tower, &c.’ Gen. xi. 5. ‘God looked down from heaven upon the children of men to see, &c.’ Ps. liii. 3. ‘It may be they will reverence My Son.’ Matt. xxi. 37; Luke xx. 13. ‘Seeing a fig-tree afar off, having leaves, He came, if haply He might find, &c.’ Mark xi. 13. ‘Simon, lovest thou Me?’ John xxi. 15. vid. Ambros. de Fid. v. c. 17. Chrys. in Matt. Hom. 77, 3. Greg. Epp. x. 39. Vid. also the instances, supr. §37. Other passages may be added, such as Gen. xxii. 12. vid. Berti Opp. t. 3. p. 42. But the difficulty of the passage lies in its signifying that there is a sense in which the Father knows what the Son knows not.
421:3142Or. i. 8, n. 2.
421:3143νεανιεύησθε, vid. Decr. 18 init. de Fug. 4. b.
421:3144τονθορύζετε, vid. Decr. 16.
421:3145διεφθαρμένη, §58 fin.
421:3146Luke ii. 52.
421:3147§32, n. 7.
421:3148De Syn. 24, n. 9, vid. supr. §39; Orat. iv. 11.
422:3149It is the doctrine of the [medieval and modern] Church that Christ, as man, was perfect in knowledge from the first, as if ignorance were hardly separable from sin, and were the direct consequence or accompaniment of original sin. Cf. Aug. de Pecc. Mer. ii. 48. As to the limits of Christ’s perfect knowledge as man, Petavius observes, that we must consider ‘that the soul of Christ knew all things that are or ever will be or ever have been, but not what are only in posse, not in fact.’ Incarn. xi. 3, 6.
422:3150Vid. Gen. xxvi. 13.
422:3151Phil. iii. 13.
422:3152§4, n. 10.
422:3153Or. ii. 36, n. 4.
422:3154Vid. Serm. Maj. de Fid. 18.
422:3155Or. ii. 12, n. 4.
422:3156§31, n. 10.
422:3157It is remarkable, considering the tone of his statements in the present chapter, that here and in what follows Athan. should resolve our Lord’s advance in wisdom merely to its gradual manifestation through the flesh [but he says expressly ‘the Manhood advanced in wisdom!’] and it increases the proof that his statements are not to be taken in the letter, and as if fully brought out and settled. Naz. says the same, Ep. ad Cled. 101. p. 86. which is the more remarkable since he is chiefly writing against the Apollinarians, who considered a φανέρωσις the great end of our Lord’s coming; and Cyril. c. Nest. iii. p. 87. Theod. Hor. v. 13. On the other hand, S. Epiphanius speaks of Him as growing in wisdom as man. Hær. 77. p. 1019–24. and S. Ambrose, Incarn. 71–14. Vid. however Ambr. de fid. as quoted supr. §45, n. 2.
422:3158Matt. xvi. 16; xxvii. 54.
422:3159Or. ii. 1, n. 6.
422:3160Or. ii. 10, n. 7; iii. 58.
422:3161i. 45.
422:3162iii. 16, n. 8.
422:3163§34.
422:3164ii. 69, n. 3.
422:3165§31, n. 12.
422:316631, n. 10.
422:3167Or. ii. 52, n. 6.
Chapter XXIX.—Texts Explained; Twelfthly, Matthew xxvi. 39; John xii. 27, &c. Arian inferences are against the Regula Fidei, as before. He wept and the like, as man. Other texts prove Him God. God could not fear. He feared because His flesh feared.
54. Therefore as, when the flesh advanced, He is said to have advanced, because the body was His own, so also what is said at the season of His death, that He was troubled, that He wept, must be taken in the same sense 3168 . For they, going up and down 3169 , as if thereby recommending their heresy anew, allege; “Behold, ‘He wept,’ and said, ‘Now is My soul troubled,’ and He besought that the cup might pass away; how then, if He so spoke, is He God, and Word of the Father?” Yea, it is written that He wept, O God’s enemies, and that He said, ‘I am troubled,’ and on the Cross He said, ‘Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani,’ that is, ‘My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me?’ and He besought that the cup might pass away 3170 . Thus certainly it is written; but again I would ask you (for the same rejoinder must of necessity be made to each of your objections 3171 ), If the speaker is mere man, let him weep and fear death, as being man; but if He is the Word in flesh 3172 (for one must not be reluctant to repeat), whom had He to fear being God? or wherefore should He fear death, who was Himself Life, and was rescuing others from death? or how, whereas He said, ‘Fear not him that kills the body 3173 ,’ should He Himself fear? And how should He who said to Abraham, ‘Fear not, for I am with thee,’ and encouraged Moses against Pharaoh, and said to the son of Nun, ‘Be strong, and of a good courage 3174 ,’ Himself feel terror before Herod and Pilate? Further, He who succours others against fear (for ‘the Lord,’ says Scripture, ‘is on my side, I will not fear what man shall do unto me 3175 ’), did He fear governors, mortal men? did He who Himself was come against death, feel terror of death? Is it not both unseemly and irreligious to say that He was terrified at death or hades, whom the keepers of the gates of hades 3176 saw and shuddered? But if, as you would hold, the Word was in terror wherefore, when He spoke long before of the conspiracy of the Jews, did He not flee, nay said when actually sought, ‘I am He?’ for He could have avoided death, as He said, ‘I have power to lay down My life, and I have power to take it again;’ and ‘No one taketh it from Me 3177 .’
55. But these affections were not proper to the nature of the Word, as far as He was Word; but in the flesh which was thus affected was the Word, O Christ’s enemies and unthankful Jews! For He said not all this prior to the flesh; but when the ‘Word became flesh,’ and has become man, then is it written that He said this, that is, humanly. Surely He of whom this is written was He who raised Lazarus from the dead, and made the water wine, and vouchsafed sight to the man born blind, and said, ‘I and My Father are one 3178 .’ If then they make His human attributes a ground for low thoughts concerning the Son of God, nay consider Him altogether man from the earth, and not 3179 from heaven, wherefore not from His divine works recognise the Word who is in the Father, and henceforward renounce their self-willed 3180 irreligion? For they are given to see, how He who did the works is the same as He who shewed that His body was passible by His permitting 3181 it to weep and hunger, and to shew other properties of a body. For while by means of such He made it known that, though God impassible, He had taken a passible flesh; yet from the works He shewed Himself the Word of God, who had afterwards become man, saying, Though ye believe not Me, beholding Me clad in a human body, yet believe the works, that ye may know that “I am in the Father, and the Father in Me. 3182 ” ‘And Christ’s enemies seem to me to shew plain shamelessness and blasphemy;’ for, when they hear ‘I and the Father are one 3183 ,’ they violently distort the sense, and separate the unity of the Father and the Son; but reading of His tears or sweat or sufferings, they do not advert to His body, but on account of these rank in the creation Him by whom the creation was made. What then is left for them to differ from the Jews in? for as the Jews blasphemously ascribed God’s works to Beelzebub, so also will these, ranking with the creatures the Lord who wrought those works, undergo the same condemnation as theirs without mercy.
56. But they ought, when they hear ‘I and the Father are one,’ to see in Him the oneness of the Godhead and the propriety of the Father’s Essence; and again when they hear, ‘He wept’ and the like, to say that these are proper to the body; especially since on each side they have an intelligible ground, viz. that this is written as of God and that with reference to His manhood. For in the incorporeal, the properties of body had not been, unless He had taken a body corruptible and mortal 3184 ; for mortal was Holy Mary, from whom was His body. Wherefore of necessity when He was in a body suffering, and weeping, and toiling, these things which are proper to the flesh, are ascribed to Him together with the body. If then He wept and was troubled, it was not the Word, considered as the Word, who wept and was troubled, but it was proper to the flesh; and if too He besought that the cup might pass away, it was not the Godhead that was in terror, but this affection too was proper to the manhood. And that the words ‘Why hast Thou forsaken Me?’ are His, according to the foregoing explanations (though He suffered nothing, for the Word was impassible), is notwithstanding declared by the Evangelists; since the Lord became man, and these things are done and said as from a man, that He might Himself lighten 3185 these very sufferings of the flesh, and free it from them 3186 . Whence neither can the Lord be forsaken by the Father, who is ever in the Father, both before He spoke, and when He uttered this cry. Nor is it lawful to say that the Lord was in terror, at whom the keepers of hell’s gates shuddered 3187 and set open hell, and the graves did gape, and many bodies of the saints arose and appeared to their own people 3188 . Therefore be every heretic dumb, nor dare to ascribe terror to the Lord whom death, as a serpent, flees, at whom demons tremble, and the sea is in alarm; for whom the heavens are rent and all the powers are shaken. For behold when He says, ‘Why hast Thou forsaken Me?’ the Father shewed that He was ever and even then in Him; for the earth knowing its Lord 3189 who spoke, straightway trembled, and the vail was rent, and the sun was hidden, and the rocks were torn asunder, and the graves, as I have said, did gape, and the dead in them arose; and, what is wonderful, they who were then present and had before denied Him, then seeing these signs, confessed that ‘truly He was the Son of God 3190 .’
57. And as to His saying, ‘If it be possible, let the cup pass,’ observe how, though He thus spake, He rebuked 3191 Peter, saying, ‘Thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.’ For He willed 3192 what He deprecated, for therefore had He come; but His was the willing (for for it He came), but the terror belonged to the flesh. Wherefore as man He utters this speech also, and yet both were said by the Same, to shew that He was God, willing in Himself, but when He had become man, having a flesh that was in terror. For the sake of this flesh He combined His own will with human weakness 3193 , that destroying this affection He might in turn make man undaunted in face of death. Behold then a thing strange indeed! He to whom Christ’s enemies impute words of terror, He by that so-called 3194 tenor renders men undaunted and fearless. And so the Blessed Apostles after Him from such words of His conceived so great a contempt of death, as not even to care for those who questioned them, but to answer, ‘We ought to obey God rather than men 3195 .’ And the other Holy Martyrs were so bold, as to think that they were rather passing to life than undergoing death. Is it not extravagant then, to admire the courage of the servants of the Word, yet to say that the Word Himself was in terror, through whom they despised death? But from that most enduring purpose and courage of the Holy Martyrs is shewn, that the Godhead was not in terror, but the Saviour took away our terror. For as He abolished death by death, and by human means all human evils, so by this so-called terror did He remove our terror, and brought about that never more should men fear death. His word and deed go together. For human were the sayings, ‘Let the cup pass,’ and ‘Why hast Thou forsaken Me?’ and divine the act whereby the Same did cause the sun to fail and the dead to rise. Again He said humanly, ‘Now is My soul troubled;’ and He said divinely, ‘I have power to lay down My life, and power to take it again 3196 .’ For to be troubled was proper to the flesh, and to have power to lay down His life 3197 and take it again, when He will, was no property of men but of the Word’s power. For man dies, not by his own power, but by necessity of nature and against his will; but the Lord, being Himself immortal, but having a mortal flesh, had power, as God, to become separate from the body and to take it again, when He would. Concerning this too speaks David in the Psalm, ‘Thou shalt not leave My soul in hades, neither shalt Thou suffer Thy Holy One to see corruption 3198 .’ For it beseemed that the flesh, corruptible as it was, should no longer after its own nature remain mortal, but because of the Word who had put it on, should abide incorruptible. For as He, having come in our body, was conformed to our condition, so we, receiving Him, partake of the immortality that is from Him.
58. Idle then is the excuse for stumbling, and petty the notions concerning the Word, of these Ario-maniacs, because it is written, ‘He was troubled,’ and ‘He wept.’ For they seem not even to have human feeling, if they are thus ignorant of man’s nature and properties; which do but make it the greater wonder, that the Word should be in such a suffering flesh, and neither prevented those who were conspiring against Him, nor took vengeance of those who were putting Him to death, though He was able, He who hindered some from dying, and raised others from the dead. And He let His own body suffer, for therefore did He come, as I said before, that in the flesh He might suffer, and thenceforth the flesh might be made impassible and immortal 3199 , and that, as we have many times said, contumely and other troubles might determine upon Him and come short of others after Him, being by Him annulled utterly; and that henceforth men might for ever abide 3200 incorruptible, as a temple of the Word 3201 . Had Christ’s enemies thus dwelt on these thoughts, and recognised the ecclesiastical scope as an anchor for the faith, they would not have made shipwreck of the faith, nor been so shameless as to resist those who would fain recover them from their fall, and to deem those as enemies who are admonishing them to be religious 3202 .
Footnotes
423:3168διανοί& 139·, §26 et passim.
423:3169ἄνω καὶ κάτω, vid. de Decr. 14, n. 1; Or. ii. 34, n. 5.
423:3170John xi. 35; xii. 27; Matt. xxvi. 39; Mark xv. 34.
423:3171Cf. ii. 80.
423:3172§53, n. 2.
423:3173Luke xii. 4.
423:3174Gen. 15:1, Gen. 26:24, Exod. 4:12, Josh. 1:6Gen. xv. 1; xxvi. 24; Exod. iv. 12, &c.; Josh. i. 6.
423:3175Ps. cxviii. 6.
423:3176Job xxxviii. 17. LXX.; De Syn. 8, below, §56.
423:3177John xviii. 5; x. 18.
423:3178John 10.30.
423:3179ἄνθρωπον ὅλον, Orat. iv. 35 fin.
423:3180ἰδίαν, Orat. i. 52 fin.
423:3181This our Lord’s suspense or permission, at His will, of the operations of His manhood is a great principle in the doctrine of the Incarnation. Cf. Theophylact, in Joh. xi. 34. And Cyril, fragm. in Joan. p. 685. Leon. Ep. 35, 3. Aug. in Joan. xlix. 18. vid. note on §57, sub. fin. The Eutychians perverted this doctrine, as if it implied that our Lord was not subject to the laws of human nature, and that He suffered merely ‘by permission of the Word.’ Leont. ap. Canis. t. i. p. 563. In like manner Marcion or Manes said that His ‘flesh appeared from heaven in resemblance, ὡς ἠθέλησεν.’ Athan. contr. Apoll. ii. 3.
423:3182John x. 38; xiv. 10.
423:3183John 10.30.
424:3184Or. i. 43, 44, notes; ii. 66, n. 7. Serm. Maj. de Fid. 9. Tertull. de Carn. Chr. 6.
424:3185§44, nn. 2, 6.
424:3186ii. 56, n. 5.
424:3187Job xxxviii. 17, LXX.
424:3188Vid. Matt. 27:52, 53, similar passage supr. p. 88.
424:3189δεσποτὴν, §14, &c.
424:3190Vid. Matt. xxvii. 54. Vid. Or. ii. 16; 35, n. 2. Cf. Leo’s Tome (Ep. 28.) 4. Nyssen, contr. Eunom. iv. p. 161. Ambros. Epist. i. 46. n. 7. vid. Hil. Trin. x. 48. Also vid. Athan. Sent. D. fin. Serm. Maj. de Fid. 24.
424:3191Matt. xvi. 23, cf. §§40, 41.
424:3192[The human will of the Saviour is in absolute harmony with the Divine, though psychologically distinct.] Cf. Anast. Hodeg. i. p. 12.
424:3193It is observable that, as elsewhere we have seen Athan. speak of the nature of the Word, and of, not the nature of man as united to Him, but of flesh, humanity, &c. (vid. Or. ii. 45, n. 2.) so here, instead of speaking of two wills, he speaks of the Word’s willing and human weakness, terror, &c. In another place he says still more pointedly, ‘The will was of the Godhead alone; since the whole nature of the Word was manifested in the second Adam’s human form and visible flesh.’ contr. Apoll. ii. 10. Cf. S. Leo on the same passage: ‘The first request is one of infirmity, the second of power; the first He asked in our [character], the second in His own.…The inferior will give way to the superior,’ &c. Serm. 56, 2. vid. a similar passage in Nyssen. Antirrh. adv. Apol. 32. vid. also 31. An obvious objection may be drawn from such passages, as if the will ‘of the flesh’ were represented as contrary (vid. foregoing note) to the will of the Word. The whole of our Lord’s prayer is offered by Him as man, because it is a prayer; the first part is not from Him as man, but the second, which corrects it, from Him as God [i.e. the first part is not human as contrasted with the second]; but the former part is from the sinless infirmity of our nature, the latter from His human will expressing its acquiescence in His Father’s, that is, in His Divine Will. ‘His Will,’ says S. Greg. Naz. ‘was not contrary to God, being all deified, θεωθὲν ὅλον.’
424:3194νομιζομένῃ, vid. Orat. i. 10.
424:3195Acts v. 29.
424:3196John xii. 27; x. 18.
425:3197This might be taken as an illustration of the ut voluit supr. Or. i. 44, n. 11. And so the expressions in the Evangelists, ‘Into Thy hands I commend My Spirit,’ ‘He bowed the head,’ ‘He gave up the ghost,’ are taken to imply that His death was His free act. vid. Ambros. in loc. Luc. Hieron. in loc. Matt. also Athan. Serm. Maj. de Fid. 4. It is Catholic doctrine that our Lord, as man, submitted to death of His free will, and not as obeying an express command of the Father. Cf. S. Chrysostom on John x. 18. Theophylact. in Hebr. xii. 2; Aug. de Trin. iv. 16.
425:3198Ps. xvi. 10.
425:3199Or. ii. 65, n. 3.
425:3200Ib. 69, n. 3.
425:3201§53.
425:3202Thus ends the exposition of texts, which forms the body of these Orations. It is remarkable that he ends as he began, with reference to the ecclesiastical scope, or Regula Fidei, which has so often come under our notice, vid. Or. ii. 35. n. 2. 44, n. 1, as if distinctly to tell us, that Scripture did not so force its meaning on the individual as to dispense with an interpreter, and as if his own deductions were not to be viewed merely in their own logical power, great as that power often is, but as under the authority of the Catholic doctrines which they subserve. Vid. Or. iii. 18, n. 3.
Chapter XXX.—Objections continued, as in Chapters vii.—x. Whether the Son is begotten of the Father’s will? This virtually the same as whether once He was not? and used by the Arians to introduce the latter question. The Regula Fidei answers it at once in the negative by contrary texts. The Arians follow the Valentinians in maintaining a precedent will; which really is only exercised by God towards creatures. Instances from Scripture. Inconsistency of Asterius. If the Son by will, there must be another Word before Him. If God is good, or exist, by His will, then is the Son by His will. If He willed to have reason or wisdom, then is His Word and Wisdom at His will. The Son is the Living Will, and has all titles which denote connaturality. That will which the Father has to the Son, the Son has to the Father. The Father wills the Son and the Son wills the Father.
58. (continued). But 3203 , as it seems, a heretic is a wicked thing in truth, and in every respect his heart is depraved 3204 and irreligious. For behold, though convicted on all points, and shewn to be utterly bereft of understanding, they feel no shame; but as the hydra of Gentile fable, when its former serpents were destroyed, gave birth to fresh ones, contending against the slayer of the old by the production of new, so also they, hostile 3205 and hateful to God 3206 , as hydras 3207 , losing their life in the objections which they advance, invent for themselves other questions Judaic and foolish, and new expedients, as if Truth were their enemy, thereby to shew the rather that they are Christ’s opponents in all things.
59. After so many proofs against them, at which even the devil who is their father 3208 had himself been abashed and gone back, again as from their perverse heart they mutter forth other expedients, sometimes in whispers, sometimes with the drone 3209 of gnats; ‘Be it so,’ say they; ‘interpret these places thus, and gain the victory in reasonings and proofs; still you must say that the Son has received being from the Father at His will and pleasure;’ for thus they deceive many, putting forward the will and the pleasure of God. Now if any of those who believe aright 3210 were to say this in simplicity, there would be no cause to be suspicious of the expression, the right intention 3211 prevailing over that somewhat simple use of words 3212 . But since the phrase is from the heretics 3213 and the words of heretics are suspicious, and, as it is written, ‘The wicked are deceitful,’ and ‘The words of the wicked are deceit 3214 ,’ even though they but make signs 3215 , for their heart is depraved, come let us examine this phrase also, lest, though convicted on all sides, still, as hydras, they invent a fresh word, and by such clever language and specious evasion, they sow again that irreligion of theirs in another way. For he who says, ‘The Son came to be at the Divine will,’ has the same meaning as another who says, ‘Once He was not,’ and ‘The Son came to be out of nothing,’ and ‘He is a creature.’ But since they are now ashamed of these phrases, these crafty ones have endeavoured to convey their meaning in another way, putting forth the word ‘will,’ as cuttlefish their blackness, thereby to blind the simple 3216 , and to keep in mind their peculiar heresy. For whence 3217 bring they ‘by will and pleasure?’ or from what Scripture? let them say, who are so suspicious in their words and so inventive of irreligion. For the Father who revealed from heaven His own Word, declared, ‘This is My beloved Son;’ and by David He said, ‘My heart uttered a good Word;’ and John He bade say, ‘In the beginning was the Word;’ and David says in the Psalm, ‘With Thee is the well of life, and in Thy light shall we see light;’ and the Apostle writes, ‘Who being the Radiance of Glory,’ and again, ‘Who being in the form of God,’ and, ‘Who is the Image of the invisible God 3218 .’
60. All everywhere tell us of the being of the Word, but none of His being ‘by will,’ nor at all of His making; but they, where, I ask, did they find will or pleasure ‘precedent 3219 ’ to the Word of God, unless forsooth, leaving the Scriptures, they simulate the perverseness of Valentinus? For Ptolemy the Valentinian said that the Unoriginate had a pair of attributes, Thought and Will, and first He thought and then He willed; and what He thought, He could not put forth 3220 , unless when the power of the Will was added. Thence the Arians taking a lesson, wish will and pleasure to precede the Word. For them then, let them rival the doctrine of Valentinus; but we, when we read the divine discourses, found ‘He was’ applied to the Son, but of Him only did we hear as being in the Father and the Father’s Image; while in the case of things originate only, since also by nature these things once were not, but afterwards came to be 3221 , did we recognise a precedent will and pleasure, David saying in the hundred and thirteenth Psalm, ‘As for our God He is in heaven, He hath done whatsoever pleased Him,’ and in the hundred and tenth, ‘The works of the Lord are great, sought out unto all His good pleasure;’ and again, in the hundred and thirty-fourth, ‘Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did He in heaven, and in earth, and in the sea, and in all deep places 3222 .’ If then He be work and thing made, and one among others, let Him, as others, be said ‘by will’ to have come to be, and Scripture shews that these are thus brought into being. And Asterius, the advocate 3223 for the heresy, acquiesces, when he thus writes, ‘For if it be unworthy of the Framer of all, to make at pleasure, let His being pleased be removed equally in the case of all, that His Majesty be preserved unimpaired. Or if it be befitting God to will, then let this better way obtain in the case of the first Offspring. For it is not possible that it should be fitting for one and the same God to make things at His pleasure, and not at His will also.’ In spite of the Sophist having introduced abundant irreligion in his words, namely, that the Offspring and the thing made are the same, and that the Son is one offspring out of all offsprings that are, He ends with the conclusion that it is fitting to say that the works are by will and pleasure.
61. Therefore if He be other than all things, as has been above shewn 3224 , and through Him the works rather came to be, let not ‘by will’ be applied to Him, or He has similarly come to be as the things consist which through Him come to be. For Paul, whereas he was not before, became afterwards an Apostle ‘by the will of God 3225 ;’ and our own calling, as itself once not being, but now taking place afterwards, is preceded by will, and, as Paul himself says again, has been made ‘according to the good pleasure of His will 3226 .’ And what Moses relates, ‘Let there be light,’ and ‘Let the earth appear,’ and ‘Let Us make man,’ is, I think, according to what has gone before 3227 , significant of the will of the Agent. For things which once were not but happened afterwards from external causes, these the Framer counsels to make; but His own Word begotten from Him by nature, concerning Him He did not counsel beforehand; for in Him the Father makes, in Him frames, other things whatever He counsels; as also James the Apostle teaches, saying, ‘Of His own will begat He us with the Word of truth 3228 .’ Therefore the Will of God concerning all things, whether they be begotten again or are brought into being at the first, is in His Word, in whom He both makes and begets again what seems right to Him; as the Apostle 3229 again signifies, writing to Thessalonica; ‘for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.’ But if, in whom He makes, in Him also is the will, and in Christ is the pleasure of the Father, how can He, as others, come into being by will and pleasure? For if He too came to be as you maintain, by will, it follows that the will concerning Him consists in some other Word, through whom He in turn comes to be; for it has been shewn that God’s will is not in the things which He brings into being, but in Him through whom and in whom all things made are brought to be. Next, since it is all one to say ‘By will’ and Once He was not,’ let them make up their minds to say, ‘Once He was not,’ that, perceiving with shame that times are signified by the latter, they may understand that to say ‘by will’ is to place times before the Son; for counselling goes before things which once were not, as in the case of all creatures. But if the Word is the Framer of the creatures, and He coexists with the Father, how can to counsel precede the Everlasting as if He were not? for if counsel precedes, how through Him are all things? For rather He too, as one among others is by will begotten to be a Son, as we too were made sons by the Word of Truth; and it rests, as was said, to seek another Word, through whom He too has come to be, and was begotten together with all things, which were according to God’s pleasure.
62. If then there is another Word of God, then be the Son originated by a word; but if there be not, as is the case, but all things by Him have come to be, which the Father has willed, does not this expose the many-headed 3230 craftiness of these men? that feeling shame at saying ‘work,’ and ‘creature,’ and ‘God’s Word was not before His generation,’ yet in another way they assert that He is a creature, putting forward ‘will,’ and saying, ‘Unless He has by will come to be, therefore God had a Son by necessity and against His good pleasure.’ And who is it then who imposes necessity on Him, O men most wicked, who draw everything to the purpose of your heresy? for what is contrary to will they see; but what is greater and transcends it has escaped their perception. For as what is beside purpose is contrary to will, so what is according to nature transcends and precedes counselling 3231 . A man by counsel builds a house, but by nature he begets a son; and what is in building began to come into being at will, and is external to the maker; but the son is proper offspring of the father’s essence, and is not external to him; wherefore neither does he counsel concerning him, lest he appear to counsel about himself. As far then as the Son transcends the creature, by so much does what is by nature transcend the will 3232 . And they, on hearing of Him, ought not to measure by will what is by nature; forgetting however that they are hearing about God’s Son, they dare to apply human contrarieties in the instance of God, ‘necessity’ and ‘beside purpose,’ to be able thereby to deny that there is a true Son of God. For let them tell us themselves,—that God is good and merciful, does this attach to Him by will or not? if by will, we must consider that He began to be good, and that His not being good is possible; for to counsel and choose implies an inclination two ways, and is incidental to a rational nature. But if it be too unseemly that He should be called good and merciful upon will, then what they have said themselves must be retorted on them,—‘therefore by necessity and not at His pleasure He is good;’ and, ‘who is it that imposes this necessity on Him?’ But if it be unseemly to speak of necessity in the case of God, and therefore it is by nature that He is good, much more is He, and more truly, Father of the Son by nature and not by will.
63. Moreover let them answer us this:—(for against their shamelessness I wish to urge a further question, bold indeed, but with a religious intent; be propitious, O Lord 3233 !)—the Father Himself, does He exist, first having counselled, then being pleased, or before counselling? For since they are so bold in the instance of the Word, they must receive the like answer, that they may know that this their presumption reaches even to the Father Himself. If then they shall themselves take counsel about will, and say that even He is from will, what then was He before He counselled, or what gained He, as ye consider, after counselling? But if such a question be unseemly and self-destructive, and shocking even to ask (for it is enough only to hear God’s Name for us to know and understand that He is He that Is), will it not also be against reason to have parallel thoughts concerning the Word of God, and to make pretences of will and pleasure? for it is enough in like manner only to hear the Name of the Word, to know and understand that He who is God not by will, has not by will but by nature His own Word. And does it not surpass all conceivable madness, to entertain the thought only, that God Himself counsels and considers and chooses and proceeds to have a good pleasure, that He be not without Word and without Wisdom, but have both? for He seems to be considering about Himself, who counsels about what is proper to His Essence. There being then much blasphemy in such a thought, it will be religious to say that things originate have come to be ‘by favour and will,’ but the Son is not a work of will, nor has come after 3234 , as the creation, but is by nature the own Offspring of God’s Essence. For being the own Word of the Father, He allows us not to account 3235 of will as before Himself, since He is Himself the Father’s Living Counsel 3236 , and Power, and Framer of the things which seemed good to the Father. And this is what He says of Himself in the Proverbs; ‘Counsel is mine and security, mine is understanding, and mine strength 3237 .’ For as, although Himself the ‘Understanding,’ in which He prepared the heavens, and Himself ‘Strength and Power’ (for Christ is ‘God’s Power and God’s Wisdom’ 3238 ), He here has altered the terms and said, ‘Mine is understanding’ and ‘Mine strength,’ so while He says, ‘Mine is counsel,’ He must Himself be the Living 3239 Counsel of the Father; as we have learned from the Prophet also, that He becomes ‘the Angel of great Counsel 3240 ,’ and was called the good pleasure of the Father; for thus we must refute them, using human illustrations 3241 concerning God.
64. Therefore if the works subsist ‘by will and favour,’ and the whole creature is made ‘at God’s good pleasure,’ and Paul was called to be an Apostle ‘by the will of God,’ and our calling has come about ‘by His good pleasure and will,’ and all things have come into being through the Word, He is external to the things which have come to be by will, but rather is Himself the Living Counsel of the Father, by which all these things have come to be; by which David also gives thanks in the seventy-second Psalm. ‘Thou hast holden me by my right hand; Thou shalt guide me with Thy Counsel 3242 .’ How then can the Word, being the Counsel and Good Pleasure of the Father, come into being Himself ‘by good pleasure and will,’ like every one else? unless, as I said before, in their madness they repeat that He has come into being through Himself, or through some other 3243 . Who then is it through whom He has come to be? let them fashion another Word; and let them name another Christ, rivalling the doctrine of Valentinus 3244 ; for Scripture it is not. And though they fashion another, yet assuredly he too comes into being through some one; and so, while we are thus reckoning up and investigating the succession of them, the many-headed 3245 heresy of the Atheists 3246 is discovered to issue in polytheism 3247 and madness unlimited; in the which, wishing the Son to be a creature and from nothing, they imply the same thing in other words by pretending the words will and pleasure, which rightly belong to things originate and creatures. Is it not irreligious then to impute the characteristics of things originate to the Framer of all? and is it not blasphemous to say that will was in the Father before the Word? for if will precedes in the Father, the Son’s words are not true, ‘I in the Father;’ or even if He is in the Father, yet He will hold but a second place, and it became Him not to say ‘I in the Father,’ since will was before Him, in which all things were brought into being and He Himself subsisted, as you hold. For though He excel in glory, He is not the less one of the things which by will come into being. And, as we have said before, if it be so, how is He Lord and they servants 3248 ? but He is Lord of all, because He is one with the Father’s Lordship; and the creation is all in bondage, since it is external to the Oneness of the Father, and, whereas it once was not, was brought to be.
65. Moreover, if they say that the Son is by will, they should say also that He came to be by understanding; for I consider understanding and will to be the same. For what a man counsels, about that also he has understanding; and what he has in understanding, that also he counsels. Certainly the Saviour Himself has made them correspond, as being cognate, when He says, ‘Counsel is mine and security; mine is understanding, and mine strength 3249 .’ For as strength and security are the same (for they mean one attribute), so we may say that Understanding and Counsel are the same, which is the Lord. But these irreligious men are unwilling that the Son should be Word and Living Counsel; but they fable that there is with God 3250 , as if a habit 3251 , coming and going 3252 , after the manner of men, understanding, counsel, wisdom; and they leave nothing undone, and they put forward the ‘Thought’ and ‘Will’ of Valentinus, so that they may but separate the Son from the Father, and may call Him a creature instead of the proper Word of the Father. To them then must be said what was said to Simon Magus; ‘the irreligion of Valentinus perish with you 3253 ;’ and let every one rather trust to Solomon, who says, that the Word is Wisdom and Understanding. For he says, ‘The Lord by Wisdom founded the earth, by Understanding He established the heavens.’ And as here by Understanding, so in the Psalms, ‘By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made.’ And as by the Word the heavens, so ‘He hath done whatsoever pleased Him.’ And as the Apostle writes to Thessalonians, ‘the will of God is in Christ Jesus 3254 .’ The Son of God then, He is the ‘Word’ and the ‘Wisdom;’ He the ‘Understanding’ and the Living ‘Counsel;’ and in Him is the ‘Good Pleasure of the Father;’ He is ‘Truth’ and ‘Light’ and ‘Power’ of the Father. But if the Will of God is Wisdom and Understanding, and the Son is Wisdom, he who says that the Son is ‘by will,’ says virtually that Wisdom has come into being in wisdom, and the Son is made in a son, and the Word created through the Word 3255 ; which is incompatible with God and is opposed to His Scriptures. For the Apostle proclaims the Son to be the own Radiance and Expression, not of the Father’s will 3256 , but of His Essence 3257 Itself, saying, ‘Who being the Radiance of His glory and the Expression of His Subsistence 3258 .’ But if, as we have said before, the Father’s Essence and Subsistence be not from will, neither, as is very plain, is what is proper to the Father’s Subsistence from will; for such as, and so as, that Blessed Subsistence, must also be the proper Offspring from It. And accordingly the Father Himself said not, ‘This is the Son originated at My will,’ nor ‘the Son whom I have by My favour,’ but simply ‘My Son,’ and more than that, ‘in whom I am well pleased;’ meaning by this, This is the Son by nature; and ‘in Him is lodged My will about what pleases Me.’
66. Since then the Son is by nature and not by will, is He without the pleasure of the Father and not with the Father’s will? No, verily; but the Son is with the pleasure of the Father, and, as He says Himself, ‘The Father loveth the Son, and sheweth Him all things 3259 .’ For as not ‘from will’ did He begin to be good, nor yet is good without will and pleasure (for what He is, that also is His pleasure), so also that the Son should be, though it came not ‘from will,’ yet it is not without His pleasure or against His purpose. For as His own Subsistence is by His pleasure, so also the Son, being proper to His Essence, is not without His pleasure. Be then the Son the object of the Father’s pleasure and love; and thus let every one religiously account of 3260 the pleasure and the not-unwillingness of God. For by that good pleasure wherewith the Son is the object of the Father’s pleasure, is the Father the object of the Son’s love, pleasure, and honour; and one is the good pleasure which is from Father in Son, so that here too we may contemplate the Son in the Father and the Father in the Son. Let no one then, with Valentinus, introduce a precedent will; nor let any one, by this pretence of ‘counsel,’ intrude between the Only Father and the Only Word; for it were madness to place will and consideration between them. For it is one thing to say, ‘Of will He came to be,’ and another, that the Father has love and good pleasure towards His Son who is His own by nature. For to say, ‘Of will He came to be,’ in the first place implies that once He was not; and next it implies an inclination two ways, as has been said, so that one might suppose that the Father could even not will the Son. But to say of the Son, ‘He might not have been,’ is an irreligious presumption reaching even to the Essence of the Father, as if what is His own might not have been. For it is the same as saying, ‘The Father might not have been good.’ And as the Father is always good by nature, so He is always generative 3261 by nature; and to say, ‘The Father’s good pleasure is the Son,’ and ‘The Word’s good pleasure is the Father,’ implies, not a precedent will, but genuineness of nature, and propriety and likeness of Essence. For as in the case of the radiance and light one might say, that there is no will preceding radiance in the light, but it is its natural offspring, at the pleasure of the light which begat it, not by will and consideration, but in nature and truth, so also in the instance of the Father and the Son, one might rightly say, that the Father has love and good pleasure towards the Son, and the Son has love and good pleasure towards the Father.
67. Therefore call not the Son a work of good pleasure; nor bring in the doctrine of Valentinus into the Church; but be He the Living Counsel, and Offspring in truth and nature, as the Radiance from the Light. For thus has the Father spoken, ‘My heart uttered a good Word;’ and the Son conformably, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me 3262 .’ But if the Word be in the heart, where is will? and if the Son in the Father, where is good pleasure? and if He be Will Himself, how is counsel in Will? it is unseemly; lest the Word come into being in a word, and the Son in a son, and Wisdom in a wisdom, as has been repeatedly 3263 said. For the Son is the Father’s All; and nothing was in the Father before the Word; but in the Word is will also, and through Him the objects of will are carried into effect, as holy Scriptures have shewn. And I could wish that the irreligious men, having fallen into such want of reason 3264 as to be considering about will, would now ask their childbearing women no more, whom they used to ask, ‘Hadst thou a son before conceiving him 3265 ?’ but the father, ‘Do ye become fathers by counsel, or by the natural law of your will?’ or ‘Are your children like your nature and essence 3266 ?’ that, even from fathers they may learn shame, from whom they assumed this proposition 3267 about birth, and from whom they hoped to gain knowledge in point. For they will reply to them, ‘What we beget, is like, not our good pleasure 3268 , but like ourselves; nor become we parents by previous counsel, but to beget is proper to our nature; since we too are images of our fathers.’ Either then let them condemn themselves 3269 , and cease asking women about the Son of God, or let them learn from them, that the Son is begotten not by will, but in nature and truth. Becoming and suitable to them is a refutation from human instances 3270 , since the perverse-minded men dispute in a human way concerning the Godhead. Why then are Christ’s enemies still mad? for this, as well as their other pretences, is shewn and proved to be mere fantasy and fable; and on this account, they ought, however late, contemplating the precipice of folly down which they have fallen, to rise again from the depth and to flee the snare of the devil, as we admonish them. For Truth is loving unto men and cries continually, ‘If because of My clothing of the body ye believe Me not, yet believe the works, that ye may know that “I am in the Father and the Father in Me,” and “I and the Father are one,” and “He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father 3271 .”’ But the Lord according to His wont is loving to man, and would fain ‘help them that are fallen,’ as the praise of David 3272 says; but the irreligious men, not desirous to hear the Lord’s voice, nor bearing to see Him acknowledged by all as God and God’s Son, go about, miserable men, as beetles, seeking with their father the devil pretexts for irreligion. What pretexts then, and whence will they be able next to find? unless they borrow blasphemies of Jews and Caiaphas, and take atheism from Gentiles? for the divine Scriptures are closed to them, and from every part of them they are refuted as insensate and Christ’s enemies.
Footnotes
425:3203This chapter is in a very different style from the foregoing portions of this Book, and much more resembles the former two; not only in its subject and the mode of treating it, but in the words introduced, e.g. ἐπισπείρουσι, ἐπινοοῦσι, γογγύζουσι, καθ᾽ ὑμᾶς, ἄτοπον, λεξείδιον, εἷς τῶν πάντων, &c. And the references are to the former Orations.
425:3204See 50, n. 10; Serap. i. 18.
425:3205θεομάχοι, de Decr. 3, n. 1; Or. ii. 32, n. 4. Vid. Dissert. by Bucher on the word in Acts v. 39. ap. Thesaur. Theol. Phil. N. T. t. 2.
425:3206θεοστυγεῖς, §40.
425:3207§64, note.
425:3208Or. ii. 73, n. 7.
425:3209περιβομβοῦσι. De Decr. 14, n. 1; also de Fug. 2, 6. Naz. Orat. 27, 2. c.
425:3210S. Ignatius speaks of our Lord as ‘Son of God according to the will (θέλημα) and power of God.’ ad Smyrn. 1. S. Justin as ‘God and Son according to His will, βουλήν.’ Tryph. 127, and ‘begotten from the Father at His will, θελήσει.’ ibid. 61. and he says, δυνάμει καὶ βουλῇ αὐτοῦ. ibid. 128. S. Clement ‘issuing from the Father’s will itself quicker than light.’ Gent. 10 fin. S. Hippolytus, ‘Whom God the Father, willing, βουληθείς, begat as He willed, ὡς ἠθέλησεν. contr. Noet. 16. Origen, ἐκ θελήματος. ap. Justin. ad. Menn. vid. also cum filius charitatis etiam voluntatis. Periarch. iv. 28.
426:3211διανοίας interpretation, §26, n. 9.
426:3212Cf. Ep. Æg. 8. and supr. ii. 3. Also Letter 54 fin. Vid. supr. de Decr. 10, n. 3. And vid. Leont. contr. Nest. iii. 41. (p. 581. Canis.) He here seems alluding to the Semi-Arians, Origen, and perhaps the earlier Fathers.
426:3213Tatian had said θελήματι προπηδᾷ ὁ λόγος. Gent. 5. Tertullian had said, ‘Ut primum voluit Deus ea edere, ipsum primum protulit sermonem. adv. Prax. 6. Novatian, Ex quo, quando ipse voluit, Sermo filius natus est. de Trin. 31. And Constit. Apost. τὸν πρὸ αἰ& 240·νων εὐδοκί& 139· τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα. vii. 41. Pseudo-Clem. Genuit Deus voluntate præcedente. Recognit. iii. 10. Eusebius, κατὰ γνώμην καὶ προαίρεσιν βουληθεὶς ὁ θεός· ἐκ τῆς τοῦ πατρὸς βουλῆς καὶ δυνάμεως. Dem. iv. 3. Arius, θελήματι καὶ βουλῇ ὑπέστη. ap. Theod. H. E. i. 4. p. 750. vid. also de Syn. 16.
426:3214Prov. 12:5, 6. LXX.
426:3215De Decr. 20.
426:3216p. 69. n. 8.
426:3217And so supr. de Decr. 18, ‘by what Saint have they been taught “at will?”’ That is, no one ever taught it in the sense in which they explained it; that he has just said, ‘He who says “at will” has the same meaning as he who says “Once He was not.”’ Cf. below §§61, 64, 66. Certainly as the earlier Fathers had used the phrase, so those who came after Arius. Thus Nyssen in the passage in contr. Eun. vii. referred to in the next note. And Hilar. Syn. 37. The same father says, unitate Patris et virtute. Psalm xci. 8. and ut voluit, ut potuit, ut scit qui genuit. Trin. iii. 4. And he addresses Him as non invidum bonorum tuorum in Unigeniti tui nativitate. ibid. vi. 21. S. Basil too speaks of our Lord as αὐτοζωὴν καὶ αὐτοάγαθον, ‘from the quickening Fountain, the Father’s goodness, ἀγαθότητος.’ contr. Eun. ii. 25. And Cæsarius calls Him ἀγάπην πατρός. Quæst. 39. Vid. Ephrem. Syr. adv. Scrut. R. vi. 1. Oxf. Tra. and note there. Maximus Taurin. says, that God is per omnipotentiam Pater. Hom. de trad. Symb. p. 270. ed. 1784, vid. also Chrysol. Serm. 61. Ambros. de Fid. iv. 8. Petavius refers in addition to such passages as one just quoted from S. Hilary, which speak of God as not invidus, so as not to communicate Himself, since He was able. Si non potuit, infirmus; si non voluit, invidus. August. contr. Maxim. iii. 7.
426:3218Matt. iii. 17; Ps. xlv. 1; John i. 1; Ps. xxxvi. 9; Heb. i. 3; Phil. ii. 26; Col. i. 15.
426:3219προηγουμένην and 61 fin. The antecedens voluntas has been mentioned in Recogn. Clem. supr. note 11. For Ptolemy vid. Epiph. Hær. p. 215. The Catholics, who allowed that our Lord was θελήσει, explained it as a σύνδρομος θέλησις, and not a προηγουμένη; as Cyril. Trin. ii. p. 56. And with the same meaning S. Ambrose, nec voluntas ante Filium nec potestas. de Fid. v. 224. And S. Gregory Nyssen, ‘His immediate union, ἄμεσος συνάφεια, does not exclude the Father’s will, βούλησιν, nor does that will separate the Son from the Father.’ contr. Eunom. vii. p. 206, 7. vid. the whole passage. The alternative which these words, σύνδρομος and προηγουμένη, expressed was this; whether an act of Divine Purpose or Will took place before the Generation of the Son, or whether both the Will and the Generation were eternal, as the Divine Nature was eternal. Hence Bull says, with the view of exculpating Novatian, Cum Filius dicitur ex Patre, quando ipse voluit, nasci. Velle illud Patris æternum fuisse intelligendum. Defens. F. N. iii. 8. §8.
426:3220προβάλλειν, de Syn. 16, n. 8.
426:3221ἐπιγέγονε, Or. i. 25, 28 fin. iii. 6.
426:3222Ps. 115:3, Ps. 111:2, Ps. 135:6Ps. cxv. 3; cxi. 2. LXX.; cxxxv. 6.
426:3223Cf. ii. n. 1.
427:3224Cf. ii. 18–43.
427:32251 Cor. i. 1, &c.
427:3226Eph. i. 5.
427:3227ii. 31 seqq.
427:3228James i. 18.
427:32291 Thess. v. 18.
427:323064, note 4.
427:3231Thus he makes the question a nugatory one, as if it did not go to the point, and could not be answered, or might be answered either way, as the case might be. Really Nature and Will go together in the Divine Being, but in order, as we regard Him, Nature is first, Will second, and the generation belongs to Nature, not to Will. And so supr. Or. i. 29; ii. 2. In like manner S. Epiphanius, Hær. 69, 26. vid. also Ancor. 51. vid. also Ambros. de Fid. iv. 4. vid. others, as collected in Petav. Trin. vi. 8. §§14–16.
427:3232Two distinct meanings may be attached to ‘by will’ (as Dr. Clark observes, Script. Doct. p. 142. ed. 1738), either a concurrence or acquiescence, or a positive act. S. Cyril uses it in the former sense, when he calls it σύνδρομος, as quoted §60, n. 1; and when he says (with Athan. infr.) that ‘the Father wills His own subsistence, θεληγής ἐστι, but is not what He is from any will, ἐκ βουλήσεως τινός,’ Thes. p. 56; Dr. Clark would understand it in the latter sense, with a view of inferring that the Son was subsequent to a Divine act, i.e. not eternal; but what Athan. says leads to the conclusion, that it does not matter which sense is taken. He does not meet the Arian objection, ‘if not by will therefore by necessity,’ by speaking of a concomitant will, or merely saying that the Almighty exists or is good, by will, with S. Cyril, but he says that ‘nature transcends will and necessity also.’ Accordingly, Petavius is even willing to allow that the ἐκ βουλῆς is to be ascribed to the γέννησις in the sense which Dr. Clark wishes, i.e. he grants that it may precede the γέννησις, i.e. in order, not in time, in the succession of our ideas, Trin. vi. 8, §§20, 21; and follows S. Austin, Trin. xv. 20. in preferring to speak of our Lord rather as voluntas de voluntate, than, as Athan. is led to do, as the voluntas Dei.
428:3233Vid. Or. i. 25, n. 2. Also Serap. i. 15, 16 init. 17, 20; iv. 8, 14. Ep. Æg. 11 fin. Didym. Trin. iii. 3. p. 341. Ephr. Syr. adv. Hær. Serm. 55 init. (t. 2. p. 557.) Facund. Tr. Cap. iii. 3 init.
428:3234ἐπιγεγονώς, §60, n. 3.
428:3235λογίσασθαί τινα βούλησιν, as §66 (Latin version inexact).
428:3236ἀγαθοῦ πατρὸς ἀγαθὸν βούλημα. Clem. Ped. iii. circ. fin. σοφία, χρηστότης, δύναμις, θέλημα παντοκρατορικόν. Strom. v. p. 547. Voluntas et potestas patris. Tertull. Orat. 4. Natus ex Patri quasi voluntas ex mente procedens. Origen. Periarch. i. 2. §6. S. Jerome notices the same interpretation of ‘by the will of God’ in the beginning of Comment. in Ephes. But cf. Aug. Trin. xv. 20. And so Cæsarius, ἀγάπη ἐξ ἀγάπης. Qu. 39.
428:3237Prov. viii. 14.
428:32381 Cor. i. 24.
428:3239ζῶσα βουλή. supr. Ορ. ii. 2. Cyril in Joan. p. 213. ζῶσα δύναμις. Sabell. Greg. 5. c. ζῶσα εἴκων. Naz. Orat. 30, 20. c. ζῶσα ἐνέργεια. Syn. Antioch. ap. Routh. Reliqu. t. 2. p. 469. ζῶσα ἴσχυς. Cyril. in Joan. p. 951. ζῶσα σοφία. Origen. contr. Cels. iii. fin. ζῶν λόγος. Origen. ibid. ζῶν ὄργανον (heretically) Euseb. Dem. iv. 2.
428:3240Is. ix. 6.
428:3241Or. ii. 33, n. 12.
429:3242Ps. 73:23, 24.
429:3243δι᾽ ἑτέρου τινος. This idea has been urged against the Arians again and again, as just above, §61; e.g. de Decr. 8, 24; Or. i. 15, below 65, sub. fin. vid. also Epiph. Hær. 76. p. 951. Basil. contr. Eunom. ii. 11. c. 17, a. &c.
429:3244§60.
429:3245πολυκέφαλος αἵρεσις. And so πολυκ. πανουργία, §62. The allusion is to the hydra, with its ever-springing heads, as introduced §58, n. 5. and with a special allusion to Asterius who is mentioned, §60, and in de Syn. 18. is called πολυκ. σοφιστής.
429:3246Or. ii. 43, n. 4.
429:3247§16, n. 4.
429:3248Or. i. 57; ii. 23.
429:3249Prov. viii. 14.
429:3250περὶ τὸν θεόν. vid. de Decr. 22, n. 1; Or. i. 15. Also Orat. i. 27, where (n. 2 a.), it is mistranslated. Euseb. Eccl. Theol. iii. p. 150. vid. de Syn. 34, n. 7.
429:3251ἕξιν. vid. Or. ii. 38, n. 6; iv. 2, n. 7.
429:3252συμβαινούσαν καὶ ἀποσυμβαινούσαν, vid. de Decr. 11, n. 7, and 22, n. 9, σύμβαμα, Euseb. Eccl. Theol. iii. p. 150. in the same, though a technical sense. vid. also Serap. i. 26; Naz. Orat. 31, 15 fin.
429:3253Acts viii. 20.
429:3254Prov. iii. 19; Ps. xxxiii. 6; cxxxv. 6, cxv. 3; 1 Thess. v. 18.
429:3255Read ‘a word,’ cf. p. 394, n. 6.
429:3256De Syn. 53, n. 9.
429:3257οὐσία and ὑπόστασις are in these passages made synonymous; and so infr. Orat. iv. 1, f. And in iv. 33 fin. to the Son is attributed ἡ πατρικὴ ὑπόστασις. Vid. also ad Afros. 4. quoted supr. Exc. A, pp. 77, sqq. ῾Υπ. might have been expected too in the discussion in the beginning of Orat. iii. did Athan. distinguish between them. It is remarkable how seldom it occurs at all in these Orations, except as contained in Heb. i. 3. Vid. also p. 70, note 13. Yet the phrase τρεῖς ὑποστάσεις is certainly found in Illud Omn. fin. and in Incarn. c. Arian. 10. (if genuine) and apparently in Expos. Fid. 2. Vid. also Orat. iv. 25 init.
430:3258Heb. i. 3.
430:3259John iii. 35; v. 20.
430:326063, n. 3.
430:3261Or. i. 14, n. 4; ii. 2, n. 3.
430:3262Ps. xlv. 1; John xiv. 10.
430:3263§2, n. 6, &c.
430:3264De Decr. i. n. 6.
430:3265Or. i. 26.
430:3266τῆς οὐσίας ὅμοια, vid. Or. i. 21, n. 8. Also ii. 42, b. iii. 11, 14 sub. fin., 17, n. 5.
430:3267Or. ii. 1, n. 13.
430:326865, n. 8.
431:3269De Decr. 3, n. 2; Orat. i. 27, ii. 4; Apol. c. Ar. 36.
431:3270Cf. 63, n. 9.
431:3271John 10:38, 30; xiv. 9; cf. §5, n. 3.
431:3272Ps. cxlvi. 8.
Excursus C.
Introductory 3273 to the Fourth Discourse against the Arians.
————————————
The fourth Discourse, as has been already observed (p. 304), stands on a footing of its own. To begin with, it is not quoted in antiquity, as the first three are, as part of the work of Ath. against the Arians (details in Newman, p. 499). Again, the fact that not only the Ep. Æg., but even the dubious de Incar. c. Arian., are in some mss. included in the Orationes, while our present oration appears sometimes as the ‘fifth’ sometimes as the ‘sixth,’ cast a shade of doubt upon its claim to be included in the ‘Pentabiblus against the Arians’ referred to by Photius. In addition to these external considerations, Newman lays stress on the apparent want of continuity in its argument; on its non-conformity to the structural plan of Orat. i.–iii., on the use of the term ὁμοούσιον (§§10, 22, contrast Orat. i. §9, p. 311, note 12); on certain peculiarities of style which seem characteristic of disjointed notes rather than of a systematic treatise; on the reference to ‘Eusebius’ (of Cæsarea) as apparently still living (§8); and on the general absence of personal reference to opponents, while yet a definite and extant system seems to be combated.
Now a comparison with the works of Eusebius against Marcellus leaves little doubt that the system combated by Athan. is that of the latter (described briefly Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) c).
After laying down as a thesis (§1) the substantive existence of the divine Word or Wisdom, Athan. proceeds to combat the idea that the Word has no personality distinct from that of the Father. Setting aside the alternative errors of Sabellius (§2) and Arius (§3), he taxes with the consequence of involving two ᾽Αρχαί a view that the Word had a substantive existence and was then united to the Father (cf. Euseb. c. Marcell. 32 A, 108 A, 106 C, D). This consequence can only be avoided by falling into the Sabellian alternative of a θεὸς διφυής (cf. Tertullian’s ‘Deum versipellem’), unless the true solution, that of the eternal divine γέννησις, be accepted (§3 worked out in 4, 5). The argument, apparently interrupted by an anti-Arian digression §§6, 7, is resumed §8, whence it proceeds without break to §24. Eusebius, insisting against Marcellus on the eternity of Christ’s Kingdom, inconsistently defends those who deny the eternity of His Person. But if so, how inconsistent are those who deny the Son any pre-existence, while yet repelling the Arian formulæ with indignation! In §§9–12, taking Joh. x. 30 as his text, Athan. asks his opponents in what sense Christ and the Father ‘are one,’ distinguishing from his own answer that of Sabellius (9, 10), and that of Marcellus (11, 12), whom he presses with the paradoxical character of his explanation of the divine γέννησις. In §§13, 14, he examines the (Marcellian, not Sabellian) doctrine of πλατυσμὸς and συστολή, charging it with Sabellianism as its consequence. Next (§§15–24) Ath. turns upon the radically weak point of the system of Marcellus (Prolegg. ubi supra), and asks What do his followers mean by ‘the Son?’ Do they mean merely (a) the man, Christ (§20, Photinus), or (b) the union of Word and Man, or (c) the Word regarded as Incarnate? The latter was the answer (§22) of Marcellus himself. This last point leads to a discussion (§24) of those O.T. passages on which Marcellus notoriously relied. §25, which Zahn understands as a direct polemic against Sabellius, is far more probably, as Newman maintains in his note, a supplemental argument against Marcellianism, for the view combated is said to lead inevitably to Sabellianism. The concluding portion, §§26–36, turns the argument of §24, that Scripture declares the identity of Son and Word, against those who (adopting alternative (a) supra) drift from Marcellianism toward the Samosatene rather than toward the Sabellian position (on the connection of the two see Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) a and c). Even here, the name of Photinus, to whose position the section specially applies, is significantly withheld.
Such is the course of the argument in the Fourth Oration; and with the exception of §§6, 7, and again possibly §25, it forms a homogeneous, if not a finished and elaborated piece of argument. Its date and composition may be left an open question; but its purpose as an appendix to Orat. i.–iii., is we think open to little doubt (supr. p. 304). Of Sabellius, who left no writings 3274 , the age of Athanasius knew little, except that he identified Father and Son (υἱοπατώρ), and denied the Trinity of Persons. Most that is told us of Sabellius from the fourth century onwards requires careful sifting, in order to eliminate what really belongs to Marcellus, Photinus, or others who were taxed with Sabellianism, and combated as ‘Sabellians.’ But with the simple patri-passianism which is the one undoubted element in the teaching of Sabellius, Marcellus had little or nothing in common. The criticism of Marcellus that Sabellius ‘knew not the Word’ reveals the true difference between them. To Sabellius, creation and redemption were the work of the one God under successive changes of manifestation; to Marcellus, they were the realisation of a process eternally latent in God; but both Marcellus and apparently Sabellius referred to the divine Nature what the theology of the Church has consistently referred to the divine Will.
The following table will make the foregoing scheme clear.
§1. Introductory. Thesis: the co-eternal personality of the Son or Word.
§§2–5. Those who, while rejecting Arianism, would avoid Sabellianism, must accept the eternal divine Generation of the Son.
§§6, 7. [Digression: the humiliation of the Word explained against the Arians.]
§8. The eternity of Christ’s Kingdom and of His Person implied each in the other.
§§9–12. In what sense Christ and the Father are, and are not, one. The divine γέννησις.
§§13, 14. The doctrine of divine dilatation and contraction denies true personal distinctions in the Godhead.
§§15–24. The Son and the Word identical. Refutation of the three alternative suppositions, and of the argument alleged from the O.T. in support of them.
§25. Final refutation of the doctrine of dilatation.
§§26–36. The Scriptural identification of Son and Word refutes the restriction of the former title to the man Jesus.
Footnotes
431:3273The above Excursus is substituted for the longer introduction of Newman (republished in Latin in his Tracts, Theological and Ecclesiastical, 1872), and is in the main a condensation of the more recent and final discussion of Zahn (Marcellus, 1867, pp. 198 seqq.). The result of the latter is to confirm the main contention of Newman, viz. that the system, rather than the person, of Marcellus is throughout in view. Earlier discussions pointing the same way are cited: ‘In Eusebii contra Marcellum libros Observationes, auctore K.S.C.,’ Lips. 1787 (cited by Newman); Rettberg, Marcelliana, Præf. p. 7; Kuhn, Kathol. Dogm. ii. p. 344, note 1 (by Zahn).
432:3274The Articles Sabellianism and Sabellius (both sub. fin.) in D.C.B. vol. iv., state the contrary, but the present writer follows the standard discussion of Zahn, of which the learned articles in question do not seem to take account.
Discourse IV.
————————————
§§1–5. The substantiality of the Word proved from Scripture. If the One Origin be substantial, Its Word is substantial. Unless the Word and Son be a second Origin, or a work, or an attribute (and so God be compounded), or at the same time Father, or involve a second nature in God, He is from the Father’s Essence and distinct from Him. Illustration of John x. 30, drawn from Deut. iv. 4.
1. The Word is God from God; for ‘the Word was God 3275 ,’ and again, ‘Of whom are the Fathers, and of whom Christ, who is God over all, blessed for ever. Amen 3276 .’ And since Christ is God from God, and God’s Word, Wisdom, Son, and Power, therefore but One God is declared in the divine Scriptures. For the Word, being Son of the One God, is referred to Him of whom also He is; so that Father and Son are two, yet the Monad of the Godhead is indivisible and inseparable. And thus too we preserve One Beginning of Godhead and not two Beginnings, whence there is strictly a Monarchy. And of this very Beginning the Word is by nature Son, not as if another beginning, subsisting by Himself, nor having come into being externally to that Beginning, lest from that diversity a Dyarchy and Polyarchy should ensue; but of the one Beginning He is own Son, own Wisdom, own Word, existing from It. For, according to John, ‘in’ that ‘Beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,’ for the Beginning was God; and since He is from It, therefore also ‘the Word was God.’ And as there is one Beginning and therefore one God, so one is that Essence and Subsistence which indeed and truly and really is, and which said ‘I am that I am 3277 ,’ and not two, that there be not two Beginnings; and from the One, a Son in nature and truth, is Its own Word, Its Wisdom, Its Power, and inseparable from It. And as there is not another essence, lest there be two Beginnings, so the Word which is from that One Essence has no dissolution, nor is a sound significative, but is an essential Word and essential Wisdom, which is the true Son. For were He not essential, God will be speaking into the air 3278 , and having a body, in nothing differently from men; but since He is not man, neither is His Word according to the infirmity of man 3279 . For as the Beginning is one Essence, so Its Word is one, essential, and subsisting, and Its Wisdom. For as He is God from God, and Wisdom from the Wise, and Word from the Rational, and Son from Father, so is He from Subsistence Subsistent, and from Essence Essential and Substantive, and Being from Being.
2. Since were He not essential Wisdom and substantive Word, and Son existing, but simply Wisdom and Word and Son in the Father, then the Father Himself would have a nature compounded of Wisdom and Word. But if so, the forementioned absurdities would follow; and He will be His own Father, and the Son begetting and begotten by Himself; or Word, Wisdom, Son, is a name only, and He does not subsist who owns, or rather who is, these titles. If then He does not subsist, the names are idle and empty, unless we say that God is Very Wisdom 3280 and Very Word. But if so, He is His own Father and Son; Father, when Wise, Son, when Wisdom; but these things are not in God as a certain quality; away with the dishonourable 3281 thought; for it will issue in this, that God is compounded of essence and quality 3282 . For whereas all quality is in essence, it will clearly follow that the Divine Monad, indivisible as it is, must be compound, being severed into essence and accident 3283 . We must ask then these headstrong men; The Son was proclaimed as God’s Wisdom and Word; how then is He such? if as a quality, the absurdity has been shewn; but if God is that Very Wisdom, then it is the absurdity of Sabellius; therefore He is so, as an Offspring in a proper sense from the Father Himself, according to the illustration of light. For as there is light from fire, so from God is there a Word, and Wisdom from the Wise, and from the Father a Son. For in this way the Monad remains undivided and entire, and Its Son, Word not unessential, nor not subsisting, but essential truly. For were it not so, all that is said would be said notionally 3284 and verbally 3285 . But if we must avoid that absurdity, then is a true Word essential. For as there is a Father truly, so Wisdom truly. In this respect then they are two; not because, as Sabellius said, Father and Son are the same, but because the Father is Father and the Son Son, and they are one, because He is Son of the Essence of the Father by nature, existing as His own Word. This the Lord said, viz. ‘I and the Father are One 3286 ;’ for neither is the Word separated from the Father, nor was or is the Father ever Wordless; on this account He says, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me 3287 .’
3. And again, Christ is the Word of God. Did He then subsist by Himself, and subsisting, has He become joined to the Father, or did God make Him or call Him His Word? If the former, I mean if He subsisted by Himself and is God, then there are two Beginnings; and moreover, as is plain, He is not the Father’s own, as being not of the Father, but of Himself. But if on the contrary He be made externally, then is He a creature. It remains then to say that He is from God Himself; but if so, that which is from another is one thing, and that from which it is, is a second; according to this then there are two. But if they be not two, but the names belong to the same, cause and effect will be the same, and begotten and begetting, which has been shewn absurd in the instance of Sabellius. But if He be from Him, yet not another, He will be both begetting and not begetting; begetting because He produces from Himself, and not begetting, because it is nothing other than Himself. But if so, the same is called Father and Son notionally. But if it be unseemly so to say, Father and Son must be two; and they are one, because the Son is not from without, but begotten of God. But if any one shrinks from saying ‘Offspring,’ and only says that the Word exists with God, let such a one fear lest, shrinking from what is said in Scripture, he fall into absurdity, making God a being of double nature. For not granting that the Word is from the Monad, but simply as if He were joined to the Father, he introduces a twofold essence, and neither of them Father of the other. And the same of Power. And we may see this more clearly, if we consider it with reference to the Father; for there is One Father, and not two, but from that One the Son. As then there are not two Fathers, but One, so not two Beginnings, but One, and from that One the Son essential.
4. But the Arians we must ask contrariwise: (for the Sabellianisers must be confuted from the notion of a Son, and the Arians from that of a Father:) let us say then—Is God wise and not word-less: or on the contrary, is He wisdom-less and word-less 3288 ? if the latter, there is an absurdity at once; if the former, we must ask, how is He wise and not word-less? does He possess the Word and the Wisdom from without, or from Himself? If from without, there must be one who first gave to Him, and before He received He was wisdom-less and word-less. But if from Himself, it is plain that the Word is not from nothing, nor once was not; for He was ever; since He of whom He is the Image, exists ever. But if they say that He is indeed wise and not word-less, but that He has in Himself His own wisdom and own word, and that, not Christ, but that by which He made Christ, we must answer that, if Christ in that word was brought to be, plainly so were all things; and it must be He of whom John says, ‘All things were made by Him,’ and the Psalmist, ‘In Wisdom hast Thou made them all 3289 .’ And Christ will be found to speak untruly, ‘I in the Father,’ there being another in the Father. And ‘the Word became flesh 3290 ’ is not true according to them. For if He in whom ‘all things came to be,’ Himself became flesh, but Christ is not in the Father, as Word ‘by whom all things came to be,’ then Christ has not become flesh, but perhaps Christ was named Word. But if so, first, there will be another besides the name, next, all things were not by Him brought to be, but in that other, in whom Christ also was made. But if they say that Wisdom is in the Father as a quality or that He is Very Wisdom 3291 , the absurdities will follow already mentioned. For He will be compound 3292 , and will prove His own Son and Father 3293 . Moreover, we must confute and silence them on the ground, that the Word which is in God cannot be a creature nor out of nothing; but if once a Word be in God, then He must be Christ who says, ‘I am in the Father and the Father in Me 3294 ,’ who also is therefore the Only-begotten, since no other was begotten from Him. This is One Son, who is Word, Wisdom, Power; for God is not compounded of these, but is generative 3295 of them. For as He frames the creatures by the Word, so according to the nature of His own Essence has He the Word as an Offspring, through whom He frames and creates and dispenses all things. For by the Word and the Wisdom all things have come to be, and all things together remain according to His ordinance 3296 . And the same concerning the word ‘Son;’ if God be without Son 3297 , then is He without Work; for the Son is His Offspring through whom He works 3298 ; but if not, the same questions and the same absurdities will follow their audacity.
5. From Deuteronomy; ‘But ye that did attach yourselves unto the Lord your God are alive every one of you this day 3299 .’ From this we may see the difference, and know that the Son of God is not a creature. For the Son says, ‘I and the Father are One,’ and, ‘I in the Father, and the Father in Me;’ but things originate, when they make advance, are attached unto the Lord. The Word then is in the Father as being His own; but things originate, being external, are attached, as being by nature foreign, and attached by free choice. For a son which is by nature, is one 3300 with him who begat him; but he who is from without, and is made a son, will be attached to the family. Therefore he immediately adds, ‘What nation is there so great who hath God drawing nigh unto them 3301 ?’ and elsewhere, ‘I a God drawing nigh 3302 ;’ for to things originate He draws nigh, as being strange to Him, but to the Son, as being His own, He does not draw nigh, but He is in Him. And the Son is not attached to the Father, but co-exists with Him; whence also Moses says again in the same Deuteronomy, ‘Ye shall obey His voice, and apply yourselves unto Him 3303 ;’ but what is applied, is applied from without.
Footnotes
433:3275John i. 1.
433:3276Rom. ix. 5.
433:3277Exod. iii. 14.
433:32781 Cor. xiv. 9.
433:3279Or. ii. 7.
433:3280Or. ii. 19, n. 3, and below, §4.
433:3281§9.
433:3282Cf. ad Afros. 8.
433:3283Cf. Euseb. Eccl. Theol. p. 121. His opinion was misstated supr., p. 164 sq. note 9.
434:3284Cf. ii. 38, n. 2.
434:3285Cf. i. 52, n. 1.
434:3286John x. 30.
434:3287John 14.10.
434:3288Or. i. 19, n. 5.
434:3289John i. 3; Ps. civ. 24.
434:3290John i. 14.
434:3291§2.
434:3292§9, fin.
434:3293§10.
434:3294John xiv. 20.
435:3295iii. 66, n. 3.
435:3296Ps. cxix. 91.
435:3297Or. ii. 2, n. 3.
435:3298Or. ii. 41; iii. 11, n. 4.
435:3299Deut. iv. 4.
435:3300i. 26, n. 2.
435:3301Deut. iv. 7, LXX.
435:3302Jer. xxiii. 23, LXX.
435:3303Deut. xiii. 4.
§§6, 7. When the Word and Son hungered, wept, and was wearied, He acted as our Mediator, taking on Him what was ours, that He might impart to us what was His.
6. But in answer to the weak and human notion of the Arians, their supposing that the Lord is in want, when He says, ‘Is given unto Me,’ and ‘I received,’ and if Paul says, ‘Wherefore He highly exalted Him,’ and ‘He set Him at the right hand 3304 ,’ and the like, we must say that our Lord, being Word and Son of God, bore a body, and became Son of Man, that, having become Mediator between God, and men, He might minister the things of God to us, and ours to God. When then He is said to hunger and weep and weary, and to cry Eloi, Eloi, which are our human affections, He receives them from us and offers to the Father 3305 , interceding for us, that in Him they may be annulled 3306 . And when it is said, ‘All power is given unto Me,’ and ‘I received,’ and ‘Wherefore God highly exalted Him,’ these are gifts given from God to us through Him. For the Word was never in want 3307 , nor has come into being 3308 ; nor again were men sufficient to minister these things for themselves, but through the Word they are given to us; therefore, as if given to Him, they are imparted to us. For this was the reason of His becoming man, that, as being given to Him, they might pass on to us 3309 . For of such gifts mere man had not become worthy; and again the mere Word had not needed them 3310 ; the Word then was united to us, and then imparted to us power, and highly exalted us 3311 . For the Word being in man, highly exalted man himself; and, when the Word was in man, man himself received. Since then, the Word being in flesh, man himself was exalted, and received power, therefore these things are referred to the Word, since they were given on His account; for on account of the Word in man were these gifts given. And as ‘the Word became flesh 3312 ,’ so also man himself received the gifts which came through the Word. For all that man himself has received, the Word is said to have received 3313 ; that it might be shewn, that man himself, being unworthy to receive, as far as his own nature is concerned, yet has received because of the Word become flesh. Wherefore if anything be said to be given to the Lord, or the like, we must consider that it is given, not to Him as needing it, but to man himself through the Word. For every one interceding for another, receives the gift in his own person, not as needing, but on his account for whom he intercedes.
7. For as He takes our infirmities, not being infirm 3314 , and hungers not hungering, but sends up what is ours that it may be abolished, so the gifts which come from God instead of our infirmities, doth He too Himself receive, that man, being united to Him, may be able to partake them. Hence it is that the Lord says, ‘All things whatsoever Thou hast given Me, I have given them,’ and again, ‘I pray for them 3315 .’ For He prayed for us, taking on Him what is ours, and He was giving what He received. Since then, the Word being united to man himself, the Father, regarding Him, vouchsafed to man to be exalted, to have all power and the like; therefore are referred to the Word Himself, and are as if given to Him, all things which through Him we receive. For as He for our sake became man, so we for His sake are exalted. It is no absurdity then, if, as for our sake He humbled Himself, so also for our sake He is said to be highly exalted. So ‘He gave to Him,’ that is, ‘to us for His sake;’ ‘and He highly exalted Him 3316 ,’ that is, ‘us in Him.’ And the Word Himself, when we are exalted, and receive, and are succoured, as if He Himself were exalted and received and were succoured, gives thanks to the Father, referring what is ours to Himself, and saying, ‘All things, whatsoever Thou hast given Me, I have given unto them 3317 .’
Footnotes
435:3304Matt. xxviii. 18; John x. 18; Phil. ii. 9; Eph. i. 20.
435:3305De Decr. 14; Or. ii. 8, 9.
435:3306Or. iii. 33, n. 6, and 34.
435:3307Or. i. 43.
435:3308Or. i. 43; ii. 65, 67.
435:3309Or. i. 42, 45.
435:3310Or. i. 48; iii. 38.
435:3311Or. i. 41, 42.
435:3312John i. 14.
435:3313iii. 38.
435:3314Or. ii. 60; iii. 37.
435:3315John xvii. 7-9.
436:3316Phil. ii. 9.
436:3317John 17:7, 8.
§8. Arians date the Son’s beginning earlier than Marcellus, &c.
8. Eusebius and his fellows, that is, the Ario-maniacs, ascribing a beginning of being to the Son, yet pretend not to wish Him to have a beginning of kingship 3318 . But this is ridiculous; for he who ascribes to the Son a beginning of being, very plainly ascribes to Him also a beginning of reigning; so blind are they, confessing what they deny. Again, those who say that the Son is only a name, and that the Son of God, that is, the Word of the Father, is unessential and non-subsistent, pretend to be angry with those who say, ‘Once He was not.’ This is ridiculous also; for they who give Him no being at all, are angry with those who at least grant Him to be in time. Thus these also confess what they deny, in the act of censuring the others. And again Eusebius and his fellows, confessing a Son, deny that He is the Word by nature, and would have the Son called Word notionally; and the others confessing Him to be Word, deny Him to be Son, and would have the Word called Son notionally, equally void of footing.
Footnotes
436:3318Euseb. c. Marcell. pp. 6, 32, 49, &c. &c.
§§9, 10. Unless Father and Son are two in name only, or as parts and so each imperfect, or two gods, they are coessential, one in Godhead, and the Son from the Father.
9. ‘I and the Father are One 3319 .’ You say that the two things are one, or that the one has two names, or again that the one is divided into two. Now if the one is divided into two, that which is divided must need be a body, and neither part perfect, for each is a part and not a whole. But if again the one have two names, this is the expedient of Sabellius, who said that Son and Father were the same, and did away with either, the Father when there is a Son, and the Son when there is a Father. But if the two are one, then of necessity they are two, but one according to the Godhead, and according to the Son’s coessentiality with the Father, and the Word’s being from the Father Himself; so that there are two, because there is Father, and Son, namely the Word; and one because one God. For if not, He would have said, ‘I am the Father,’ or ‘I and the Father am;’ but, in fact, in the ‘I’ He signifies the Son, and in the ‘And the Father,’ Him who begat Him; and in the ‘One’ the one Godhead and His coessentiality 3320 . For the Same is not, as the Gentiles hold, Wise and Wisdom, or the Same Father and Word; for it were unfit for Him to be His own Father, but the divine teaching knows Father and Son, and Wise and Wisdom, and God and Word; while it ever guards Him indivisible and inseparable and indissoluble in all respects.
10. But if any one, on hearing that the Father and the Son are two, misrepresent us as preaching two Gods (for this is what some feign to themselves, and forthwith mock, saying, ‘You hold two Gods’), we must answer to such, If to acknowledge Father and Son, is to hold two Gods, it instantly 3321 follows that to confess but one we must deny the Son and Sabellianise. For if to speak of two is to fall into Gentilism, therefore if we speak of one, we must fall into Sabellianism. But this is not so; perish the thought! but, as when we say that Father and Son are two, we still confess one God, so when we say that there is one God, let us consider Father and Son two, while they are one in the Godhead, and in the Father’s Word being indissoluble and indivisible and inseparable from Him. And let the fire and the radiance from it be a similitude of man, which are two in being and in appearance, but one in that its radiance is from it indivisibly.
Footnotes
436:3319John x. 30.
436:3320Here again is the word ὁμοούσιον. Contrast the language of Orat. iii. when commenting on the same text, in the same way; e.g. ἓν τῇ ἰδιότητι καὶ οἰκειότητι τῆς φύσεως, καὶ τῇ ταὐτότητι τῆς μιᾶς θεότητος, §4.
436:3321Cf. Or. iii. 10, note 4.
§§11, 12. Marcellus and his disciples, like Arians, say that the Word was, not indeed created, but issued, to create us, as if the Divine silence were a state of inaction, and when God spake by the Word, He acted; or that there was a going forth and return of the Word; a doctrine which implies change and imperfection in Father and Son.
11. They fall into the same folly with the Arians; for Arians also say that He was created for us, that He might create us, as if God waited till our creation for His issue, as the one party say, or His creation, as the other. Arians then are more bountiful to us than to the Son; for they say, not we for His sake, but He for ours, came to be; that is, if He was therefore created, and subsisted, that God through Him might create us. And these, as irreligious or more so, give to God less than to us. For we oftentimes, even when silent, yet are active in thinking, so as to form the results of our thoughts into images; but God they would have inactive when silent, and when He speaks then to exert strength; if, that is, when silent He could not make, and when speaking He began to create. For it is just to ask them, whether the Word, when He was in God, was perfect, so as to be able to make. If on the one hand He was imperfect, when in God, but by being begotten became perfect 3322 , we are the cause of His perfection, that is, if He has been begotten for us; for on our behalf He has received the power of making. But if He was perfect in God, so as to be able to make, His generation is superfluous; for He, even when in the Father, could frame the world; so that either He has not been begotten, or He was begotten, not for us, but because He is ever from the Father. For His generation evidences, not that we were created, but that He is from God; for He was even before our creation.
12. And the same presumption will be proved against them concerning the Father; for if, when silent, He could not make, of necessity He has gained power by begetting, that is, by speaking. And whence has He gained it? and wherefore? If, when He had the Word within Him, He could make, He begets needlessly, being able to make even in silence. Next, if the Word was in God before He was begotten, then being begotten He is without and external to Him. But if so, how says He now, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me 3323 ?’ but if He is now in the Father, then always was He in the Father, as He is now, and needless is it to say, ‘For us was He begotten, and He reverts after we are formed, that He may be as He was.’ For He was not anything which He is not now, nor is He what He was not; but He is as He ever was, and in the same state and in the same respects; otherwise He will seem to be imperfect and alterable. For if, what He was, that He shall be afterwards, as if now He were not so, it is plain, He is not now what He was and shall be. I mean, if He was before in God, and afterwards shall be again, it follows that now the Word is not in God. But the Lord refutes such persons when He says, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me;’ for so is He now as He ever was. But if so He now is, as He was ever, it follows, not that at one time He was begotten and not at another, nor that once there was silence with God, and then He spake, but there is ever a Father 3324 , and a Son who is His Word, not in name 3325 alone a Word, nor the Word in notion only a Son, but existing coessential 3326 with the Father, not begotten for us, for we are brought into being for Him. For, if He were begotten for us, and in His begetting we were created, and in His generation the creature consists, and then He returns that He may be what He was before, first, He that was begotten will be again not begotten. For if His progression be generation, His return will be the close 3327 of that generation, for when He has come to be in God, God will be silent again. But if He shall be silent, there will be what there was when He was silent, stillness and not creation, for the creation will cease to be. For, as on the Word’s outgoing, the creation came to be, and existed, so on the Word’s retiring, the creation will not exist. What use then for it to come into being, if it is to cease? or why did God speak, that then He should be silent? and why did He issue One whom He recalls? and why did He beget One whose generation He willed to cease? Again it is uncertain what He shall be. For either He will ever be silent, or He will again beget, and will devise a different creation (for He will not make the same, else that which was made would have remained, but another); and in due course He will bring that also to a close, and will devise another, and so on without end 3328 .
Footnotes
437:3322De Syn. 24, n. 9; Or. i. 14, n. 7.
437:3323John xiv. 10.
437:3324i. 21, n. 1.
437:3325ii. 19, n. 3.
437:3326ὁμοούσιος, 9, n. 2.
437:3327παῦλα. cf. ii. 34, 35.
437:3328εἰς ἄπειρον, ii. 68.
§§13, 14. Such a doctrine precludes all real distinctions of personality in the Divine Nature. Illustration of the Scripture doctrine from 2 Cor. vi. 11, &c.
13. This perhaps he 3329 borrowed from the Stoics, who maintain that their God contracts and again expands with the creation, and then rests without end. For what is dilated is first straitened; and what is expanded is at first contracted; and it is what it was, and does but undergo an affection. If then the Monad being dilated became a Triad, and the Monad was the Father 3330 , and the Triad is Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, first the Monad being dilated, underwent an affection and became what it was not; for it was dilated, whereas it had not been dilate. Next, if the Monad itself was dilated into a Triad, and that, Father and Son and Holy Ghost, then Father and Son and Spirit prove the same, as Sabellius held, unless the Monad which he speaks of is something besides the Father, and then he ought not to speak of dilatation, since the Monad was to make Three, so that there was a Monad, and then Father, Son, and Spirit. For if the Monad were dilated, and expanded itself, it must itself be that which was expanded. And a Triad when dilated is no longer a Monad, and when a Monad it is not yet a Triad. And so, He that was Father was not yet Son and Spirit; but, when become These, is no longer only Father. And a man who thus should lie, must ascribe a body to God, and represent Him as passible; for what is dilatation, but an affection of that which is dilated? or what the dilated, but what before was not so, but was strait indeed; for it is the same, in time only differing from itself.
14. And this the divine Apostle knows, when he writes to the Corinthians, ‘Be ye not straitened in us, but be ye yourselves dilated, O Corinthians 3331 ;’ for he advises identical persons to change from straitness to dilatation. And as, supposing the Corinthians being straitened were in turn dilated, they had not been others, but still Corinthians, so if the Father was dilated into a Triad, the Triad again is the Father alone. And he says again the same thing, ‘Our heart is dilated 3332 ;’ and Noah says, ‘May God dilate for Japheth 3333 ,’ for the same heart and the same Japheth is in the dilatation. If then the Monad dilated, it would dilate for others; but if it dilated for itself, then it would be that which was dilated; and what is that but the Son and Holy Spirit? And it is well to ask him, when thus speaking, what was the action 3334 of this dilatation? or, in very truth, wherefore at all it took place? for what does not remain the same, but is in course of time dilated, must necessarily have a cause of dilatation. If then it was in order that Word and Spirit should be with Him, it is beside the purpose to say, ‘First Monad, and then dilated;’ for Word and Spirit were not afterwards, but ever, or God would be wordless 3335 , as the Arians hold. So that if Word and Spirit were ever, ever was it dilated, and not at first a Monad; but if it were dilated afterwards, then afterwards is there a Word. But if for the Incarnation it was dilated, and then became a Triad, then before the Incarnation there was not yet a Triad. And it will seem even that the Father became flesh, if, that is, He be the Monad, and was dilated in the Man; and thus perhaps there will only be a Monad, and flesh, and thirdly Spirit; if, that is, He was Himself dilated; and there will be in name only a Triad. It is absurd too to say that it was dilated for creating; for it were possible for it, remaining a Monad, to make all; for the Monad did not need dilatation, nor was wanting in power before being dilated; it is absurd surely and impious, to think or speak thus in the case of God. Another absurdity too will follow. For if it was dilated for the sake of the creation, and while it was a Monad the creation was not, but upon the Consummation it will be again a Monad after dilatation, then the creation too will come to nought. For as for the sake of creating it was dilated, so, the dilatation ceasing, the creation will cease also.
Footnotes
437:3329i.e. Marcellus, cf. §§14, 25, &c.
437:3330Cf. §25.
438:33312 Cor. 6:12, 13.
438:33322 Cor. 6.11.
438:3333Gen. ix. 27, LXX.
438:3334ἐνέργεια [Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) c.]
438:3335Or. i. 19.
§§15–24. Since the Word is from God, He must be Son. Since the Son is from everlasting, He must be the Word; else either He is superior to the Word, or the Word is the Father. Texts of the New Testament which state the unity of the Son with the Father; therefore the Son is the Word. Three hypotheses refuted—1. That the Man is the Son; 2. That the Word and Man together are the Son; 3. That the Word became Son on His incarnation. Texts of the Old Testament which speak of the Son. If they are merely prophetical, then those concerning the Word may be such also.
15. Such absurdities will be the consequence of saying that the Monad is dilated into a Triad. But since those who say so venture to separate Word and Son, and to say that the Word is one and the Son another, and that first was the Word and then the Son, come let us consider this doctrine also. Now their presumption takes various forms; for some say that the man whom the Saviour assumed is the Son 3336 ; and others both that the man and the Word then became Son, when they were united 3337 . And others say that the Word Himself then became Son when He became man 3338 ; for from being Word, they say, He has become Son, not being Son before, but only Word. Now both are Stoic 3339 doctrines, whether to say that God was dilated or to deny the Son, but especially is it absurd to name the Word, yet deny Him to be Son. For if the Word be not from God, reasonably might they deny Him to be Son; but if He is from God, how see they not that what exists from anything is son of him from whom it is? Next, if God is Father of the Word, why is not the Word Son of His own Father? for one is and is called father, whose is the son; and one is and is called son of another, whose is the father. If then God is not Father of Christ, neither is the Word Son; but if God be Father, then reasonably also the Word is Son. But if afterwards there is Father, and first God, this is an Arian thought 3340 . Next, it is absurd that God should change; for that belongs to bodies; but if they argue that in the instance of creation He became afterwards a Maker, let them know that the change is in the things 3341 which afterwards came to be, and not in God.
16. If then the Son too were a work, well might God begin to be a Father towards Him as others; but if the Son is not a work, then ever was the Father and ever the Son 3342 . But if the Son was ever, He must be the Word; for if the Word be not Son, and this is what a man waxes bold to say, either he holds that Word to be Father or the Son superior to the Word. For the Son being ‘in the bosom of the Father 3343 ,’ of necessity either the Word is not before the Son (for nothing is before Him who is in the Father), or if the Word be other than the Son, the Word must be the Father in whom is the Son. But if the Word is not Father but Word, the Word must be external to the Father, since it is the Son who is ‘in the bosom of the Father.’ For not both the Word and the Son are in the bosom, but one must be, and He the Son, who is Only-begotten. And it follows for another reason, if the Word is one, and the Son another, that the Son is superior to the Word; for ‘no one knoweth the Father save the Son 3344 ,’ not the Word. Either then the Word does not know, or if He knows, it is not true that ‘no one knows.’ And the same of ‘He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father,’ and ‘I and the Father are One,’ for this is uttered by the Son, not the Word, as they would have it, as is plain from the Gospel; for according to John when the Lord said, ‘I and the Father are One,’ the Jews took up stones to stone Him. ‘Jesus 3345 answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from My Father, for which of those works do ye stone Me? The Jews answered Him, saying, For a good work we stone Thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that Thou, being a man, makest Thyself God. Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods unto whom the Word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, say ye of Him, whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God? If I do not the works of My Father, believe Me not. But if I do, though ye believe not Me, believe the works, that ye may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.’ And yet, as far as the surface of the words intimated, He said neither ‘I am God,’ nor ‘I am Son of God,’ but ‘I and the Father are One.’
17. The Jews then, when they heard ‘One,’ thought like Sabellius that He said that He was the Father, but our Saviour shews their sin by this argument: ‘Though I had said “God,” you should have remembered what is written, “I said, Ye are gods;”’ then to clear up ‘I and the Father are One,’ He has explained the Son’s oneness with the Father in the words, ‘Because I said, I am the Son of God.’ For if He did not say it in words, still He has referred the sense of ‘are One’ to the Son. For nothing is one with the Father, but what is from Him. What is that which is from Him but the Son? And therefore He adds, ‘that ye may know that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me.’ For, when expounding the ‘One,’ He said that the union and the inseparability lay, not in This being That, with which It was One, but in His being in the Father and the Father in the Son. For thus He overthrows both Sabellius, in saying, ‘I am’ not, “the Father,” but, ‘the Son of God;’ and Arius, in saying, ‘are One.’ If then the Son and the Word are not the same, it is not that the Word is one with the Father, but the Son; nor he that hath seen the Word ‘hath seen the Father,’ but ‘he that hath seen’ the Son. And from this it follows, either that the Son is greater than the Word, or the Word has nothing beyond the Son. For what can be greater or more perfect than ‘One,’ and ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me,’ and ‘He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father?’ for these utterances also belong to the Son. And hence the same John says, ‘He that hath seen Me, hath seen Him that sent Me,’ and, ‘He that receiveth Me, receiveth Him that sent Me;’ and, ‘I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth in Me, should not abide in darkness. And, if any one hear My words and observe them not, I judge him not; for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world. The word which he shall hear, the same shall judge him in the last day, because I go unto the Father 3346 .’ The preaching, He says, judges him who has not observed the commandment; ‘for if,’ He says, ‘I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin; but now they shall have no cloke 3347 ,’ He says, having heard My words, through which those who observe them shall reap salvation.
18. Perhaps they will have so little shame as to say, that this utterance belongs not to the Son but to the Word; but from what preceded it appeared plainly that the speaker was the Son. For He who here says, ‘I came not to judge the world but to save 3348 ,’ is shewn to be no other than the Only-begotten Son of God, by the same John’s saying before 3349 , ‘For God so loved the world that He gave His Only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He that believeth on Him is not condemned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the Name of the Only-begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil 3350 .’ If He who says, ‘For I came not to judge the world, but that I might save it,’ is the Same as says, ‘He that seeth Me, seeth Him that sent Me 3351 ,’ and if He who came to save the world and not judge it is the Only-begotten Son of God, it is plain that it is the same Son who says, ‘He that seeth Me, seeth Him that sent Me.’ For He who said, ‘He that believeth on Me,’ and, ‘If any one hear My words, I judge him not,’ is the Son Himself, of whom Scripture says, ‘He that believeth on Him is not condemned, but He that believeth not is condemned already, because He hath not believed in the Name of the Only-begotten Son of God.’ And again: ‘And this is the condemnation’ of him who believeth not on the Son, ‘that light hath come into the world,’ and they believed not in Him, that is, in the Son; for He must be ‘the Light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world 3352 .’ And as long as He was upon earth according to the Incarnation, He was Light in the world, as He said Himself, ‘While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light;’ for ‘I,’ says He, ‘am come a light into the world 3353 .’
19. This then being shewn, it follows that the Word is the Son. But if the Son is the Light, which has come into the world, beyond all dispute the world was made by the Son. For in the beginning of the Gospel, the Evangelist, speaking of John the Baptist, says, ‘He was not that Light, but that he might bear witness concerning that Light 3354 .’ For Christ Himself was, as we have said before, the True Light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world. For if ‘He was in the world, and the world was made by Him 3355 ,’ of necessity He is the Word of God, concerning whom also the Evangelist witnesses that all things were made by Him. For either they will be compelled to speak of two worlds, that the one may have come into being by the Son and the other by the Word, or, if the world is one and the creation one, it follows that Son and Word are one and the same before all creation, for by Him it came into being. Therefore if as by the Word, so by the Son also all things came to be, it will not be contradictory, but even identical to say, for instance, ‘In the beginning was the Word,’ or, ‘In the beginning was the Son.’ But if because John did not say, ‘In the beginning was the Son,’ they shall maintain that the attributes of the Word do not suit with the Son, it at once follows that the attributes of the Son do not suit with the Word. But it was shewn that to the Son belongs, ‘I and the Father are One,’ and that it is He ‘Who is in the bosom of the Father,’ and, ‘He that seeth Me, seeth Him that sent Me 3356 ;’ and that ‘the world was brought into being by Him,’ is common to the Word and the Son; so that from this the Son is shewn to be before the world; for of necessity the Framer is before the things brought into being. And what is said to Philip must belong, according to them, not to the Word, but to the Son. For, ‘Jesus said,’ says Scripture, ‘Have I been so long time with you, and yet thou hast not known Me, Philip? He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father. And how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? Believest thou not, that I am in the Father and the Father in Me? the words that I speak unto you, I speak not of Myself, but the Father that dwelleth in Me, He doeth the works. Believe Me that I am in the Father and the Father in Me, or else, believe Me for the very works’ sake. Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also, and greater works than these shall he do, because I go unto the Father. And whatsoever ye shall ask in My Name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son 3357 .’ Therefore if the Father be glorified in the Son, the Son must be He who said, ‘I in the Father and the Father in Me;’ and He who said, ‘He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father;’ for He, the same who thus spoke, shews Himself to be the Son, by adding, ‘that the Father may be glorified in the Son.’
20. If then they say that the Man whom the Word wore, and not the Word, is the Son of God the Only-begotten, the Man must be by consequence He who is in the Father, in whom also the Father is; and the Man must be He who is One with the Father, and who is in the bosom of the Father, and the True Light. And they will be compelled to say that through the Man Himself the world came into being, and that the Man was He who came not to judge the world but to save it; and that He it was who was in being before Abraham came to be. For, says Scripture, Jesus said to them, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am 3358 .’ And is it not absurd to say, as they do, that one who came of the seed of Abraham after two and forty generations 3359 , should exist before Abraham came to be? is it not absurd, if the flesh, which the Word bore, itself is the Son, to say that the flesh from Mary is that by which the world was made? and how will they retain ‘He was in the world?’ for the Evangelist, by way of signifying the Son’s antecedence to the birth according to the flesh, goes on to say, ‘He was in the world.’ And how, if not the Word but the Man is the Son, can He save the world, being Himself one of the world? And if this does not shame them, where shall be the Word, the Man being in the Father? And where will the Word stand to the Father, the Man and the Father being One? But if the Man be Only-begotten, what will be the place of the Word? Either one must say that He comes second, or, if He be above the Only-begotten, He must be the Father Himself. For as the Father is One, so also the Only-begotten from Him is One; and what has the Word above the Man, if the Word is not the Son? For, while Scripture says that through the Son and the Word the world was brought to be, and it is common to the Word and to the Son to frame the world, yet Scripture proceeds to place the sight of the Father, not in the Word but in the Son, and to attribute the saving of the world, not to the Word, but to the Only-begotten Son. For, saith it, Jesus said, ‘Have I been so long while with you, and yet hast thou not known Me, Philip? He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father.’ Nor does Scripture say that the Word knows the Father, but the Son; and that not the Word sees the Father, but the Only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father.
21. And what more does the Word contribute to our salvation than the Son, if, as they hold, the Son is one, and the Word another? for the command is that we should believe, not in the Word, but in the Son. For John says, ‘He that believeth on the Son, hath everlasting life; but he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life 3360 .’ And Holy Baptism, in which the substance of the whole faith is lodged, is administered not in the Word, but in Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. If then, as they hold, the Word is one and the Son another, and the Word is not the Son, Baptism has no connection with the Word. How then are they able to hold that the Word is with the Father, when He is not with Him in the giving of Baptism? But perhaps they will say, that in the Father’s Name the Word is included? Wherefore then not the Spirit also? or is the Spirit external to the Father? and the Man indeed (if the Word is not Son) is named after the Father, but the Spirit after the Man? and then the Monad, instead of dilating into a Triad, dilates according to them into a Tetrad, Father, Word, Son, and Holy Ghost. Being brought to shame on this ground, they have recourse to another, and say that not the Man by Himself whom the Lord bore, but both together, the Word and the Man, are the Son; for both joined together are named Son, as they say. Which then is cause of which? and which has made which a Son? or, to speak more clearly, is the Word a Son because of the flesh? or is the flesh called Son because of the Word? or is neither the cause, but the concurrence of the two? If then the Word be a Son because of the flesh, of necessity the flesh is Son, and all those absurdities follow which have been already drawn from saying that the Man is Son. But if the flesh is called Son because of the Word, then even before the flesh the Word certainly, being such, was Son. For how could a being make other sons, not being himself a son, especially when there was a father 3361 ? If then He makes sons for Himself, then is He Himself Father; but if for the Father, then must He be Son, or rather that Son, by reason of Whom the rest are made sons.
22. For if, while He is not Son, we are sons, God is our Father and not His. How then does He appropriate the name instead, saying, ‘My Father,’ and ‘I from the Father 3362 ?’ for if He be common Father of all, He is not His Father only, nor did He alone come out from the Father. But he says, that He is sometimes called our Father also, because He has Himself become partaker in our flesh. For on this account the Word has become flesh, that, since the Word is Son, therefore, because of the Son dwelling in us 3363 , He may be called our Father also; for ‘He sent forth,’ says Scripture, ‘the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, Abba, Father 3364 .’ Therefore the Son in us, calling upon His own Father, causes Him to be named our Father also. Surely in whose hearts the Son is not, of them neither can God be called Father. But if because of the Word the Man is called Son, it follows necessarily, since the ancients 3365 are called sons even before the Incarnation, that the Word is Son even before His sojourn among us; for ‘I begat sons,’ saith Scripture; and in the time of Noah, ‘When the sons of God saw,’ and in the Song, ‘Is not He thy Father 3366 ?’ Therefore there was also that True Son, for whose sake they too were sons. But if, as they say again, neither of the two is Son, but it depends on the concurrence of the two, it follows that neither is Son; I say, neither the Word nor the Man, but some cause, on account of which they were united; and accordingly that cause which makes the Son will precede the uniting. Therefore in this way also the Son was before the flesh. When this then is urged, they will take refuge in another pretext, saying, neither that the Man is Son, nor both together, but that the Word was Word indeed simply in the beginning, but when He became Man, then He was named 3367 Son; for before His appearing He was not Son but Word only; and as the ‘Word became flesh,’ not being flesh before, so the Word became Son, not being Son before. Such are their idle words; but they admit of an obvious refutation.
23. For if simply, when made Man, He has become Son, the becoming Man is the cause. And if the Man is cause of His being Son, or both together, then the same absurdities result. Next, if He is first Word and then Son, it will appear that He knew the Father afterwards, not before; for not as being Word does He know Him, but as Son. For ‘No one knoweth the Father but the Son.’ And this too will result, that He has come afterwards to be ‘in the bosom of the Father 3368 ,’ and afterwards He and the Father have become One; and afterwards is, ‘He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father 3369 .’ For all these things are said of the Son. Hence they will be forced to say, The Word was nothing but a name. For neither is it He who is in us with the Father, nor whoso has seen the Word, hath seen the Father, nor was the Father known to any one at all, for through the Son is the Father known (for so it is written, ‘And he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him’), and, the Word not being yet Son, not yet did any know the Father. How then was He seen by Moses, how by the fathers? for He says Himself in the Kingdoms, ‘Was I not plainly revealed to the house of thy father 3370 ?’ But if God was revealed, there must have been a Son to reveal, as He says Himself, ‘And he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.’ It is irreligious then and foolish to say that the Word is one and the Son another, and whence they gained such an idea it were well to ask them. They answer, Because no mention is made in the Old Testament of the Son, but of the Word; and for this reason they are positive in their opinion that the Son came later than the Word, because not in the Old, but in the New only, is He spoken of. This is what they irreligiously say; for first to separate between the Testaments, so that the one does not hold with the other, is the device of Manichees and Jews, the one of whom oppose the Old, and the other the New 3371 . Next, on their shewing, if what is contained in the Old is of older date, and what in the New of later, and times depend upon the writing, it follows that ‘I and the Father are One,’ and ‘Only-begotten,’ and ‘He that hath seen Me hath seen the Father 3372 ,’ are later, for these testimonies are adduced not from the Old but from the New.
24. But it is not so; for in truth much is said in the Old also about the Son, as in the second Psalm, ‘Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee 3373 ;’ and in the ninth the title 3374 , Unto the ‘end concerning the hidden things of the Son, a Psalm of David;’ and in the forty-fourth, ‘Unto the end, concerning the things that shall be changed to the Sons of Korah for understanding, a song about the Well-beloved;’ and in Isaiah, ‘I will sing to my Well-beloved a song of my Well-beloved touching my vineyard. My Well-beloved hath a vineyard 3375 ;’ Who is this ‘Well-beloved’ but the Only-begotten Son? as also in the hundred and ninth, ‘From the womb I begat Thee before the morning star 3376 ,’ concerning which I shall speak afterwards; and in the Proverbs, ‘Before the hills He begat me;’ and in Daniel, ‘And the form of the Fourth is like the Son of God 3377 ;’ and many others. If then from the Old be ancientness, ancient must be the Son, who is clearly described in the Old Testament in many places. ‘Yes,’ they say, ‘so it is, but it must be taken prophetically.’ Therefore also the Word must be said to be spoken of prophetically; for this is not to be taken one way, that another. For if ‘Thou art My Son’ refer to the future, so does ‘By the Word of the Lord were the heavens established;’ for it is not said ‘were brought to be,’ nor ‘He made.’ But that ‘established’ refers to the future, it states elsewhere: ‘The Lord reigned 3378 ,’ followed by ‘He so established the earth that it can never be moved.’ And if the words in the forty-fourth Psalm ‘for My Well-beloved’ refer to the future, so does what follows upon them, ‘My heart uttered a good Word.’ And if ‘From the womb’ relates to a man, therefore also ‘From the heart.’ For if the womb is human, so is the heart corporeal. But if what is from the heart is eternal, then what is ‘From the womb’ is eternal. And if the ‘Only-begotten’ is ‘in the bosom,’ therefore the ‘Well-beloved’ is ‘in the bosom.’ For ‘Only-begotten’ and ‘Well-beloved’ are the same, as in the words ‘This is My Well-beloved Son 3379 .’ For not as wishing to signify His love towards Him did He say ‘Well-beloved,’ as if it might appear that He hated others, but He made plain thereby His being Only-begotten, that He might shew that He alone was from Him. And hence the Word, with a view of conveying to Abraham the idea of ‘Only-begotten,’ says, ‘Offer thy son thy well-beloved 3380 ;’ but it is plain to any one that Isaac was the only son from Sara. The Word then is Son, not lately come to be, or named Son, but always Son. For if not Son, neither is He Word; and if not Word, neither is He Son. For that which is from the father is a son; and what is from the Father, but that Word that went forth from the heart, and was born from the womb? for the Father is not Word, nor the Word Father, but the one is Father, and the other Son; and one begets, and the other is begotten.
Footnotes
438:3336Vid. §20.
438:3337Vid. §21.
438:3338Vid. §22 fin.
438:3339Cf. Ritt. and Prell. (Ed. 5) §398 (?).
438:3340§§8, 13.
439:3341Cf. i. 29.
439:3342Or. i. 14, n. 4.
439:3343John i. 18.
439:3344Matt. xi. 27.
439:3345John x. 32-38
439:3346John xii. 45; Matt. x. 40; John xii. 46-48.
439:3347John xv. 22.
440:3348John xii. 47.
440:3349John 3.16-19.
440:3350John 3:18, 19.
440:3351John 22.45.
440:3352John 1.9.
440:3353John 22:36, 46.
440:3354John 1.8.
440:3355John 1.10.
440:3356John x. 30; i. 18; xii. 45.
440:3357John 14.9-13.
441:3358John viii. 58.
441:3359Vid. Matt. i. 17
441:3360John iii. 36.
441:3361Cf. iii. 11, n. 1.
441:3362John v. 17; xvi. 28.
441:3363Or. ii. 60. n. 5.
441:3364Gal. iv. 6.
441:3365Below, §29.
442:3366Isa. 1:2, Gen. 6:2, Deut. 32:6Is. i. 2, LXX.; Gen. vi. 2; Deut. xxxii. 6
442:3367Or. ii. 19, n. 3.
442:3368Matt. xi. 27; John i. 18.
442:3369John xiv. 9.
442:33701 Sam. ii. 27, LXX.
442:3371Cf. i. 53, n. 7; iii. 35, n. 5.
442:3372John x. 30; i. 18; xiv. 9.
442:3373Ps. ii. 7.
442:3374Ib. ix. title xlv. title.
442:3375Is. v. 1.
442:3376Ps. cx. 3, LXX.
442:3377Prov. 8:25, Dan. 3:25Prov. viii. 25, LXX.; Dan. iii. 25.
442:3378Cf. Exp. in Ps. xcii.
443:3379Ps. xxxiii. 6; xciii. 1; xlv. 1; Matt. iii. 17.
443:3380Gen. xxii. 2.
§25. Marcellian illustration from 1 Cor. xii. 4, refuted.
25. Arius then raves in saying that the Son is from nothing, and that once He was not, while Sabellius also raves in saying that the Father is Son, and again, the Son Father 3381 , in subsistence 3382 One, in name Two; and he 3383 raves also in using as an example the grace of the Spirit. For he says, ‘As there are “diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit,” so also the Father is the same 3384 , but is dilated into Son and Spirit.’ Now this is full of absurdity; for if as with the Spirit, so it is with God, the Father will be Word and Holy Spirit, to one becoming Father, to another Son, to another Spirit, accommodating himself to the need of each, and in name indeed Son and Spirit, but in reality Father only; having a beginning in that He becomes a Son, and then ceasing to be called Father, and made man in name, but in truth not even coming among us; and untrue in saying ‘I and the Father,’ but in reality being Himself the Father, and the other absurdities which result in the instance of Sabellius. And the name of the Son and the Spirit will necessarily cease, when the need has been supplied; and what happens will altogether be but make-belief, because it has been displayed, not in truth, but in name. And the Name of Son ceasing, as they hold, then the grace of Baptism will cease too; for it was given in the Son 3385 . Nay, what will follow but the annihilation of the creation? for if the Word came forth that we might be created 3386 , and when He was come forth, we were, it is plain that when He retires into the Father, as they say, we shall be no longer. For He will be as He was; so also we shall not be, as then we were not; for when He is no more gone forth, there will no more be a creation. This then is absurd.
Footnotes
443:3381§13.
443:3382ὑποστάσει, iii. 65, n. 9.
443:3383i.e. Marcellus.
443:3384(1 Cor. xii. 4.) So Marcellus, §13.
443:3385§21.
443:3386ii. 24, n. 6; iv. 11, n. 4.
§§26–36. That the Son is the Co-existing Word, argued from the New Testament. Texts from the Old Testament continued; especially Ps. cx. 3. Besides, the Word in Old Testament may be Son in New, as Spirit in Old Testament is Paraclete in New. Objection from Acts x. 36; answered by parallels, such as 1 Cor. i. 5. Lev. ix. 7. &c. Necessity of the Word’s taking flesh, viz. to sanctify, yet without destroying, the flesh.
26. But that the Son has no beginning of being, but before He was made man was ever with the Father, John makes clear in his first Epistle, writing thus: ‘That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the Word of Life; and the Life was manifested, and we have seen it; and we bear witness and declare unto you that Eternal Life, which was with the Father, and was manifested unto us 3387 .’ While he says here that ‘the Life,’ not ‘became,’ but ‘was with the Father,’ in the end of his Epistle he says the Son is the Life, writing, ‘And we are in Him that is True, even in His Son, Jesus Christ; this is the True God and Eternal Life 3388 .’ But if the Son is the Life, and the Life was with the Father, and if the Son was with the Father, and the same Evangelist says, ‘And the Word was with God 3389 ,’ the Son must be the Word, which is ever with the Father. And as the ‘Son’ is ‘Word,’ so ‘God’ must be ‘the Father.’ Moreover, the Son, according to John, is not merely ‘God’ but ‘True God;’ for according to the same Evangelist, ‘And the Word was God;’ and the Son said, ‘I am the Life 3390 .’ Therefore the Son is the Word and Life which is with the Father. And again, what is said in the same John, ‘The Only-begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father 3391 ,’ shews that the Son was ever. For whom John calls Son, Him David mentions in the Psalm as God’s Hand 3392 , saying, ‘Why stretchest Thou not forth Thy Right Hand out of Thy bosom 3393 ?’ Therefore if the Hand is in the bosom, and the Son in the bosom, the Son will be the Hand, and the Hand will be the Son, through whom the Father made all things; for it is written, ‘Thy Hand made all these things,’ and ‘He led out His people with His Hand 3394 ;’ therefore through the Son. And if ‘this is the changing of the Right Hand of the Most Highest,’ and again, ‘Unto the end, concerning the things that shall be changed, a song for My Well-beloved 3395 ;’ the Well-beloved then is the Hand that was changed; concerning whom the Divine Voice also says, ‘This is My Beloved Son.’ This ‘My Hand’ then is equivalent to ‘This My Son.’
27. But since there are ill-instructed men who, while resisting the doctrine of a Son, think little of the words, ‘From the womb before the morning star I begat Thee 3396 ;’ as if this referred to His relation to Mary, alleging that He was born of Mary ‘before the morning star,’ for that to say ‘womb’ could not refer to His relation towards God, we must say a few words here. If then, because the ‘womb’ is human, therefore it is foreign to God, plainly ‘heart’ too has a human meaning 3397 , for that which has heart has womb also. Since then both are human, we must deny both, or seek to explain both. Now as a word is from the heart, so is an offspring from the womb; and as when the heart of God is spoken of, we do not conceive of it as human, so if Scripture says ‘from the womb,’ we must not take it in a corporeal sense. For it is usual with divine Scripture to speak and signify in the way of man what is above man. Thus speaking of the creation it says, ‘Thy hands made me and fashioned me,’ and, ‘Thy hand made all these things,’ and, ‘He commanded and they were created 3398 .’ Suitable then is its language about everything; attributing to the Son ‘propriety’ and ‘genuineness,’ and to the creation ‘the beginning of being.’ For the one God makes and creates; but Him He begets from Himself, Word or Wisdom. Now ‘womb’ and ‘heart’ plainly declare the proper and the genuine; for we too have this from the womb; but our works we make by the hand.
28. What means then, say they, ‘Before the morning star?’ I would answer, that if ‘Before the morning star’ shews that His birth from Mary was wonderful, many others besides have been born before the rising of the star. What then is said so wonderful in His instance, that He should record it as some choice prerogative 3399 , when it is common to many? Next, to beget differs from bringing forth; for begetting involves the primary foundation, but to bring forth is nothing else than the production of what exists. If then the term belongs to the body, let it be observed that He did not then receive a beginning of coming to be when he was evangelized to the shepherds by night, but when the Angel spoke to the Virgin. And that was not night, for this is not said; on the contrary, it was night when He issued from the womb. This difference Scripture makes, and says on the one hand that He was begotten before the morning star, and on the other speaks of His proceeding from the womb, as in the twenty-first Psalm, ‘Thou art he that drew Me from the womb 3400 .’ Besides, He did not say, ‘before the rising of the morning star,’ but simply ‘before the morning star.’ If then the phrase must be taken of the body, then either the body must be before Adam, for the stars were before Adam, or we have to investigate the sense of the letter. And this John enables us to do, who says in the Apocalypse, ‘I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last, the beginning and the end. Blessed are they who make broad their robes, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever maketh and loveth a lie. I Jesus have sent My Angel, to testify these things in the Churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star. And the Spirit and the Bride say, Come; and let him that heareth say, Come; and let him that is athirst, Come; and whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely 3401 .’ If then ‘the Offspring of David’ be the ‘Bright and Morning Star,’ it is plain that the flesh of the Saviour is called ‘the Morning Star,’ which the Offspring from God preceded; so that the sense of the Psalm is this, ‘I have begotten Thee from Myself before Thy appearance in the flesh;’ for ‘before the Morning Star’ is equivalent to ‘before the Incarnation of the Word.’
29. Thus in the Old also, statements are plainly made concerning the Son; at the same time it is superfluous to argue the point; for if what is not stated in the Old is of later date, let them who are thus disputatious, say where in the Old is mention made of the Spirit, the Paraclete? for of the Holy Spirit there is mention, but nowhere of the Paraclete. Is then the Holy Spirit one, and the Paraclete another, and the Paraclete the later, as not mentioned in the Old? but far be it to say that the Spirit is later, or to distinguish the Holy Ghost as one and the Paraclete as another; for the Spirit is one and the same, then and now hallowing and comforting those who are His recipients; as one and the same Word and Son led even then to adoption of sons those who were worthy 3402 . For sons under the Old were made such through no other than the Son. For unless even before Mary there were a Son who was of God, how is He before all, when they are sons before Him? and how also ‘First-born,’ if He comes second after many? But neither is the Paraclete second, for He was before all, nor the Son later; for ‘in the beginning was the Word 3403 .’ And as the Spirit and Paraclete are the same, so the Son and Word are the same; and as the Saviour says concerning the Spirit, ‘But the Paraclete which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My Name 3404 ,’ speaking of One and Same, and not distinguishing, so John describes similarly when he says, ‘And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, glory as of one Only-begotten from the Father 3405 .’ For here too he does not distinguish but witnesses the identity. And as the Paraclete is not one and the Holy Ghost another, but one and the same, so Word is not one, and Son another, but the Word is Only-Begotten; for He says not the glory of the flesh itself, but of the Word. He then who dares distinguish between Word and Son, let him distinguish between Spirit and Paraclete; but if the Spirit cannot be distinguished, so neither can the Word, being also Son and Wisdom and Power. Moreover, the word ‘Well-beloved’ even the Greeks who are skilful in phrases know to be equivalent with ‘Only-begotten.’ For Homer speaks thus of Telemachus, who was the only-begotten of Ulysses, in the second book of the Odyssey:
O’er the wide earth, dear youth, why seek to run,
An only child, a well-beloved 3406 son?
He whom you mourn, divine Ulysses, fell
Far from his country, where the strangers dwell.
Therefore he who is the only son of his father is called well-beloved.
30. Some of the followers of the Samosatene, distinguishing the Word from the Son, pretend that the Son is Christ, and the Word another; and they ground this upon Peter’s words in the Acts, which he spoke well, but they explain badly 3407 . It is this: ‘The Word He sent to the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ; this is Lord of all 3408 .’ For they say that since the Word spoke through Christ, as in the instance of the Prophets, ‘Thus saith the Lord,’ the prophet was one and the Lord another. But to this it is parallel to oppose the words in the first to the Corinthians, ‘waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall also confirm you unto the end unblameable in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ 3409 .’ For as one Christ does not confirm the day of another Christ, but He Himself confirms in His own day those who wait for Him, so the Father sent the Word made flesh, that being made man He might preach by means of Himself. And therefore he straightway adds, ‘This is Lord of all;’ but Lord of all is the Word.
31. ‘And Moses said unto Aaron, Go unto the altar and offer thy sin-offering, and thy burnt-offering, and make an atonement for thyself and for the people; and offer the offering of the people, and make an atonement for them, as the Lord commanded Moses 3410 .’ See now here, though Moses be one, Moses himself speaks as if about another Moses, ‘as the Lord commanded Moses.’ In like manner then, if the blessed Peter speak of the Divine Word also, as sent to the children of Israel by Jesus Christ, it is not necessary to understand that the Word is one and Christ another, but that they were one and the same by reason of the uniting which took place in His divine and loving condescension and becoming man. And even if He be considered in two ways 3411 , still it is without any division of the Word, as when the inspired John says, ‘And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us 3412 .’ What then is said well and rightly 3413 by the blessed Peter, the followers of the Samosatene, understanding badly and wrongly, stand not in the truth. For Christ is understood in both ways in Divine Scripture, as when it says Christ ‘God’s power and God’s wisdom 3414 .’ If then Peter says that the Word was sent through Jesus Christ unto the children of Israel, let him be understood to mean, that the Word incarnate has appeared to the children of Israel, so that it may correspond to ‘And the Word became flesh.’ But if they understand it otherwise, and, while confessing the Word to be divine, as He is, separate from Him the Man that He has taken, with which also we believe that He is made one, saying that He has been sent through Jesus Christ, they are, without knowing it, contradicting themselves. For those who in this place separate the divine Word from the divine Incarnation, have, it seems, a degraded notion of the doctrine of His having become flesh, and entertain Gentile thoughts, as they do, conceiving that the divine Incarnation is an alteration of the Word. But it is not so; perish the thought.
32. For in the same way that John here preaches that incomprehensible union. ‘the mortal being swallowed up of life 3415 ,’ nay, of Him who is Very Life (as the Lord said to Martha, ‘I am the Life 3416 ’), so when the blessed Peter says that through Jesus Christ the Word was sent, he implies the divine union also. For as when a man heard ‘The Word became flesh,’ he would not think that the Word ceased to be, which is absurd, as has been said before, so also hearing of the Word which has been united to the flesh, let him understand the divine mystery one and simple. More clearly however and indisputably than all reasoning does what was said by the Archangel to the Bearer of God herself, shew the oneness of the Divine Word and Man. For he says, ‘The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that Holy Thing which shall be born of thee, shall be called the Son of God 3417 .’ Irrationally then do the followers of the Samosatene separate the Word who is clearly declared to be made one with the Man from Mary. He is not therefore sent through that Man; but He rather in Him sent, saying, ‘Go ye, teach all nations 3418 .’
33. And this is usual with Scripture 3419 , to express itself in inartificial and simple phrases. For so also in Numbers we shall find, Moses said to Raguel the Midianite, the father-in-law of Moses; for there was not one Moses who spoke, and another whose father-in-law was Raguel, but Moses was one. And if in like manner the Word of God is called Wisdom and Power and Right-Hand and Arm and the like, and if in His love to man He has become one with us, putting on our first-fruits and blended with it, therefore the other titles also have, as was natural, become the Word’s portions. For that John has said, that in the beginning was the Word, and He with God and Himself God, and all things through Him, and without Him nothing made, shews clearly that even man is the formation of God the Word. If then after taking him, when enfeebled 3420 , into Himself, He renews him again through that sure renewal unto endless permanence, and therefore is made one with him in order to raise him to a diviner lot, how can we possibly say that the Word was sent through the Man who was from Mary, and reckon Him, the Lord of Apostles, with the other Apostles, I mean prophets, who were sent by Him? And how can Christ be called a mere man? on the contrary, being made one with the Word, He is with reason called Christ and Son of God, the prophet having long since loudly and clearly ascribed the Father’s subsistence to Him, and said, ‘And I will send My Son Christ 3421 ,’ and in the Jordan, ‘This is My Well-beloved Son.’ For when He had fulfilled His promise, He shewed, as was suitable, that He was He whom He said He had sent.
34. Let us then consider Christ in both ways, the divine Word made one in Mary with Him which is from Mary. For in her womb the Word fashioned for Himself His house, as at the beginning He formed Adam from the earth; or rather more divinely, concerning whom Solomon too says openly, knowing that the Word was also called Wisdom, ‘Wisdom builded herself an house 3422 ;’ which the Apostle interprets when he says, ‘Which house are we 3423 ,’ and elsewhere calls us a temple, as far as it is fitting to God to inhabit a temple, of which the image, made of stones, He by Solomon commanded the ancient people to build; whence, on the appearance of the Truth, the image ceased. For when the ruthless men wished to prove the image to be the truth, and to destroy that true habitation which we surely believe His union with us to be, He threatened them not; but knowing that their crime was against themselves, He says to them, ‘Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up 3424 ,’ He, our Saviour, surely shewing thereby that the things about which men busy themselves, carry their dissolution with them. For unless the Lord had built the house, and kept the city, in vain did the builders toil, and the keepers watch 3425 . And so the works of the Jews are undone, for they were a shadow; but the Church is firmly established; it is ‘founded on the rock,’ and ‘the gates of hades shall not prevail against it 3426 .’ Theirs 3427 it was to say, ‘Why dost Thou, being a man, make Thyself God 3428 ?’ and their disciple is the Samosatene; whence to his followers with reason does he teach his heresy. But ‘we did not so learn Christ, if so be that we heard’ Him, and were taught from Him, ‘putting off the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts,’ and taking up ‘the new, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness 3429 .’ Let Christ then in both ways be religiously considered.
35. But if Scripture often calls even the body by the name of Christ, as in the blessed Peter’s words to Cornelius, when he teaches him of ‘Jesus of Nazareth, whom God anointed with the Holy Ghost,’ and again to the Jews, ‘Jesus of Nazareth, a Man approved of God for you 3430 ,’ and again the blessed Paul to the Athenians, ‘By that Man, whom He ordained, giving assurance to all men, in that He raised Him from the dead 3431 ’ (for we find the appointment and the mission often synonymous with the anointing; from which any one who will may learn, that there is no discordance in the words of the sacred writers, but that they but give various names to the union of God the Word with the Man from Mary, sometimes as anointing, sometimes as mission, sometimes as appointment), it follows that what the blessed Peter says is right 3432 , and he proclaims in purity the Godhead of the Only begotten, without separating the subsistence of God the Word from the Man from Mary (perish the thought! for how should he, who had heard in so many ways, ‘I and the Father are one,’ and ‘He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father 3433 ?)’ In which Man, after the resurrection also, when the doors were shut, we know of His coming to the whole band 3434 of the Apostles, and dispersing all that was hard to believe in it by His words, ‘Handle Me and see, for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see Me have 3435 .’ And He did not say, ‘This,’ or ‘this Man which I have taken to Me,’ but ‘Me.’ Wherefore the Samosatene will gain no allowance, being refuted by so many arguments for the union of God the Word, nay by God the Word Himself, who now brings the news to all, and assures them by eating, and permitting to them that handling of Him which then took place. For certainly he who gives food to others, and they who give him, touch hands. For ‘they gave Him,’ Scripture says, ‘a piece of a broiled fish and of an honey-comb, and’ when He had ‘eaten before them, He took the remains and gave to them 3436 .’ See now, though not as Thomas was allowed, yet by another way, He afforded to them full assurance, in being touched by them; but if you would now see the scars, learn from Thomas. ‘Reach hither thy hand and thrust it into My side, and reach hither thy finger and behold My hands 3437 ;’ so says God the Word, speaking of His own 3438 side and hands, and of Himself as whole man and God together, first affording to the Saints even perception of the Word through the body 3439 , as we may consider, by entering when the doors were shut; and next standing near them in the body and affording full assurance. So much may be conveniently said for confirmation of the faithful, and correction of the unbelieving.
36. And so let Paul of Samosata also stand corrected on hearing the divine voice of Him who said ‘My body,’ not ‘Christ besides Me who am the Word,’ but ‘Him 3440 with Me, and Me with Him.’ For I the Word am the chrism, and that which has the chrism from Me is the Man 3441 ; not then without Me could He be called Christ, but being with Me and I in Him. Therefore the mention of the mission of the Word shews the uniting which took place with Jesus, born of Mary, Whose Name means Saviour, not by reason of anything else, but from the Man’s being made one with God the Word. This passage has the same meaning as ‘the Father that sent Me,’ and ‘I came not of Myself, but the Father sent Me 3442 .’ For he has given the name of mission 3443 to the uniting with the Man, with Whom the Invisible nature might be known to men, through the visible. For God changes not place, like us who are hidden in places, when in the fashion of our littleness He displays Himself in His existence in the flesh; for how should He, who fills the heaven and the earth? but on account of the presence in the flesh the just have spoken of His mission. Therefore God the Word Himself is Christ from Mary, God and Man; not some other Christ but One and the Same; He before ages from the Father, He too in the last times from the Virgin; invisible 3444 before even to the holy powers of heaven, visible now because of His being one with the Man who is visible; seen, I say, not in His invisible Godhead but in the operation 3445 of the Godhead through the human body and whole Man, which He has renewed by its appropriation to Himself. To Him be the adoration and the worship, who was before, and now is, and ever shall be, even to all ages. Amen.
Footnotes
443:33871 John 1:1, 2.
443:33881 John 5.20.
443:3389John i. 1.
443:3390John 14.6.
443:3391John 1.18.
443:3392ii. 31, n. 4.
443:3393Ps. lxxiv. 11, LXX.
444:3394Vid. Isa. 66:2, Deut. 7:8.
444:3395Ps. lxxvii. 10, LXX.; xlv. title.
444:3396Psa. 110.3, LXX.
444:3397§24.
444:3398Ps. cxix. 73; cxlviii. 5.
444:3399ἐξαιρέτου, ii. 19, n. 6.
444:3400Ps. xxii. 9.
444:3401Rev. xxii. 13-17
445:3402Cf. i. 39, n. 4.
445:3403John i. 1.
445:3404John 14.26.
445:3405John 1.14.
445:3406μοῦνος ἐ& 241·ν ἀγαπητός, line 365.
445:3407Cf. ii. 1, n. 13.
445:3408Acts x. 36.
445:34091 Cor. 1:7, 8.
445:3410Lev. ix. 7.
445:3411Cf. iii. 29, init.
445:3412John i. 14.
445:3413ii. 44, n. 1.
445:34141 Cor. i. 24.
446:34152 Cor. v. 4.
446:3416John xi. 25.
446:3417Luke i. 35.
446:3418Matt. xxviii. 19.
446:3419Cf. ii. 53, n. 4.
446:3420σαθρωθέντα, cf. ii. 66, n. 7.
446:3421Vid. 2 Esd. 7:28, 29, Acts 3:20.
446:3422Prov. ix. 1.
446:3423Heb. iii. 6.
446:3424John ii. 19.
446:3425Vid. Ps. cxxvii. 1.
446:3426Vid. Matt. 7:25, Matt. 16:18.
446:3427ἐκείνων, John x. 33
446:3428De Decr. 1; Or. i. 4, iii. 27; de Syn. 50.
446:3429Eph. iv. 20-24
446:3430Acts x. 38; ii. 22.
447:3431Acts xvii. 31.
447:3432ii. 44, n. 1.
447:3433John x. 30; xiv. 9.
447:3434ξυνωρίς.
447:3435Luke xxiv. 39.
447:3436Luke 24:42, 43, vid. Wetstein in loc.
447:3437John xx. 27.
447:3438Cf. iii. 33, n. 5.
447:3439Vid. 1 John i. 1
447:3440i.e. τὸν Χρ. vid. Matt. xxvi. 26.
447:3441Or. i. 47, n. 11.
447:3442John vi. 44, viii. 42.
447:3443§35, line 8.
447:3444De Syn. 27 (15).
447:3445ἐνεργεία, §14, n. 5.
Introduction to de Synodis.
————————————
(Written 359, Added to After 361.)
The de Synodis is the last of the great and important group of writings of the third exile. With the exception of §§30, 31, which were inserted at a later recension after the death of Constantius (cf. Hist. Ar. 32 end), the work was all written in 359, the year of the ‘dated’ creed (§4 ἀπὸ τῆς νῦν ὑπατείας) and of the fateful assemblies of Rimini and Seleucia. It was written moreover after the latter council had broken up (Oct. 1), but before the news had reached Athanasius of the Emperor’s chilling reception of the Ariminian deputies, and of the protest of the bishops against their long detention at that place. The documents connected with the last named episode reached him only in time for his postscript (§55). Still less had he heard of the melancholy surrender of the deputies of Ariminum at Niké on Oct. 10, or of the final catastrophe (cf. the allusion in the inserted §30, also Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 (2) fin.).
The first part only (see Table infra) of the letter is devoted to the history 3446 of the twin councils. Athanasius is probably mistaken in ascribing the movement for a great council to the Acacian or Homœan anxiety to eclipse and finally set aside the Council of Nicæa. The Semi-Arians, who were ill at ease and anxious to dissociate themselves from the growing danger of Anomœanism, and who at this time had the ear of Constantius, were the persons who desired a doctrinal settlement. It was the last effort of Eastern ‘Conservatism’ (yet see Gwatkin, Studies, p. 163) to formulate a position which without admitting the obnoxious ὁμοούσιον should yet condemn Arianism, conciliate the West, and restore peace to the Christian world. The failure of the attempt, gloomy and ignominious as it was, was yet the beginning of the end, the necessary precursor of the downfall of Arianism as a power within the Church. The cause of this failure is to be found in the intrigues of the Homœans, Valens in the West, Eudoxius and Acacius in the East. Nicæa was chosen by Constantius for the venue of the great Synod. But Basil, then in high favour, suggested Nicomedia, and thither the bishops were summoned. Before they could meet, the city was destroyed by an earthquake, and the venue was changed to Nicæa again. Now the Homœans saw their opportunity. Their one chance of escaping disaster was in the principle ‘divide et impera.’ The Council was divided into two: the Westerns were to meet at Ariminum, the Easterns at Seleucia in Cilicia, a place with nothing to recommend it excepting the presence of a strong military force. Hence also the conference of Homœan and Semi-Arian bishops at Sirmium, who drew up in the presence of Constantius, on Whitsun-Eve, the famous ‘dated’ or ‘third Sirmian’ Creed. Its wording (ὅμοιου κατὰ πάντα) shows the predominant influence of the Semi-Arians, in spite of the efforts of Valens to get rid of the test words, upon which the Emperor insisted. Basil moreover issued a separate memorandum to explain the sense in which he signed the creed, emphasising the absolute likeness of the Son to the Father (Bright, Introd., lxxxiii., Gwatkin, pp. 168 sq.), and accepting the Nicene doctrine in everything but the name. But for all Basil might say, the Dated Creed by the use of the word ὅμοιον had opened the door to any evasion that an Arian could desire: for ὅμοιον is a relative term admitting of degrees: what is only ‘like’ is ipso facto to some extent unlike (see below, §53). The party of Basil, then, entered upon the decisive contest already outmanœuvred, and doomed to failure. The events which followed are described by Athanasius (§§8–12). At Ariminum the Nicene, at Seleucia the Semi-Arian cause carried all before it. The Dated Creed, rejected with scorn at Ariminum, was unsuccessfully propounded in an altered form by Acacius at Seleucia. The rupture between Homœans and Semi-Arians was complete. So far only does Athanasius carry his account of the Synods: at this point he steps in with a fresh blow at the link which united Eastern Conservatism with the mixed multitude of original Arians like Euzoius and Valens, ultra Arians like Aetius and Eunomius, and Arianising opportunists like Acacius, Eudoxius, and their tribe. In the latter he recognises deadly foes who are to be confuted and exposed without any thought of compromise; in the former, brethren who misunderstand their own position, and whom explanation will surely bring round to their natural allies. In this twofold aim the de Synodis stands in the lines of the great anti-Arian discourses (supra, p. 304). But with the eye of a general Athanasius suits his attack to the new position. With the Arians, he has done with theological argument; he points indignantly to their intrigues and their brow-beating, to their lack of consistent principle, their endless synods and formularies (§§21–32); concisely he exposes the hollowness of their objection to the Nicene formula, the real logical basis upon which their position rests (§33–40, see Bright, xc.–xcii.). But to the Semi-Arians he turns with a serious and carefully stated vindication of the ὁμοούσιον. The time has come to press it earnestly upon them as the only adequate expression of what they really mean, as the only rampart which can withstand the Arian invasion. This, the last portion (§§41–54) of the letter, is the raison d’être of the whole: the account of the Synods is merely a means to this end, not his main purpose; the exposure of Arian principles and of Arian variations subserves the ultimate aim of detaching from them those of whom Athanasius was now hoping better things. It may be said that he over-rated the hopefulness of affairs as far as the immediate future was concerned. The weak acceptance by the Seleucian majority (or rather by their delegates) of the Arian creed of Niké, the triumph of Acacius, Eudoxius and their party as Constantius drifted in the last two years of his life nearer and nearer to ultra-Arianism (de Syn. 30, 31, his rupture with Basil, Theodt. ii. 27), the ascendancy of Arianism under Valens, and the eventual consolidation of a Semi-Arian sect under the name of Macedonius, all this at the first glance is a sad commentary upon the hopefulness of the de Synodis. But (1) even if this were all the truth, Athanasius was right: he was acting a noble part. In the de Synodis ‘even Athanasius rises above himself.’ Driven to bay by the pertinacity of his enemies, exasperated as we see him in the de Fuga and Arian History, ‘yet no sooner is he cheered with the news of hope than the importunate jealousies of forty years are hushed (contrast Ep. Æg. 7) in a moment, as though the Lord had spoken peace to the tumult of the grey old exile’s troubled soul’ (Gwatkin, Studies, p. 176, Arian Controv., p. 98). The charity that hopeth all things is always justified of her works. (2) Athanasius, however, was right in his estimate of the position. Not only did many of the Semi-Arians (e.g. the fifty-nine in 365) accept the ὁμοούσιον, but it was from the ranks of the Semi-Arians that the men arose who led the cause of Nicæa to its ultimate victory in the East. There accompanied Basil of Ancyra from the Seleucian Synod to Constantinople a young deacon and ascetic, who read and welcomed the appeal of Athanasius. Writing a few months later, this young theologian, Basil of Cæsarea, adopts the words of the de Synodis: ‘one God we confess, one in nature not in number, for number belongs to the category of quantity,…neither Like nor Unlike, for these terms belong to the category of quality (cf. below, §53)…He that is essentially God is Coessential with Him that is essentially God.…If I am to state my own opinion, I accept “Like in essence” with the addition of “exactly” as identical in sense with “Coessential”…but “exactly like” [without “essence”] I suspect.…Accordingly since “Coessential” is the term less open to abuse, on this ground I too adopt it’ (Epp. 8, 9, the Greek in Gwatkin, Studies, p. 242) 3447 . Basil the Great is, not indeed the only, but the conspicuous and abundant justification of the insight of Athanasius in the de Synodis.
Turning to subordinate parts of the Letter, we may note the somewhat unfair use made of the unlucky blunder of the Dated Creed, as though its compilers thereby admitted that their faith had no earlier origin. The dating of the creed was doubtless ‘an offence against good taste as well as ecclesiastical propriety’ (as sad a blunder in its way as Macaulay’s celebrated letter to his constituents from ‘Windsor Castle’), and it was only in human nature to make the most of it. More serious is the objection taken to the revolting title Αὐγούστου τοῦ αἰωνίου (which set a bad precedent for later times, Bright, lxxxiv, note 4) in contrast to the denial of the eternity of the Son. At any rate, lending itself as it did to such obvious criticisms, we are not surprised to read (§29) that the copies of the creed were hastily called in and a fresh recension substituted for it.
Lastly it must be remembered that Athanasius does not aim at giving a complete catalogue of Arian or Arianising creeds, any more than at giving a full history of the double council. Accordingly we miss (1) the confession of Arius and Euzoius, presented to Constantine in 330; (2) The confession ‘colourless in wording, but heterodox in aim,’ drawn up at Sirmium 3448 against Photinus in 347 (Hil. Fragm. 2. 21 sq. Hefele, vol. i. p. 192); (3) The formulary propounded by the Emperor at Milan in 355 (Hil. Syn. 78); (4) The confession of the council of Ancyra 3449 , 358, alluded to §41, see n. 9); (5) The Anomœan Ecthesis of Eudoxius and Aetius, Constantinople 359 (Thdt. H. E. ii. 27).
In the de Synodis we have a worthy conclusion of the anti-Arian writings which are the legacy and the record of the most stirring and eventful period of the noble life of our great bishop.
The translation of this tract by Newman has been more closely revised than those of the ‘de Decretis’ and the first three ‘Discourses,’ as it appeared somewhat less exact in places. In §§10, 11, the Athanasian version has been followed, as, inaccurate as the version certainly is in places, this seemed more suitable to an edition of Athanasius; moreover, it appears to preserve some more original readings than the Hilarian text. The notes have been curtailed to some extent, especially those containing purely historical matter.
Table of Contents.
Part I. History of the Double Council.
§1. The reason of any new council having been called.
§2. The superfluity of such assemblies.
§§3, 4. Monstrosity of a dated creed.
§5. Necessity of the Nicene Council.
§6. Its decisions make any fresh council unnecessary.
§7. The true motives of the promoters of the new councils.
§§8–11. Proceedings of the 400 at Ariminum.
§8. The ‘Dated’ Creed propounded.
§9. Rejection of the Dated Creed and deposition of Valens, &c.
§10. The Council’s Letter to the Emperor.
§11. Decree of the Council.
§12. Proceedings of the 160 at Seleucia Trachea.
Deposition of Acacius, &c., and report to the Emperor.
§13, 14. Reflections on the two councils, especially as to the divergence of the Arians from the Fathers and from each other.
Part II. History of Arian Creeds.
§15. The belief of Arius as expressed in his Thalia.
§16. Letter of Arius to Alexander.
§17. Statements of early partizans of Arius.
§§18, 19. Extracts from Asterius the sophist.
§20. The true character of this doctrine.
Arian Councils and their formularies.
§21. Jerusalem (335). Letter announcing reception of Arius to Communion.
§22. Antioch (‘Dedication’ 341). First creed.
§23. Second (Lucianic) Creed.
§24. Third creed (of Theophronius).
§25. Fourth creed (342; revision of the Nicene).
§26. (344) Fifth creed: the ‘Macrostich’ (the fourth with additions and explanations).
§27. Sirmium (against Photinus, 351, fourth of Antioch with 27 anathemas), the ‘First’ Sirmian.
§28. ‘Second Sirmian’ (357, the ‘blasphemy’).
§29. Creed propounded by the Acacians at Seleucia (359, the ‘Dated’ Creed revised in the Homœan sense).
[§30. Creed of Niké and Constantinople (359, 360, a new recension of the ‘Dated’ Creed, rejecting ‘Hypostasis’ as well as ‘Essence.’)
§31. A further Anomœan creed published under the patronage of Constantius at Antioch (361)].
§32. Reflections on the significance of these many changes.
Part III. Appeal to the Semi-Arians.
a. §§33–40. Homœans confuted.
§33. The terms objected to give offence only because misunderstood.
§34. The true Divinity of Christ implies ‘Coessential.’
§35. To reject the term implies that Christ is a creature.
§36. The objection to ‘unscriptural’ language condemns the Arians.
§37, 38. If the Son is truly ‘Like’ the Father, he is ‘Coessential.’
§39. The sense, not the occurrence of the terms in Scripture, must be attended to.
§40. Alleged obscurity of the Nicene formula.
b. §§41–54. Semi-Arians conciliated.
§41. The party of Basil of Ancyra are with us on the main question.
§42. ‘Coessential’ conveys a meaning which they would adopt.
§43, 44. Alleged rejection of the term by the 70 bishops at Antioch, subsequent to its recognition by Dionysius of Alexandria.
§45. We must not hastily assume contradictions between the Fathers.
§46, 47. Parallel of the word ‘Unoriginate.’
§48. ‘Coessential’ guards the acknowledged attributes of the Son.
§49. The Son is all that the Father is, except Father.
§50. If the Son is not Coessential, the Unity of the Godhead is lost.
§51. The Son cannot impart to man what is not His own; The oneness of Essence does not imply a common or prior essence.
§52. The Son not an independent God.
§53. ‘Coessential’ why preferable to ‘Like in Essence.’
§54. Appeal for union among those who are really agreed.
Postscript (supplementing Part I.)
§55. Reply of Constantius to the Council of Ariminum, and remonstrance of the bishops upon receipt of it.
Footnotes
448:3446He undertakes to tell ἅπερ ἑ& 240·ρακα καὶ ἔγνων ἀκριβῶς, words which have given rise to the romantic but ill-founded tradition that, ubiquitious and untiring in his exile, he was a secret spectator of the proceedings of his enemies at these distant gatherings. (So Gibbon and, as far as Seleucia is concerned, Tillemont. Montfaucon, as usual, takes the more sober and likely view.)
449:3447Observe also that the Semi-Arian document of reconciliation in 363 (Socr. iii. 25) adopts the point pressed in de Syn. 41.
449:3448This is, strictly speaking, the ‘first’ Sirmian creed, but in the Table below that of 351 is counted as such.
449:3449The ‘Semi-Arian digest of three confessions,’ number 5 in Newman’s list of Sirmian creeds, is left out of the reckoning here, as the confused statement of Soz. iv. 15, is the sole evidence for its existence. It cannot be the confession referred to in Hil. Fragm. vi. 6, 7. But see Newman, Arians, Appendix iii. note 5; Gwatkin, Studies, pp. 162, 189, sub fin.
Councils of Ariminum and Seleucia.
————————————
Part I. History of the Councils.
Reason why two Councils were called. Inconsistency and folly of calling any; and of the style of the Arian formularies; occasion of the Nicene Council; proceedings at Ariminum; Letter of the Council to Constantius; its decree. Proceedings at Seleucia; reflections on the conduct of the Arians.
1. Perhaps news has reached even yourselves concerning the Council, which is at this time the subject of general conversation; for letters both from the Emperor and the Prefects 3450 were circulated far and wide for its convocation. However, you take that interest in the events which have occurred, that I have determined upon giving you an account of what I have seen myself, and accurately ascertained, which may save you from the suspense attendant on the reports of others; and this the more, because there are parties who are in the habit of misrepresenting what has happened. At Nicæa then, which had been fixed upon, the Council has not met, but a second edict was issued, convening the Western Bishops at Ariminum in Italy, and the Eastern at Seleucia the Rugged, as it is called, in Isauria. The professed reason of such a meeting was to treat of the faith touching our Lord Jesus Christ; and those who alleged it, were Ursacius, Valens, and one Germinius 3451 from Pannonia; and from Syria, Acacius, Eudoxius, and Patrophilus 3452 of Scythopolis. These men who had always been of the Arian party, and ‘understood neither how they believe or whereof they affirm,’ and were silently deceiving first one and then another, and scattering the second sowing 3453 of their heresy, influenced some who seemed to be somewhat, and the Emperor Constantius among them, being a heretic 3454 , on some pretence about the Faith, to call a Council; under the idea that they should be able to put into the shade the Nicene Council, and prevail upon all to turn round, and to establish irreligion everywhere instead of the Truth.
2. Now here I marvel first, and think that I shall carry every sensible man whatever with me, that, whereas a General Council had been fixed, and all were looking forward to it, it was all of a sudden divided into two, so that one part met here, and the other there. However, this was surely the doing of Providence, in order in the respective Councils to exhibit the faith without guile or corruption of the one party, and to expose the dishonesty and duplicity of the other. Next, this too was on the mind of myself and my true brethren here, and made us anxious, the impropriety of this great gathering which we saw in progress; for what pressed so much, that the whole world was to be put in confusion, and those who at the time bore the profession of clergy, should run about far and near, seeking how best to learn to believe in our Lord Jesus Christ? Certainly if they were believers already, they would not have been seeking, as though they were not. And to the catechumens, this was no small scandal; but to the heathen, it was something more than common, and even furnished broad merriment 3455 , that Christians, as if waking out of sleep at this time of day, should be enquiring how they were to believe concerning Christ; while their professed clergy, though claiming deference from their flocks, as teachers, were unbelievers on their own shewing, in that they were seeking what they had not. And the party of Ursacius, who were at the bottom of all this, did not understand what wrath they were storing up (Rom. ii. 5) against themselves, as our Lord says by His saints, ‘Woe unto them, through whom My Name is blasphemed among the Gentiles’ (Isa. 52:5, Rom. 2:24); and by His own mouth in the Gospels (Matt. xviii. 6), ‘Whoso shall offend one of these little ones, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea, than,’ as Luke adds, ‘that he should offend one of these little ones’ (Luke xvii. 2).
3. What defect of teaching was there for religious truth in the Catholic Church 3456 , that they should enquire concerning faith now, and should prefix this year’s Consulate to their profession of faith? For Ursacius and Valens and Germinius and their friends have done what never took place, never was heard of among Christians. After putting into writing what it pleased them to believe, they prefix to it the Consulate, and the month and the day of the current year 3457 ; thereby to shew all sensible men, that their faith dates, not from of old, but now, from the reign of Constantius 3458 ; for whatever they write has a view to their own heresy. Moreover, though pretending to write about the Lord, they nominate another master for themselves, Constantius, who has bestowed on them this reign of irreligion 3459 ; and they who deny that the Son is everlasting, have called him Eternal Emperor; such foes of Christ are they in addition to irreligion. But perhaps the dates in the holy Prophets form their excuse for the Consulate; so bold a pretence, however, will serve but to publish more fully their ignorance of the subject. For the prophecies of the saints do indeed specify their times (for instance, Isaiah and Hosea lived in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah; Jeremiah in the days of Josiah; Ezekiel and Daniel prophesied under Cyrus and Darius; and others in other times); yet they were not laying the foundations of divine religion; it was before them, and was always, for before the foundation of the world God prepared it for us in Christ. Nor were they signifying the respective dates of their own faith; for they had been believers before these dates. But the dates did but belong to their own preaching. And this preaching spoke beforehand of the Saviour’s coming, but directly of what was to happen to Israel and the nations; and the dates denoted not the commencement of faith, as I said before, but of the prophets themselves, that is, when it was they thus prophesied. But our modern sages, not in historical narration, nor in prediction of the future, but, after writing, ‘The Catholic Faith was published,’ immediately add the Consulate and the month and the day, that, as the saints specified the dates of their histories, and of their own ministries, so these may mark the date of their own faith. And would that they had written, touching ‘their own 3460 ’ (for it does date from today); and had not made their essay as touching ‘the Catholic,’ for they did not write, ‘Thus we believe,’ but ‘the Catholic Faith was published.’
4. The boldness then of their design shews how little they understand the subject; while the novelty of their phrase matches the Arian heresy. For thus they shew, when it was they began their own faith, and that from that same time present they would have it proclaimed. And as according to the Evangelist Luke, there ‘was made a decree’ (Luke ii. 1) concerning the taxing, and this decree before was not, but began from those days in which it was made by its framer, they also in like manner, by writing, ‘The Faith is now published,’ shewed that the sentiments of their heresy are novel, and were not before. But if they add ‘of the Catholic Faith,’ they fall before they know it into the extravagance of the Phrygians, and say with them, ‘To us first was revealed,’ and ‘from us dates the Faith of Christians.’ And as those inscribe it with the names of Maximilla and Montanus 3461 , so do these with ‘Constantius, Master,’ instead of Christ. If, however, as they would have it, the faith dates from the present Consulate, what will the Fathers do, and the blessed Martyrs? nay, what will they themselves do with their own catechumens, who departed to rest before this Consulate? how will they wake them up, that so they may obliterate their former lessons, and may sow in turn the seeming discoveries which they have now put into writing 3462 ? So ignorant they are on the subject; with no knowledge but that of making excuses, and those unbecoming and unplausible, and carrying with them their own refutation.
5. As to the Nicene Council, it was not a common meeting, but convened upon a pressing necessity, and for a reasonable object. The Syrians, Cilicians, and Mesopotamians, were out of order in celebrating the Feast, and kept Easter with the Jews 3463 ; on the other hand, the Arian heresy had risen up against the Catholic Church, and found supporters in Eusebius and his fellows, who were both zealous for the heresy, and conducted the attack upon religious people. This gave occasion for an Ecumenical Council, that the feast might be everywhere celebrated on one day, and that the heresy which was springing up might be anathematized. It took place then; and the Syrians submitted, and the Fathers pronounced the Arian heresy to be the forerunner of Antichrist 3464 , and drew up a suitable formula against it. And yet in this, many as they are, they ventured on nothing like the proceedings 3465 of these three or four men 3466 . Without pre-fixing Consulate, month, and day, they wrote concerning Easter, ‘It seemed good as follows,’ for it did then seem good that there should be a general compliance; but about the faith they wrote not, ‘It seemed good,’ but, ‘Thus believes the Catholic Church;’ and thereupon they confessed how they believed, in order to shew that their own sentiments were not novel, but Apostolical; and what they wrote down was no discovery of theirs, but is the same as was taught by the Apostles. 3467
6. But the Councils which they are now setting in motion, what colourable pretext have they 3468 ? If any new heresy has risen since the Arian, let them tell us the positions which it has devised, and who are its inventors? and in their own formula, let them anathematize the heresies antecedent to this Council of theirs, among which is the Arian, as the Nicene Fathers did, that it may appear that they too have some cogent reason for saying what is novel. But if no such event has happened, and they have it not to shew, but rather they themselves are uttering heresies, as holding Arius’s irreligion, and are exposed day by day, and day by day shift their ground 3469 , what need is there of Councils, when the Nicene is sufficient, as against the Arian heresy, so against the rest, which it has condemned one and all by means of the sound faith? For even the notorious Aetius, who was surnamed godless 3470 , vaunts not of the discovering of any mania of his own, but under stress of weather has been wrecked upon Arianism, himself and the persons whom he has beguiled. Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture 3471 .
7. Having therefore no reason on their side, but being in difficulty whichever way they turn, in spite of their pretences, they have nothing left but to say; ‘Forasmuch as we contradict our predecessors, and transgress the traditions of the Fathers, therefore we have thought good that a Council should meet 3472 ; but again, whereas we fear lest, should it meet at one place, our pains will be thrown away, therefore we have thought good that it be divided into two; that so when we put forth our documents to these separate portions, we may overreach with more effect, with the threat of Constantius the patron of this irreligion, and may supersede the acts of Nicæa, under pretence of the simplicity of our own documents.’ If they have not put this into words, yet this is the meaning of their deeds and their disturbances. Certainly, many and frequent as have been their speeches and writings in various Councils, never yet have they made mention of the Arian heresy as objectionable; but, if any present happened to accuse the heresies, they always took up the defence of the Arian, which the Nicene Council had anathematized; nay, rather, they cordially welcomed the professors of Arianism. This then is in itself a strong argument, that the aim of the present Councils was not truth, but the annulling of the acts of Nicæa; but the proceedings of them and their friends in the Councils themselves, make it equally clear that this was the case:—For now we must relate everything as it occurred.
8. When all were in expectation that they were to assemble in one place, whom the Emperor’s letters convoked, and to form one Council, they were divided into two; and, while some betook themselves to Seleucia called the Rugged, the others met at Ariminum, to the number of those four hundred bishops and more, among whom were Germinius, Auxentius, Valens, Ursacius, Demophilus, and Gaius 3473 . And, while the whole assembly was discussing the matter from the Divine Scriptures, these men produced 3474 a paper, and, reading out the Consulate, they demanded that it should be preferred to every Council, and that no questions should be put to the heretics beyond it, nor inquiry made into their meaning, but that it should be sufficient by itself;—and what they had written ran as follows:—
The Catholic Faith 3475 was published in the presence of our Master the most religious and gloriously victorious Emperor, Constantius, Augustus, the eternal and august, in the Consulate of the most illustrious Flavii, Eusebius and Hypatius, in Sirmium on the 11th of the Calends of June 3476 .
We believe in one Only and True God, the Father Almighty, Creator and Framer of all things:
And in one Only-begotten Son of God, who, before all ages, and before all origin, and before all conceivable time, and before all comprehensible essence, was begotten impassibly from God: through whom the ages were disposed and all things were made; and Him begotten as the Only-begotten, Only from the Only Father, God from God, like to the Father who begat Him, according to the Scriptures; whose origin no one knoweth save the Father alone who begat Him. We know that He, the Only-begotten Son of God, at the Father’s bidding came from the heavens for the abolishment of sin, and was born of the Virgin Mary, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled the Economy according to the Father’s will, and was crucified, and died and descended into the parts beneath the earth, and regulated the things there, Whom the gate-keepers of hell saw (Job xxxviii. 17, LXX.) and shuddered; and He rose from the dead the third day, and conversed with the disciples, and fulfilled all the Economy, and when the forty days were full, ascended into the heavens, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and is coming in the last day of the resurrection in the glory of the Father, to render to every one according to his works.
And in the Holy Ghost, whom the Only-begotten of God Himself, Jesus Christ, had promised to send to the race of men, the Paraclete, as it is written, ‘I go to My Father, and I will ask the Father, and He shall send unto you another Paraclete, even the Spirit of Truth. He shall take of Mine and shall teach and bring to your remembrance all things’ (Job 14:16, 17, 26, Job 16:14).
But whereas the term ‘essence,’ has been adopted by the Fathers in simplicity, and gives offence as being misconceived by the people, and is not contained in the Scriptures, it has seemed good to remove it, that it be never in any case used of God again, because the divine Scriptures nowhere use it of Father and Son. But we say that the Son is like the Father in all things, as also the Holy Scriptures say and teach 3477 .
9. When this had been read, the dishonesty of its framers was soon apparent. For on the Bishops proposing that the Arian heresy should be anathematized together with the other heresies too, and all assenting, Ursacius and Valens and those with them refused; till in the event the Fathers condemned them, on the ground that their confession had been written, not in sincerity, but for the annulling of the acts of Nicæa, and the introduction instead of their unhappy heresy. Marvelling then at the deceitfulness of their language and their unprincipled intentions, the Bishops said: ‘Not as if in need of faith have we come hither; for we have within us faith, and that in soundness: but that we may put to shame those who gainsay the truth and attempt novelties. If then ye have drawn up this formula, as if now beginning to believe, ye are not so much as clergy, but are starting with school; but if you meet us with the same views with which we have come hither, let there be a general unanimity, and let us anathematize the heresies, and preserve the teaching of the Fathers. Thus pleas for Councils will not longer circulate about, the Bishops at Nicæa having anticipated them once for all, and done all that was needful for the Catholic Church 3478 .’ However, even then, in spite of this general agreement of the Bishops, still the above-mentioned refused. So at length the whole Council, condemning them as ignorant and deceitful men, or rather as heretics, gave their suffrages in behalf of the Nicene Council, and gave judgment all of them that it was enough; but as to the forenamed Ursacius and Valens, Germinius, Auxentius, Gaius, and Demophilus, they pronounced them to be heretics, deposed them as not really Christians, but Arians, and wrote against them in Latin what has been translated in its substance into Greek, thus:—
10. Copy of an Epistle from the Council to Constantius Augustus 3479 .
We believe that what was formerly decreed was brought about both by God’s command and by order of your piety. For we the bishops, from all the Western cities, assembled together at Ariminum, both that the Faith of the Catholic Church might be made known, and that gainsayers might be detected. For, as we have found after long deliberation, it appeared desirable to adhere to and maintain to the end, that faith which, enduring from antiquity, we have received as preached by the prophets, the Gospels, and the Apostles through our Lord Jesus Christ, Who is Keeper of your Kingdom and Patron of your power. For it appeared wrong and unlawful to make any change in what was rightly and justly defined, and what was resolved upon in common at Nicæa along with the Emperor your father, the most glorious Constantine,—the doctrine and spirit of which [definition] went abroad and was proclaimed in the hearing and understanding of all men. For it alone was the conqueror and destroyer of the heresy of Arius, by which not that only but the other heresies 3480 also were destroyed, to which of a truth it is perilous to add, and full of danger to minish aught from it, since if either be done, our enemies will be able with impunity to do whatever they will. Accordingly Ursacius and Valens, since they had been from of old abettors and sympathisers of the Arian dogma, were properly declared separate from our communion, to be admitted to which they asked to be allowed a place of repentance and pardon for the transgressions of which they were conscious, as the documents drawn up by them testify. By which means forgiveness and pardon on all charges has been obtained. Now the time of these transactions was when the council was assembled at Milan 3481 , the presbyters of the Roman Church being also present. But knowing at the same time that Constantine of worthy memory had with all accuracy and deliberation published the Faith then drawn up; when he had been baptized by the hands of men, and had departed to the place which was his due, [we think it] unseemly to make a subsequent innovation and to despise so many saints, confessors, martyrs, who compiled and drew up this decree; who moreover have continued to hold in all matters according to the ancient law of the Church; whose faith God has imparted even to the times of your reign through our Master Jesus Christ, through whom also it is yours to reign and rule over the world in our day 3482 . Once more then the pitiful men of wretched mind with lawless daring have announced themselves as the heralds of an impious opinion, and are attempting to upset every summary of truth. For when according to your command the synod met, those men laid bare the design of their own deceitfulness. For they attempted in a certain unscrupulous and disorderly manner to propose to us an innovation, having found as accomplices in this plot Germinius, Auxentius 3483 , and Gaius, the stirrers up of strife and discord, whose teaching by itself has gone beyond every pitch of blasphemy. But when they perceived that we did not share their purpose, nor agree with their evil mind, they transferred themselves to our council, alleging that it might be advisable to compile something instead. But a short time was enough to expose their plans. And lest the Churches should have a recurrence of these disturbances, and a whirl of discord and confusion throw everything into disorder, it seemed good to keep undisturbed the ancient and reasonable institutions, and that the above persons should be separated from our communion. For the information therefore of your clemency, we have instructed our legates to acquaint you with the judgment of the Council by our letter, to whom we have given this special direction, to establish the truth by resting their case upon the ancient and just decrees; and they will also assure your piety that peace would not be accomplished by the removal of those decrees as Valens and Ursacius alleged. For how is it possible for peace-breakers to bring peace? on the contrary, by their means strife and confusion will arise not only in the other cities, but also in the Church of the Romans. On this account we ask your clemency to regard our legates with favourable ears and a serene countenance and not to suffer aught to be abrogated to the dishonour of the dead; but allow us to abide by what has been defined and laid down by our forefathers, who, we venture to say, we trust in all things acted with prudence and wisdom and the Holy Spirit; because by these novelties not only are the faithful made to disbelieve, but the infidels also are embittered 3484 . We pray also that you would give orders that so many Bishops who are detained abroad, among whom are numbers who are broken with age and poverty, may be enabled to return to their own country, lest the Churches suffer, as being deprived of their Bishops. This, however, we ask with earnestness, that nothing be innovated upon existing creeds, nothing withdrawn; but that all remain incorrupt which has continued in the times of your Father’s piety and to the present time; and that you will not permit us to be harassed, and estranged from our sees; but that the Bishops may in quiet give themselves always to prayers and worship, which they do always offer for your own safety and for your reign, and for peace, which may the Divinity bestow on you for ever. But our legates are conveying the subscriptions and titles of the Bishops, and will also inform your piety from the Holy Scriptures themselves.
11. Decree of the Council 3485 .
As far as it was fitting and possible, dearest brethren, the general Council and the holy Church have had patience, and have generously displayed the Church’s forbearance towards Ursacius and Valens, Gaius, Germinius, and Auxentius; who by so often changing what they had believed, have troubled all the Churches, and still are endeavouring to foist their heretical spirit upon the faith of the orthodox. For they wish to annul the formulary passed at Nicæa, which was framed against the Arian heresy. They have presented to us besides a creed drawn up by themselves from without, and utterly alien to the most holy Church; which we could not lawfully receive. Even before this, and now, have they been pronounced heretics and gainsayers by us, whom we have not admitted to our communion, but condemned and deposed them in their presence by our voices. Now then, what seems good to you, again declare, that each one’s vote may be ratified by his subscription.
The Bishops answered with one accord, It seems good that the aforenamed heretics should be condemned, that the Catholic faith may remain in peace.
Matters at Ariminum then had this speedy issue; for there was no disagreement there, but all of them with one accord both put into writing what they decided upon, and deposed the Arians 3486 .
12. Meanwhile the transactions in Seleucia the Rugged were as follows: it was in the month called by the Romans September, by the Egyptians Thoth, and by the Macedonians Gorpiæus, and the day of the month according to the Egyptians the 16th 3487 , upon which all the members of the Council assembled together. And there were present about a hundred and sixty; and whereas there were many who were accused among them, and their accusers were crying out against them, Acacius, and Patrophilus, and Uranius of Tyre, and Eudoxius, who usurped the Church of Antioch, and Leontius 3488 , and Theodotus 3489 , and Evagrius, and Theodulus, and George who has been driven from the whole world 3490 , adopt an unprincipled course. Fearing the proofs which their accusers had to shew against them, they coalesced with the rest of the Arian party (who were mercenaries in the cause of irreligion for this purpose, and were ordained by Secundus, who had been deposed by the great Council), the Libyan Stephen, and Seras, and Polydeuces, who were under accusation upon various charges, next Pancratius, and one Ptolemy a Meletian 3491 . And they made a pretence 3492 of entering upon the question of faith, but it was clear they were doing so from fear of their accusers; and they took the part of the heresy, till at length they were divided among themselves. For, whereas those with Acacius and his fellows lay under suspicion and were very few, the others were the majority; therefore Acacius and his fellows, acting with the boldness of desperation, altogether denied the Nicene formula, and censured the Council, while the others, who were the majority, accepted the whole proceedings of the Council, except that they complained of the word ‘Coessential,’ as obscure and so open to suspicion. When then time passed, and the accusers pressed, and the accused put in pleas, and thereby were led on further by their irreligion and blasphemed the Lord, thereupon the majority of Bishops became indignant 3493 , and deposed Acacius, Patrophilus, Uranius, Eudoxius, and George the contractor 3494 , and others from Asia, Leontius, and Theodosius, Evagrius and Theodulus, and excommunicated Asterius, Eusebius, Augarus, Basilicus, Phœbus, Fidelius, Eutychius, and Magnus. And this they did on their non-appearance, when summoned to defend themselves on charges which numbers preferred against them. And they decreed that so they should remain, until they made their defence and cleared themselves of the offences imputed to them. And after despatching the sentence pronounced against them to the diocese of each, they proceeded to Constantius, the most irreligious 3495 Augustus, to report to him their proceedings, as they had been ordered. And this was the termination of the Council in Seleucia.
13. Who then but must approve of the conscientious conduct of the Bishops at Ariminum? who endured such labour of journey and perils of sea, that by a sacred and canonical resolution they might depose the Arians, and guard inviolate the definitions of the Fathers. For each of them deemed that, if they undid the acts of their predecessors, they were affording a pretext to their successors to undo what they themselves then were enacting 3496 . And who but must condemn the fickleness of Eudoxius, Acacius, and their fellows, who sacrifice the honour due to their own fathers to partizanship and patronage of the Ario-maniacs 3497 ? for what confidence can be placed in their acts, if the acts of their fathers be undone? or how call they them fathers and themselves successors, if they set about impeaching their judgment? and especially what can Acacius say of his own master, Eusebius, who not only gave his subscription in the Nicene Council, but even in a letter 3498 signified to his flock, that that was true faith, which the Council had declared? for, if he explained himself in that letter in his own way 3499 , yet he did not contradict the Council’s terms, but even charged it upon the Arians, that their position that the Son was not before His generation, was not even consistent with His being before Mary. What then will they proceed to teach the people who are under their teaching? that the Fathers erred? and how are they themselves to be trusted by those, whom they teach to disobey their Teachers? and with what eyes too will they look upon the sepulchres of the Fathers whom they now name heretics? And why do they defame the Valentinians, Phrygians, and Manichees, yet give the name of saint to those whom they themselves suspect of making parallel statements? or how can they any longer be Bishops, if they were ordained by persons whom they accuse of heresy 3500 ? But if their sentiments were wrong and their writings seduced the world, then let their memory perish altogether; when, however, you cast out their books, go and cast out their remains too from the cemeteries, so that one and all may know that they are seducers, and that you are parricides.
14. The blessed Apostle approves of the Corinthians because, he says, ‘ye remember me in all things, and keep the traditions as I delivered them to you’ (1 Cor. xi. 2); but they, as entertaining such views of their predecessors, will have the daring to say just the reverse to their flocks: ‘We praise you not for remembering your fathers, but rather we make much of you, when you hold not their traditions.’ And let them go on to accuse their own unfortunate birth, and say, ‘We are sprung not of religious men but of heretics.’ For such language, as I said before, is consistent in those who barter their Fathers’ fame and their own salvation for Arianism, and fear not the words of the divine proverb, ‘There is a generation that curseth their father’ (Prov. 30:11, Exod. 21:17), and the threat lying in the Law against such. They then, from zeal for the heresy, are of this obstinate temper; you, however, be not troubled at it, nor take their audacity for truth. For they dissent from each other, and, whereas they have revolted from their Fathers, are not of one and the same mind, but float about with various and discordant changes. And, as quarrelling with the Council of Nicæa, they have held many Councils themselves, and have published a faith in each of them, and have stood to none 3501 , nay, they will never do otherwise, for perversely seeking, they will never find that Wisdom which they hate. I have accordingly subjoined portions both of Arius’s writings and of whatever else I could collect, of their publications in different Councils; whereby you will learn to your surprise with what object they stand out against an Ecumenical Council and their own Fathers without blushing.
Footnotes
451:3450[On the Prefects, see Gibbon, ch. xvii., and Gwatkin, pp. 272–281.]
451:3451[Cf. Hist. Ar. 74, D.C.B. ii. 661.] At a later date he approached very nearly to Catholicism.
451:3452[See Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (1), and, on the Arian leaders at this time, §8 (2).]
451:3453Cf. de Decr. §2.
451:3454Infr. §12, note.
451:3455Cf. Ammianus, Hist. xxi. 16. Eusebius. Vit. Const. ii. 61.
452:3456Cf. Orat. ii. §34. And Hilary de Syn. 91; ad Const. ii. 7.
452:3457Cf. Hil. ad Const. ii. 4, 5.
452:3458Cf. Tertull. de Præscr. 37; Hil. de Trin. vi. 21; Vincent. Lir. Commonit. 24; Jerom. in Lucif. 27; August. de Bapt. contr. Don. iii. 3.
452:3459[Cf. Hist. Ar. §§52, 66, 76, 44, and Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2), c. 2, and §6 (1).]
452:3460‘He who speaketh of his own, ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων, speaketh a lie.’ Athan. contr. Apoll. i. fin…The Simonists, Dositheans, &c.…each privately (ἰδίως) and separately has brought in a private opinion.’ Hegesippus, ap Euseb. Hist. iv. 22. Sophronius at Seleucia cried out, ‘If to publish day after day our own private (ἰδίαν) will, be a profession of faith, accuracy of truth will fail us.’ Socr. ii. 40.
452:3461Vid. supr. Orat. iii. §47.
452:3462Cf. Tertull. Præscr. 29; Vincent, Comm. 24; Greg. Naz. ad Cledon Ep. 102, p. 97.
452:3463Cf. D.C.A. i. 588 sqq.
453:3464πρόδρομος, præcursor, is almost a received word for the predicted apostasy or apostate (vid. note on S. Cyril’s Cat. xv. 9), but the distinction was not always carefully drawn between the apostate and the Antichrist. [Cf. both terms applied to Constantius, Hist. Ar. passim, and by Hilary and Lucifer.]
453:3465At Seleucia Acacius said, ‘If the Nicene faith has been altered once and many times since, no reason why we should not dictate another faith now.’ Eleusius the Semi-Arian answered, ‘This Council is called, not to learn what it does not know, not to receive a faith which it does not possess, but walking in the faith of the fathers’ (meaning the Council of the Dedication. a.d. 341. vid. infr. §22), ‘it swerves not from it in life or death.’ On this Socrates (Hist. ii. 40) observes, ‘How call you those who met at Antioch Fathers, O Eleusius, you who deny their Fathers,’ &c.
453:3466ὀλίγοι τινές, says Pope Julius, supr. p. 118, cf. τινές, p. 225.
453:3467Infr. §9, note.
453:3468Ad Ep. Æg. 10.
453:3469Vid. de Decr. init. and §4. We shall have abundant instances of the Arian changes as this Treatise proceeds. Cf. Hilary contr. Constant. 23. Vincent. Comm. 20.
453:3470Vid. de Decr. 1. note.
453:3471Vid. de Decr. 32, note.
453:3472Cf. the opinion of Nectarius and Sisinnius. Socr. v. 10.
453:3473[On Demophilus and Gaius see D.C.B. i. 812, 387 (20); on Auxentius, ad Afr. note 9.]
454:3474[See Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 (2), and Introd. to this Tract.]
454:34758th Confession, or 3rd Sirmian, of 359, vid. §29, infr.
454:3476May 22, 359, Whitsun-Eve.
454:3477On the last clause, see Prolegg. ubi supra.
454:3478[Cf. Tom. ad. Ant. 5, Soz. iii. 12.]
454:3479Cf. Socr. ii. 39; Soz. iv. 10; Theod. H. E. ii. 19; Niceph. i. 40. The Latin original is preserved by Hilary, Fragm. viii., but the Greek is followed here, as stated supr. Introd.
454:3480The Hilarian Latin is much briefer here.
455:3481347.
455:3482The whole passage is either much expanded by Athan., or much condensed by Hilary.
455:3483Auxentius, omitted in Hilary’s copy. A few words are wanting in the Latin in the commencement of one of the sentences which follow. [See above, note 3.]
455:3484The Greek here mistranslates ‘credulitatem’ as though it were ‘crudelitatem.’ The original sense is the heathen are kept back from believing.
455:3485This Decree is also preserved in Hilary, who has besides preserved the ‘Catholic Definition’ of the Council, in which it professes its adherence to the Creed of Nicæa, and, in opposition to the Sirmian Confession which the Arians had proposed, acknowledges in particular both the word and the meaning of ‘substance:’ ‘substantiæ nomen et rem, a multis sanctis Scripturis insinuatam mentibus nostris, obtinere debere sui firmitatem.’ Fragm. vii. 3. [The decree is now re-translated from the Greek.]
455:3486[On the subsequent events at Ariminum, see Prolegg. ubi supra.]
455:3487i.e. Sep. 14, 359 (Egyptian leap-year.) Gorpiæus was the first month of the Syro-Macedonic year among the Greeks, dating according to the era of the Seleucidæ. The original transactions at Ariminum had at this time been finished as much as two months, and its deputies were waiting for Constantius at Constantinople.
455:3488[Of Tripolis, D.C.B. iii. 688 (3).]
455:3489[‘Theodosius’ infr.]
456:3490There is little to observe of these Acacian Bishops in addition to [the names and sees in Epiph. Hær. lxxiii. 26] except that George is the Cappadocian, the notorious intruder into the see of S. Athanasius. [For his expulsion see Fest. Ind. xxx, and on the composition of the council, see Gwatkin, note G, p. 190.]
456:3491The Meletian schismatics of Egypt had formed an alliance with the Arians from the first. Cf. Ep. Æg. 22. vid. also Hist. Arian. 31, 78. After Sardica the Arians attempted a coalition with the Donatists of Africa. Aug. contr. Cresc. iii. 38.
456:3492Acacius had written to the Semi-Arian Macedonius of Constantinople in favour of the κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον, and of the Son’s being τῆς αὐτῆς οὐσίας, and this the Council was aware of. Soz. iv. 22. Acacius made answer that no one ancient or modern was ever judged by his writings. Socr. ii. 40.
456:3493They also confirmed the Semi-Arian Confession of the Dedication, 341. of which infr. §22. After this the Acacians drew up another Confession, which Athan. has preserved, infr. §29. in which they persist in their rejection of all but Scripture terms. This the Semi-Arian majority rejected, and proceeded to depose its authors.
456:3494Pork contractor to the troops, ὑποδέκτην, Hist. Arian. 75. vid. Naz. Orat. 21. 16.
456:3495[Cf. supr. pp. 237, 267.]
456:3496Supr. §5, note 1.
456:3497On the word ᾽Αρειομανῖται, Gibbon observes, ‘The ordinary appellation with which Athanasius and his followers chose to compliment the Arians, was that of Ariomanites,’ ch. xxi. note 61. Rather, the name originally was a state title, injoined by Constantine, vid. Petav. de Trin. i. 8 fin. Naz. Orat. p. 794. note e. [Petavius states this, but without proof.] Several meanings are implied in this title; the real reason for it was the fanatical fury with which it spread and maintained itself; and hence the strange paronomasia of Constantine, ᾽Αρὲς ἄρειε, with an allusion to Hom. Il. v. 31. A second reason, or rather sense, of the appellation was that, denying the Word, they have forfeited the gift of reason, e.g. τῶν ᾽Αρειομανιτῶν τὴν ἀλογίαν. de Sent. Dion. init. 24 fin. Orat. ii. §32, iii. §63. [The note, which is here much condensed, gives profuse illustrations of this figure of speech.]
456:3498Vid. supr. pp. 152, 74.
456:3499ὡς ἠθέλησεν. vid. also de Decr. §3. ὡς ἠθέλησαν. ad Ep. Æg. 5.
456:3500§5, note 1.
457:3501Ad Ep. Æg. 6.
Part II. History of Arian Opinions.
Arius’s own sentiments; his Thalia and Letter to S. Alexander; corrections by Eusebius and others; extracts from the works of Asterius; letter of the Council of Jerusalem; first Creed of Arians at the Dedication of Antioch; second, Lucian’s on the same occasion; third, by Theophronius; fourth, sent to Constans in Gaul; fifth, the Macrostich sent into Italy; sixth, at Sirmium; seventh, at the same place; and eighth also, as given above in §8; ninth, at Seleucia; tenth, at Constantinople; eleventh, at Antioch.
15. Arius and those with him thought and professed thus: ‘God made the Son out of nothing, and called Him His Son;’ ‘The Word of God is one of the creatures;’ and ‘Once He was not;’ and ‘He is alterable; capable, when it is His Will, of altering.’ Accordingly they were expelled from the Church by the blessed Alexander. However, after his expulsion, when he was with Eusebius and his fellows, he drew up his heresy upon paper, and imitating in the Thalia no grave writer, but the Egyptian Sotades, in the dissolute tone of his metre 3502 , he writes at great length, for instance as follows:—
Blasphemies of Arius.
God Himself then, in His own nature, is ineffable by all men. Equal or like Himself He alone has none, or one in glory. And Ingenerate we call Him, because of Him who is generate by nature. We praise Him as without beginning because of Him who has a beginning. And adore Him as everlasting, because of Him who in time has come to be. The Unbegun made the Son a beginning of things originated; and advanced Him as a Son to Himself by adoption. He has nothing proper to God in proper subsistence. For He is not equal, no, nor one in essence 3503 with Him. Wise is God, for He is the teacher of Wisdom 3504 . There is full proof that God is invisible to all beings; both to things which are through the Son, and to the Son He is invisible. I will say it expressly, how by the Son is seen the Invisible; by that power by which God sees, and in His own measure, the Son endures to see the Father, as is lawful. Thus there is a Triad, not in equal glories. Not intermingling with each other 3505 are their subsistences. One more glorious than the other in their glories unto immensity. Foreign from the Son in essence is the Father, for He is without beginning. Understand that the Monad was; but the Dyad was not, before it was in existence. It follows at once that, though the Son was not, the Father was God. Hence the Son, not being (for He existed at the will of the Father), is God Only-begotten 3506 , and He is alien from either. Wisdom existed as Wisdom by the will of the Wise God. Hence He is conceived in numberless conceptions 3507 : Spirit, Power, Wisdom, God’s glory, Truth, Image, and Word. Understand that He is conceived to be Radiance and Light. One equal to the Son, the Superior is able to beget; but one more excellent, or superior, or greater, He is not able. At God’s will the Son is what and whatsoever He is. And when and since He was, from that time He has subsisted from God. He, being a strong God, praises in His degree the Superior. To speak in brief, God is ineffable to His Son. For He is to Himself what He is, that is, unspeakable. So that nothing which is called comprehensible 3508 does the Son know to speak about; for it is impossible for Him to investigate the Father, who is by Himself. For the Son does not know His own essence, For, being Son, He really existed, at the will of the Father. What argument then allows, that He who is from the Father should know His own parent by comprehension? For it is plain that for that which hath a beginning to conceive how the Unbegun is, or to grasp the idea, is not possible.
16. And what they wrote by letter to the blessed Alexander, the Bishop, runs as follows:—
To Our Blessed Pope 3509 and Bishop, Alexander, the Presbyters and Deacons send health in the Lord.
Our faith from our forefathers, which also we have learned from thee, Blessed Pope, is this:—We acknowledge One God, alone Ingenerate, alone Everlasting, alone Unbegun, alone True, alone having Immortality, alone Wise, alone Good, alone Sovereign; Judge, Governor, and Providence of all, unalterable and unchangeable, just and good, God of Law and Prophets and New Testament; who begat an Only-begotten Son before eternal times, through whom He has made both the ages and the universe; and begat Him, not in semblance, but in truth; and that He made Him subsist at His own will, unalterable and unchangeable; perfect creature of God, but not as one of the creatures; offspring, but not as one of things begotten; nor as Valentinus pronounced that the offspring of the Father was an issue 3510 ; nor as Manichæus taught that the offspring was a portion of the Father, one in essence 3511 ; or as Sabellius, dividing the Monad, speaks of a Son-and-Father 3512 ; nor as Hieracas, of one torch from another, or as a lamp divided into two 3513 ; nor that He who was before, was afterwards generated or new-created into a Son 3514 , as thou too thyself, Blessed Pope, in the midst of the Church and in session hast often condemned; but, as we say, at the will of God, created before times and before ages, and gaining life and being from the Father, who gave subsistence to His glories together with Him. For the Father did not, in giving to Him the inheritance of all things, deprive Himself of what He has ingenerately in Himself; for He is the Fountain of all things. Thus there are Three Subsistences. And God, being the cause of all things, is Unbegun and altogether Sole, but the Son being begotten apart from time by the Father, and being created and founded before ages, was not before His generation, but being begotten apart from time before all things, alone was made to subsist by the Father. For He is not eternal or co-eternal or co-unoriginate with the Father, nor has He His being together with the Father, as some speak of relations 3515 , introducing two ingenerate beginnings, but God is before all things as being Monad and Beginning of all. Wherefore also He is before the Son; as we have learned also from thy preaching in the midst of the Church. So far then as from God He has being, and glories, and life, and all things are delivered unto Him, in such sense is God His origin. For He is above Him, as being His God and before Him. But if the terms ‘from Him,’ and ‘from the womb,’ and ‘I came forth from the Father, and I am come 3516 ’ (Rom. 11:36, Ps. 10:3, John 16:28), be understood by some to mean as if a part of Him, one in essence or as an issue, then the Father is according to them compounded and divisible and alterable and material, and, as far as their belief goes, has the circumstances of a body, Who is the Incorporeal God.
This is a part of what Arius and his fellows vomited from their heretical hearts.
17. And before the Nicene Council took place, similar statements were made by Eusebius and his fellows, Narcissus, Patrophilus, Maris, Paulinus, Theodotus, and Athanasius of [A]nazarba 3517 . And Eusebius of Nicomedia wrote over and above to Arius, to this effect, ‘Since your sentiments are good, pray that all may adopt them; for it is plain to any one, that what has been made was not before its origination; but what came to be has a beginning of being.’ And Eusebius of Cæsarea in Palestine, in a letter to Euphration the Bishop 3518 , did not scruple to say plainly that Christ was not true God 3519 . And Athanasius of [A]nazarba uncloked the heresy still further, saying that the Son of God was one of the hundred sheep. For writing to Alexander the Bishop, he had the extreme audacity to say: ‘Why complain of Arius and his fellows, for saying, The Son of God is made as a creature out of nothing, and one among others? For all that are made being represented in parable by the hundred sheep, the Son is one of them. If then the hundred are not created and originate, or if there be beings beside that hundred, then may the Son be not a creature nor one among others; but if those hundred are all originate, and there is nothing besides the hundred save God alone, what absurdity do Arius and his fellows utter, when, as comprehending and reckoning Christ in the hundred, they say that He is one among others?’ And George who now is in Laodicea, and then was presbyter of Alexandria, and was staying at Antioch, wrote to Alexander the Bishop; ‘Do not complain of Arius and his fellows, for saying, “Once the Son of God was not,” for Isaiah came to be son of Amos, and, whereas Amos was before Isaiah came to be, Isaiah was not before, but came to be afterwards.’ And he wrote to the Arians, ‘Why complain of Alexander the Pope, saying, that the Son is from the Father? for you too need not fear to say that the Son was from God.’ For if the Apostle wrote (1 Cor. xi. 12), ‘All things are from God,’ and it is plain that all things are made of nothing, though the Son too is a creature and one of things made, still He may be said to be from God in that sense in which all things are said to be ‘from God.’ From him then those who hold with Arius learned to simulate the phrase ‘from God,’ and to use it indeed, but not in a good meaning. And George himself was deposed by Alexander for certain reasons, and among them for manifest irreligion; for he was himself a presbyter, as has been said before.
18. On the whole then such were their statements, as if they all were in dispute and rivalry with each other, which should make the heresy more irreligious, and display it in a more naked form. And as for their letters I had them not at hand, to dispatch them to you; else I would have sent you copies; but, if the Lord will, this too I will do, when I get possession of them. And one Asterius 3520 from Cappadocia, a many-headed Sophist, one of the fellows of Eusebius, whom they could not advance into the Clergy, as having done sacrifice in the former persecution in the time of Constantius’s grandfather, writes, with the countenance of Eusebius and his fellows, a small treatise, which was on a par with the crime of his sacrifice, yet answered their wishes; for in it, after comparing, or rather preferring, the locust and the caterpillar to Christ, and saying that Wisdom in God was other than Christ, and was the Framer as well of Christ as of the world, he went round the Churches in Syria and elsewhere, with introductions from Eusebius and his fellows, that as he once made trial of denying, so now he might boldly oppose the truth. The bold man intruded himself into forbidden places, and seating himself in the place of Clergy 3521 , he used to read publicly this treatise of his, in spite of the general indignation. The treatise is written at great length, but portions of it are as follows:—
For the Blessed Paul said not that he preached Christ, His, that is, God’s, ‘own Power’ or ‘Wisdom,’ but without the article, ‘God’s Power and God’s Wisdom’ (1 Cor. i. 24), preaching that the own power of God Himself was distinct, which was con-natural and co-existent with Him unoriginately, generative indeed of Christ, creative of the whole world; concerning which he teaches in his Epistle to the Romans, thus, ‘The invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, even His eternal power and divinity’ (Rom. i. 20). For as no one would say that the Deity there mentioned was Christ, but the Father Himself, so, as I think, His eternal power is also not the Only-begotten God (Joh. i. 18), but the Father who begat Him. And he tells us of another Power and Wisdom of God, namely, that which is manifested through Christ, and made known through the works themselves of His Ministry.
And again:—
Although His eternal Power and Wisdom, which truth argues to be Unbegun and Ingenerate, would appear certainly to be one and the same, yet many are those powers which are one by one created by Him, of which Christ is the First-born and Only-begotten. All however equally depend upon their Possessor, and all His powers are rightly called His, who created and uses them; for instance, the Prophet says that the locust, which became a divine punishment of human sin, was called by God Himself, not only a power of God, but a great power (Joel ii. 25). And the blessed David too in several of the Psalms, invites, not Angels alone, but Powers also to praise God. And while he invites them all to the hymn, he presents before us their multitude, and is not unwilling to call them ministers of God, and teaches them to do His will.
19. These bold words against the Saviour did not content him, but he went further in his blasphemies, as follows:
The Son is one among others; for He is first of things originate, and one among intellectual natures; and as in things visible the sun is one among phenomena, and it shines upon the whole world according to the command of its Maker, so the Son, being one of the intellectual natures, also enlightens and shines upon all that are in the intellectual world.
And again he says, Once He was not, writing thus:—‘And before the Son’s origination, the Father had pre-existing knowledge how to generate; since a physician too, before he cured, had the science of curing 3522 .’ And he says again: ‘The Son was created by God’s beneficent earnestness; and the Father made Him by the superabundance of His Power.’ And again: ‘If the will of God has pervaded all the works in succession, certainly the Son too, being a work, has at His will come to be and been made.’ Now though Asterius was the only person to write all this, Eusebius and his fellows felt the like in common with him.
20. These are the doctrines for which they are contending; for these they assail the ancient Council, because its members did not propound the like, but anathematized the Arian heresy instead, which they were so eager to recommend. This was why they put forward, as an advocate of their irreligion, Asterius who sacrificed, a sophist too, that he might not spare to speak against the Lord, or by a show of reason to mislead the simple. And they were ignorant, the shallow men, that they were doing harm to their own cause. For the ill savour of their advocate’s idolatrous sacrifice betrayed still more plainly that the heresy is Christ’s foe. And now again, the general agitations and troubles which they are exciting, are in consequence of their belief, that by their numerous murders and their monthly Councils, at length they will undo the sentence which has been passed against the Arian heresy 3523 . But here too they seem ignorant, or to pretend ignorance, that even before Nicea that heresy was held in detestation, when Artemas 3524 was laying its foundations, and before him Caiaphas’s assembly and that of the Pharisees his contemporaries. And at all times is this gang of Christ’s foes detestable, and will not cease to be hateful, the Lord’s Name being full of love, and the whole creation bending the knee, and confessing ‘that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father’ (Phil. ii. 11).
21. Yet so it is, they have convened successive Councils against that Ecumenical One, and are not yet tired. After the Nicene, Eusebius and his fellows had been deposed; however, in course of time they intruded themselves without shame upon the Churches, and began to plot against the Bishops who withstood them, and to substitute in the Church men of their own heresy. Thus they thought to hold Councils at their pleasure, as having those who concurred with them, whom they had ordained on purpose for this very object. Accordingly, they assemble at Jerusalem, and there they write thus:—
The Holy Council assembled in Jerusalem 3525 by the grace of God, &c….their orthodox teaching in writing 3526 , which we all confessed to be sound and ecclesiastical. And he reasonably recommended that they should be received and united to the Church of God, as you will know yourselves from the transcript of the same Epistle, which we have transmitted to your reverences. We believe that yourselves also, as if recovering the very members of your own body, will experience great joy and gladness, in acknowledging and recovering your own bowels, your own brethren and fathers; since not only the Presbyters, Arius and his fellows, are given back to you, but also the whole Christian people and the entire multitude, which on occasion of the aforesaid men have a long time been in dissension among you. Moreover it were fitting, now that you know for certain what has passed, and that the men have communicated with us and have been received by so great a Holy Council, that you should with all readiness hail this your coalition and peace with your own members, specially since the articles of the faith which they have published preserve indisputable the universally confessed apostolical tradition and teaching.
22. This was the beginning of their Councils, and in it they were speedy in divulging their views, and could not conceal them. For when they said that they had banished all jealousy, and, after the expulsion of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, recommended the reception of Arius and his friends, they shewed that their measures against Athanasius himself then, and before against all the other Bishops who withstood them, had for their object their receiving Arius and his fellows, and introducing the heresy into the Church. But although they had approved in this Council all Arius’s malignity, and had ordered to receive his party into communion, as they had set the example, yet feeling that even now they were short of their wishes, they assembled a Council at Antioch under colour of the so-called Dedication 3527 and, since they were in general and lasting odium for their heresy, they publish different letters, some of this sort, and some of that and what they wrote in one letter was as follows:—
We have not been followers of Arius,—how could Bishops, such as we, follow a Presbyter?—nor did we receive any other faith beside that which has been handed down from the beginning. But, after taking on ourselves to examine and to verify his faith, we admitted him rather than followed him; as you will understand from our present avowals.
For we have been taught from the first, to believe 3528 in one God, the God of the Universe, the Framer and Preserver of all things both intellectual and sensible.
And in One Son of God, Only-begotten, who existed before all ages, and was with the Father who had begotten Him, by whom all things were made, both visible and invisible, who in the last days according to the good pleasure of the Father came down; and has taken flesh of the Virgin, and jointly fulfilled all His Father’s will, and suffered and risen again, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and cometh again to judge quick and dead, and remaineth King and God unto all ages.
And we believe also in the Holy Ghost; and if it be necessary to add, we believe concerning the resurrection of the flesh, and the life everlasting.
23. Here follows what they published next at the same Dedication in another Epistle, being dissatisfied with the first, and devising something newer and fuller:
We believe 3529 , conformably to the evangelical and apostolical tradition, in One God, the Father Almighty, the Framer, and Maker, and Provider of the Universe, from whom are all things.
And in One Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, Only-begotten God (Joh. i. 18), by whom are all things, who was begotten before all ages from the Father, God from God, whole from whole, sole from sole 3530 , perfect from perfect, King from King, Lord from Lord, Living Word, Living Wisdom, true Light, Way, Truth, Resurrection, Shepherd, Door, both unalterable and 3531 unchangeable; exact Image 3532 of the Godhead, Essence, Will, Power and Glory of the Father; the first born of every creature, who was in the beginning with God, God the Word, as it is written in the Gospel, ‘and the Word was God’ (John i. 1); by whom all things were made, and in whom all things consist; who in the last days descended from above, and was born of a Virgin according to the Scriptures, and was made Man, Mediator 3533 between God and man, and Apostle of our faith, and Prince of life, as He says, ‘I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, but the will of Him that sent Me’ (John vi. 38); who suffered for us and rose again on the third day, and ascended into heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and is coming again with glory and power, to judge quick and dead.
And in the Holy Ghost, who is given to those who believe for comfort, and sanctification, and initiation, as also our Lord Jesus Christ enjoined His disciples, saying, ‘Go ye, teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost’ (Matt. xxviii. 19); namely of a Father who is truly Father, and a Son who is truly Son, and of the Holy Ghost who is truly Holy Ghost, the names not being given without meaning or effect, but denoting accurately the peculiar subsistence, rank, and glory of each that is named, so that they are three in subsistence, and in agreement one 3534 .
Holding then this faith, and holding it in the presence of God and Christ, from beginning to end, we anathematize every heretical heterodoxy 3535 . And if any teaches, beside the sound and right faith of the Scriptures, that time, or season, or age 3536 , either is or has been before the generation of the Son, be he anathema. Or if any one says, that the Son is a creature as one of the creatures, or an offspring as one of the offsprings, or a work as one of the works, and not the aforesaid articles one after another, as the divine Scriptures have delivered, or if he teaches or preaches beside what we received, be he anathema. For all that has been delivered in the divine Scriptures, whether by Prophets or Apostles, do we truly and reverentially both believe and follow 3537 .
24. And one Theophronius 3538 , Bishop of Tyana, put forth before them all the following statement of his personal faith. And they subscribed it, accepting the faith of this man:—
God 3539 knows, whom I call as a witness upon my soul, that so I believe:—in God the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of the Universe, from whom are all things.
And in His Only-begotten Son, Word, Power, and Wisdom, our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things; who has been begotten from the Father before the ages, perfect God from perfect God 3540 , and was with God in subsistence, and in the last days descended, and was born of the Virgin according to the Scriptures, and was made man, and suffered, and rose again from the dead, and ascended into the heavens, and sat down on the right hand of His Father, and cometh again with glory and power to judge quick and dead, and remaineth for ever:
And in the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth (Joh. xv. 26), which also God promised by His Prophet to pour out (Joel ii. 28) upon His servants, and the Lord promised to send to His disciples: which also He sent, as the Acts of the Apostles witness.
But if any one teaches, or holds in his mind, aught beside this faith, be he anathema; or with Marcellus of Ancyra 3541 , or Sabellius, or Paul of Samosata, be he anathema, both himself and those who communicate with him.
25. Ninety Bishops met at the Dedication under the Consulate of Marcellinus and Probinus, in the 14th of the Indiction 3542 , Constantius the most irreligious being present. Having thus conducted matters at Antioch at the Dedication, thinking that their composition was deficient still, and fluctuating moreover in their own opinions, again they draw up afresh another formulary, after a few months, professedly concerning the faith, and despatch Narcissus, Maris, Theodorus, and Mark into Gaul 3543 . And they, as being sent from the Council, deliver the following document to Constans Augustus of blessed memory, and to all who were there:
We believe 3544 in One God, the Father Almighty, Creator and Maker of all things; from whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named. (Eph. iii. 15.)
And in His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, who before all ages was begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, by whom all things were made in the heavens and on the earth, visible and invisible, being Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and Life, and True Light; who in the last days was made man for us, and was born of the Holy Virgin; who was crucified, and dead, and buried, and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father; and is coming at the consummation of the age, to judge quick and dead, and to render to every one according to his works; whose Kingdom endures indissolubly into the infinite ages 3545 ; for He shall be seated on the right hand of the Father, not only in this age but in that which is to come.
And in the Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete; which, having promised to the Apostles, He sent forth after His ascension into heaven, to teach them and to remind of all things; through whom also shall be sanctified the souls of those who sincerely believe in Him.
But those who say, that the Son was from nothing, or from other subsistence and not from God, and, there was time when He was not, the Catholic Church regards as aliens 3546 .
26. As if dissatisfied with this, they hold their meeting again after three years, and dispatch Eudoxius, Martyrius, and Macedonius of Cilicia 3547 , and some others with them, to the parts of Italy, to carry with them a faith written at great length, with numerous additions over and above those which have gone before. They went abroad with these, as if they had devised something new.
We believe 3548 in one God the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of all things, from whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named.
And in His Only-begotten Son our Lord Jesus Christ, who before all ages was begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, by whom all things were made, in heaven and on the earth, visible and invisible, being Word and Wisdom and Power and Life and True Light, who in the last days was made man for us, and was born of the Holy Virgin, crucified and dead and buried, and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and is coming at the consummation of the age to judge quick and dead, and to render to every one according to his works, whose Kingdom endures unceasingly unto the infinite ages; for He sitteth on the right hand of the Father not only in this age, but also in that which is to come.
And we believe in the Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete, which, having promised to the Apostles, He sent forth after the ascension into heaven, to teach them and to remind of all things: through whom also shall be sanctified the souls of those who sincerely believe in Him.
But those who say, (1) that the Son was from nothing, or from other subsistence and not from God; (2) and that there was a time or age when He was not, the Catholic and Holy Church regards as aliens. Likewise those who say, (3) that there are three Gods: (4) or that Christ is not God; (5) or that before the ages He was neither Christ nor Son of God; (6) or that Father and Son, or Holy Ghost, are the same; (7) or that the Son is Ingenerate; or that the Father begat the Son, not by choice or will; the Holy and Catholic Church anathematizes.
(1.) For neither is safe to say that the Son is from nothing, (since this is no where spoken of Him in divinely inspired Scripture,) nor again of any other subsistence before existing beside the Father, but from God alone do we define Him genuinely to be generated. For the divine Word teaches that the Ingenerate and Unbegun, the Father of Christ, is One 3549 .
(2.) Nor may we, adopting the hazardous position, ‘There was once when He was not,’ from unscriptural sources, imagine any interval of time before Him, but only the God who has generated Him apart from time; for through Him both times and ages came to be. Yet we must not consider the Son to be co-unbegun and co-ingenerate with the Father; for no one can be properly called Father or Son of one who is co-unbegun and co-ingenerate with Him 3550 . But we acknowledge 3551 that the Father who alone is Unbegun and Ingenerate, hath generated inconceivably and incomprehensibly to all: and that the Son hath been generated before ages, and in no wise to be ingenerate Himself like the Father, but to have the Father who generated Him as His beginning; for ‘the Head of Christ is God.’ (1 Cor. xi. 3.)
(3.) Nor again, in confessing three realities and three Persons, of the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost according to the Scriptures, do we therefore make Gods three; since we acknowledge the Self-complete and Ingenerate and Unbegun and Invisible God to be one only 3552 , the God and Father (Joh. xx. 17) of the Only-begotten, who alone hath being from Himself, and alone vouchsafes this to all others bountifully.
(4.) Nor again, in saying that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is one only God, the only Ingenerate, do we therefore deny that Christ also is God before ages: as the disciples of Paul of Samosata, who say that after the incarnation He was by advance 3553 made God, from being made by nature a mere man. For we acknowledge, that though He be subordinate to His Father and God, yet, being before ages begotten of God, He is God perfect according to nature and true 3554 , and not first man and then God, but first God and then becoming man for us, and never having been deprived of being.
(5.) We abhor besides, and anathematize those who make a pretence of saying that He is but the mere word of God and unexisting, having His being in another,—now as if pronounced, as some speak, now as mental 3555 ,—holding that He was not Christ or Son of God or mediator or image of God before ages; but that He first became Christ and Son of God, when He took our flesh from the Virgin, not quite four hundred years since. For they will have it that then Christ began His Kingdom, and that it will have an end after the consummation of all and the judgment 3556 . Such are the disciples of Marcellus and Scotinus 3557 of Galatian Ancyra, who, equally with Jews, negative Christ’s existence before ages, and His Godhead, and unending Kingdom, upon pretence of supporting the divine Monarchy. We, on the contrary, regard Him not as simply God’s pronounced word or mental, but as Living God and Word, existing in Himself, and Son of God and Christ; being and abiding with His Father before ages, and that not in foreknowledge only 3558 , and ministering to Him for the whole framing whether of things visible or invisible. For He it is, to whom the Father said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness 3559 ’ (Gen. i. 26), who also was seen in His own Person 3560 by the patriarchs, gave the law, spoke by the prophets, and at last, became man, and manifested His own Father to all men, and reigns to never-ending ages. For Christ has taken no recent dignity, but we have believed Him to be perfect from the first, and like in all things to the Father 3561 .
(6.) And those who say that the Father and Son and Holy Ghost are the same, and irreligiously take the Three Names of one and the same Reality and Person, we justly proscribe from the Church, because they suppose the illimitable and impassible Father to be limitable withal and passible through His becoming man: for such are they whom Romans call Patripassians, and we Sabellians 3562 . For we acknowledge that the Father who sent, remained in the peculiar state of His unchangeable Godhead, and that Christ who was sent fulfilled the economy of the Incarnation.
(7.) And at the same time those who irreverently say that the Son has been generated not by choice or will, thus encompassing God with a necessity which excludes choice and purpose, so that He begat the Son unwillingly, we account as most irreligious and alien to the Church; in that they have dared to define such things concerning God, beside the common notions concerning Him, nay, beside the purport of divinely inspired Scripture. For we, knowing that God is absolute and sovereign over Himself, have a religious judgment that He generated the Son voluntarily and freely; yet, as we have a reverent belief in the Son’s words concerning Himself (Prov. viii. 22), ‘The Lord created me a beginning of His ways for His works,’ we do not understand Him to have been originated like the creatures or works which through Him came to be. For it is irreligious and alien to the ecclesiastical faith, to compare the Creator with handiworks created by Him, and to think that He has the same manner of origination with the rest. For divine Scripture teaches us really and truly that the Only-begotten Son was generated sole and solely 3563 . Yet 3564 , in saying that the Son is in Himself, and both lives and exists like the Father, we do not on that account separate Him from the Father, imagining place and interval between their union in the way of bodies. For we believe that they are united with each other without mediation or distance 3565 , and that they exist inseparable; all the Father embosoming the Son, and all the Son hanging and adhering to the Father, and alone resting on the Father’s breast continually 3566 . Believing then in the All-perfect Triad, the most Holy, that is, in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and calling the Father God, and the Son God, yet we confess in them, not two Gods, but one dignity of Godhead, and one exact harmony of dominion, the Father alone being Head over the whole universe wholly, and over the Son Himself, and the Son subordinated to the Father; but, excepting Him, ruling over all things after Him which through Himself have come to be, and granting the grace of the Holy Ghost unsparingly to the saints at the Father’s will. For that such is the account of the Divine Monarchy towards Christ, the sacred oracles have delivered to us.
Thus much, in addition to the faith before published in epitome, we have been compelled to draw forth at length, not in any officious display, but to clear away all unjust suspicion concerning our opinions, among those who are ignorant of our affairs: and that all in the West may know, both the audacity of the slanders of the heterodox, and as to the Orientals, their ecclesiastical mind in the Lord, to which the divinely inspired Scriptures bear witness without violence, where men are not perverse.
27. However they did not stand even to this; for again at Sirmium 3567 they met together 3568 against Photinus 3569 and there composed a faith again, not drawn out into such length, not so full in words; but subtracting the greater part and adding in its place, as if they had listened to the suggestions of others, they wrote as follows:—
We believe 3570 in One God, the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of all things, ‘from whom all fatherhood in heaven and earth is named 3571 ’
And in His Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus the Christ, who before all the ages was begotten from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, by whom all things were made, in heaven and on the earth, visible and invisible, being Word and Wisdom and True Light and Life, who in the last of days was made man for us, and was born of the Holy Virgin, and crucified and dead and buried, and rose again from the dead the third day, and was taken up into heaven, and sat down on the right hand of the Father, and is coming at the consummation of the age, to judge quick and dead, and to render to every one according to his works; whose Kingdom being unceasing endures unto the infinite ages; for He shall sit on the right hand of the Father, not only in this age, but also in that which is to come.
And in the Holy Ghost, that is, the Paraclete; which, having promised to the Apostles to send forth after His ascension into heaven, to teach and to remind them of all things, He did send; through whom also are sanctified the souls of those who sincerely believe in Him.
(1.) But those who say that the Son was from nothing or from other subsistence 3572 and not from God, and that there was time or age when He was not, the Holy and Catholic Church regards as aliens.
(2.) Again we say, Whosoever says that the Father and the Son are two Gods, be he anathema 3573 .
(3.) And whosoever, saying that Christ is God, before ages Son of God, does not confess that He has subserved the Father for the framing of the universe, be he anathema 3574 .
(4.) Whosoever presumes to say that the Ingenerate, or a part of Him, was born of Mary, be he anathema.
(5.) Whosoever says that according to foreknowledge 3575 the Son is before Mary and not that, generated from the Father before ages, He was with God, and that through Him all things were originated, be he anathema.
(6.) Whosoever shall pretend that the essence of God is dilated or contracted 3576 , be he anathema.
(7.) Whosoever shall say that the essence of God being dilated made the Son, or shall name the dilation of His essence Son, be he anathema.
(8.) Whosoever calls the Son of God the mental or pronounced Word 3577 , be he anathema.
(9.) Whosoever says that the Son from Mary is man only, be he anathema.
(10.) Whosoever, speaking of Him who is from Mary God and man, thereby means God the Ingenerate 3578 , be he anathema.
(11.) Whosoever shall explain ‘I God the First and I the Last, and besides Me there is no God,’ (Is. xliv. 6), which is said for the denial of idols and of gods that are not, to the denial of the Only-begotten, before ages God, as Jews do, be he anathema.
(12.) Whosoever hearing ‘The Word was made flesh,’ (John i. 14), shall consider that the Word has changed into flesh, or shall say that He has undergone alteration by taking flesh, be he anathema 3579 .
(13.) Whosoever hearing the Only-begotten Son of God to have been crucified, shall say that His Godhead has undergone corruption, or passion. or alteration, or diminution, or destruction, be he anathema.
(14.) Whosoever shall say that ‘Let Us make man’ (Gen. i. 26), was not said by the Father to the Son, but by God to Himself, be he anathema 3580 .
(15.) Whosoever shall say that Abraham saw, not the Son, but the Ingenerate God or part of Him, be he anathema 3581 .
(16.) Whosoever shall say that with Jacob, not the Son as man, but the Ingenerate God or part of Him, has wrestled, be he anathema 3582 .
(17.) Whosoever shall explain, ‘The Lord rained fire from the Lord’ (Gen. xix. 24), not of the Father and the Son, and says that He rained from Himself, be he anathema. For the Son, being Lord, rained from the Father Who is Lord.
(18.) Whosoever, hearing that the Father is Lord and the Son Lord and the Father and Son Lord, for there is Lord from Lord, says there are two Gods, be he anathema. For we do not place the Son in the Father’s Order, but as subordinate to the Father; for He did not descend upon Sodom without the Father’s will, nor did He rain from Himself, but from the Lord, that is, the Father authorising it. Nor is He of Himself set down on the right hand, but He hears the Father saying, ‘Sit Thou on My right hand’ (Ps. cx. 1).
(19.) Whosoever says that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost are one Person, be he anathema.
(20.) Whosoever, speaking of the Holy Ghost as Paraclete, shall mean the Ingenerate God, be he anathema 3583 .
(21.) Whosoever shall deny, what the Lord taught us, that the Paraclete is other than the Son, for He hath said, ‘And another Paraclete shall the Father send to you, whom I will ask,’ (John xiv. 16) be he anathema.
(22.) Whosoever shall say that the Holy Ghost is part of the Father or of the Son 3584 be he anathema.
(23.) Whosoever shall say that the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost are three Gods, be he anathema.
(24.) Whosoever shall say that the Son of God at the will of God has come to be, as one of the works, be he anathema.
(25.) Whosoever shall say that the Son has been generated, the Father not wishing it 3585 , be he anathema. For not by compulsion, led by physical necessity, did the Father, as He wished not, generate the Son, but He at once willed, and, after generating Him from Himself apart from time and passion, manifested Him.
(26.) Whosoever shall say that the Son is without beginning and ingenerate, as if speaking of two unbegun and two ingenerate, and making two Gods, be he anathema. For the Son is the Head, namely the beginning of all: and God is the Head, namely the beginning of Christ; for thus to one unbegun beginning of the universe do we religiously refer all things through the Son.
(27.) And in accurate delineation of the idea of Christianity we say this again; Whosoever shall not say that Christ is God, Son of God, as being before ages, and having subserved the Father in the framing of the Universe, but that from the time that He was born of Mary, from thence He was called Christ and Son, and took an origin of being God, be he anathema.
28. Casting aside the whole of this, as if they had discovered something better, they propound another faith, and write at Sirmium in Latin what is here translated into Greek 3586 .
Whereas 3587 it seemed good that there should be some discussion concerning faith, all points were carefully investigated and discussed at Sirmium in the presence of Valens, and Ursacius, and Germinius, and the rest.
It is held for certain that there is one God, the Father Almighty, as also is preached in all the world.
And His One Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, generated from Him before the ages; and that we may not speak of two Gods, since the Lord Himself has said, ‘I go to My Father and your Father, and My God and your God’ (John xx. 17). On this account He is God of all, as also the Apostle taught: ‘Is He God of the Jews only, is He not also of the Gentiles? yea of the Gentiles also: since there is one God who shall justify the circumcision from faith, and the uncircumcision through faith’ (Rom. 3:29, 30); and every thing else agrees, and has no ambiguity.
But since many persons are disturbed by questions concerning what is called in Latin ‘Substantia,’ but in Greek ‘Usia,’ that is, to make it understood more exactly, as to ‘Coessential,’ or what is called, ‘Like-in-Essence,’ there ought to be no mention of any of these at all, nor exposition of them in the Church, for this reason and for this consideration, that in divine Scripture nothing is written about them, and that they are above men’s knowledge and above men’s understanding; and because no one can declare the Son’s generation, as it is written, ‘Who shall declare His generation’ (Is. liii. 8)? for it is plain that the Father only knows how He generated the Son, and again the Son how He has been generated by the Father. And to none can it be a question that the Father is greater: for no one can doubt that the Father is greater in honour and dignity and Godhead, and in the very name of Father, the Son Himself testifying, ‘The Father that sent Me is greater than I’ (John 10:29, John 14:28). And no one is ignorant, that it is Catholic doctrine, that there are two Persons of Father and Son, and that the Father is greater, and the Son subordinated to the Father together with all things which the Father has subordinated to Him, and that the Father has no beginning, and is invisible, and immortal, and impassible; but that the Son has been generated from the Father, God from God, Light from Light, and that His origin, as aforesaid, no one knows, but the Father only. And that the Son Himself and our Lord and God, took flesh, that is, a body, that is, man, from Mary the Virgin, as the Angel preached beforehand; and as all the Scriptures teach, and especially the Apostle himself, the doctor of the Gentiles, Christ took man of Mary the Virgin, through which He has suffered. And the whole faith is summed up 3588 , and secured in this, that a Trinity should ever be preserved, as we read in the Gospel, ‘Go ye and baptize all the nations in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost’ (Matt. xxviii. 19). And entire and perfect is the number of the Trinity; but the Paraclete, the Holy Ghost, sent forth through the Son, came according to the promise, that He might teach and sanctify the Apostles and all believers 3589 .
29. After drawing up this, and then becoming dissatisfied, they composed the faith which to their shame they paraded with ‘the Consulate.’ And, as is their wont, condemning this also, they caused Martinian the notary to seize it from the parties who had the copies of it 3590 . And having got the Emperor Constantius to put forth an edict against it, they form another dogma afresh, and with the addition of certain expressions, according to their wont, they write thus in Isauria.
We decline 3591 not to bring forward the authentic faith published at the Dedication at Antioch 3592 ; though certainly our fathers at the time met together for a particular subject under investigation. But since ‘Coessential’ and ‘Like-in-essence,’ have troubled many persons in times past and up to this day, and since moreover some are said recently to have devised the Son’s ‘Unlikeness’ to the Father, on their account we reject ‘Coessential’ and ‘Like-in-essence,’ as alien to the Scriptures, but ‘Unlike’ we anathematize, and account all who profess it as aliens from the Church. And we distinctly confess the ‘Likeness’ of the Son to the Father, according to the Apostle, who says of the Son, ‘Who is the Image of the Invisible God’ (Col. i. 15).
And we confess and believe in one God, the Father Almighty, the Maker of heaven and earth, of all things visible and invisible.
And we believe also in our Lord Jesus Christ, His Son, generated from Him impassibly before all the ages, God the Word, God from God, Only-begotten, light, life, truth, wisdom, power, through whom all things were made, in the heavens and on the earth, whether visible or invisible. He, as we believe, at the end of the world, for the abolishment of sin, took flesh of the Holy Virgin, and was made man, and suffered for our sins, and rose again, and was taken up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, and is coming again in glory, to judge quick and dead.
We believe also in the Holy Ghost, which our Saviour and Lord named Paraclete, having promised to send Him to the disciples after His own departure, as He did send; through whom He sanctifieth those in the Church who believe, and are baptized in the Name of Father and Son and Holy Ghost.
But those who preach aught beside this faith the Catholic Church regards as aliens. And that to this faith that is equivalent which was published lately at Sirmium, under sanction of his religiousness the Emperor, is plain to all who read it.
30. Having written thus in Isauria, they went up to Constantinople 3593 , and there, as if dissatisfied, they changed it, as is their wont, and with some small additions against using even ‘Subsistence’ of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, they transmitted it to those at Ariminum, and compelled even those in the said parts to subscribe, and those who contradicted them they got banished by Constantius. And it runs thus:—
We believe 3594 in One God, Father Almighty, from whom are all things;
And in the Only-begotten Son of God, begotten from God before all ages and before every beginning, by whom all things were made, visible and invisible, and begotten as only-begotten, only from the Father only 3595 , God from God, like to the Father that begat Him according to the Scriptures; whose origin no one knows, except the Father alone who begat Him. He as we acknowledge, the Only-begotten Son of God, the Father sending Him, came hither from the heavens, as it is written, for the undoing of sin and death, and was born of the Holy Ghost, of Mary the Virgin according to the flesh, as it is written, and convened with the disciples, and having fulfilled the whole Economy according to the Father’s will, was crucified and dead and buried and descended to the parts below the earth; at whom hades itself shuddered: who also rose from the dead on the third day, and abode with the disciples, and, forty days being fulfilled, was taken up into the heavens, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father, to come in the last day of the resurrection in the Father’s glory, that He may render to every man according to his works.
And in the Holy Ghost, whom the Only-begotten Son of God Himself, Christ, our Lord and God, promised to send to the race of man, as Paraclete, as it is written, ‘the Spirit of truth’ (Joh. xvi. 13), which He sent unto them when He had ascended into the heavens.
But the name of ‘Essence,’ which was set down by the Fathers in simplicity, and, being unknown by the people, caused offence, because the Scriptures contain it not, it has seemed good to abolish, and for the future to make no mention of it at all; since the divine Scriptures have made no mention of the Essence of Father and Son. For neither ought Subsistence to be named concerning Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. But, we say that the Son is Like the Father, as the divine Scriptures say and teach; and all the heresies, both those which have been afore condemned already, and whatever are of modern date, being contrary to this published statement, be they anathema 3596 .
31. However, they did not stand even to this: for coming down from Constantinople to Antioch, they were dissatisfied that they had written at all that the Son was ‘Like the Father, as the Scriptures say;’ and putting their ideas upon paper 3597 , they began reverting to their first doctrines, and said that ‘the Son is altogether unlike the Father,’ and that the ‘Son is in no manner like the Father,’ and so much did they change, as to admit those who spoke the Arian doctrine nakedly and to deliver to them the Churches with licence to bring forward the words of blasphemy with impunity 3598 . Because then of the extreme shamelessness of their blasphemy they were called by all Anomœans, having also the name of Exucontian 3599 , and the heretical Constantius for the patron of their irreligion, who persisting up to the end in irreligion, and on the point of death, thought good to be baptized 3600 ; not however by religious men, but by Euzoius 3601 , who for his Arianism had been deposed, not once, but often, both when he was a deacon, and when he was in the see of Antioch.
32. The forementioned parties then had proceeded thus far, when they were stopped and deposed. But well I know, not even under these circumstances will they stop, as many as have now dissembled, 3602 but they will always be making parties against the truth, until they return to themselves and say, ‘Let us rise and go to our fathers, and we will say unto them, We anathematize the Arian heresy, and we acknowledge the Nicene Council;’ for against this is their quarrel. Who then, with ever so little understanding, will bear them any longer? who, on hearing in every Council some things taken away and others added, but perceives that their mind is shifty and treacherous against Christ? who on seeing them embodying to so great a length both their professions of faith, and their own exculpation, but sees that they are giving sentence against themselves, and studiously writing much which may be likely by their officious display and abundance of words to seduce the simple and hide what they are in point of heresy? But as the heathen, as the Lord said, using vain words in their prayers (Mat. vi. 7), are nothing profited; so they too, after all this outpouring, were not able to quench the judgment pronounced against the Arian heresy, but were convicted and deposed instead; and rightly; for which of their formularies is to be accepted by the hearer? or with what confidence shall they be catechists to those who come to them? for if they all have one and the same meaning, what is the need of many? But if need has arisen of so many, it follows that each by itself is deficient, not complete; and they establish this point better than we can, by their innovating on them all and remaking them. And the number of their Councils, and the difference of their statements is a proof that those who were present at them, while at variance with the Nicene, are yet too feeble to harm the Truth.
Footnotes
457:3502Cf. Orat. i. §§2–5; de Sent. D. 6; Socr. i. 9. The Arian Philostorgius tells us that ‘Arius wrote songs for the sea and for the mill and for the road, and then set them to suitable music,’ Hist. ii. 2. It is remarkable that Athanasius should say the Egyptian Sotades, and again in Sent. D. 6. There were two Poets of the name; one a writer of the Middle Comedy, Athen. Deipn. vii. 11; but the other, who is here spoken of, was a native of Maronea in Crete, according to Suidas (in voc.), under the successors of Alexander, Athen. xiv. 4. He wrote in Ionic metre, which was of infamous name from the subjects to which he and others applied it. vid. Suid. ibid. Horace’s Ode. ‘Miserarum est neque amori, &c.’ is a specimen of this metre, and some have called it Sotadic; but Bentley shews in loc. that Sotades wrote in the Ionic a majore. Athenæus implies that all Ionic metres were called Sotadic, or that Sotades wrote in various Ionic metres. The Church adopted the Doric music, and forbade the Ionic and Lydian. The name ‘Thalia’ commonly belonged to convivial songs; Martial contrasts the ‘lasciva Thalia’ with ‘carmina sanctiora,’ Epigr. vii. 17. vid. Thaliarchus, ‘the master of the feast,’ Horat. Od. i. 9. [The metre of the fragments of the ‘Thalia’ is obscure, there are no traces of the Ionic foot, but very distinct anapæstic cadences. In fact the lines resemble ill-constructed or very corrupt anapæstic tetrameters catalectic, as in a comic Parabasis. For Sotades, the Greek text here reads corruptly Sosates.]
457:3503This passage ought to have been added supr. p. 163, note 8, as containing a more direct denial of the ὁμοούσιον
457:3504That is, Wisdom, or the Son, is but the disciple of Him who is Wise, and not the attribute by which He is Wise, which is what the Sabellians said, vid. Orat. iv. §2, and what Arius imputed to the Church.
457:3505ἀνεπιμικτοί, that is, he denied the περιχώρησις, vid. supr. Orat. iii. 3, &c.
457:3506[John i. 18, best mss., and cf. Hort, Two Diss. p. 26.
458:3507ἐπινοίαις, that is, our Lord’s titles are but names, or figures, not properly belonging to Him, but [cf. Bigg. B. L. p. 168 sq.]
458:3508κατὰ κατάληψιν, that is, there is nothing comprehensible in the Father for the Son to know and declare. On the other hand the doctrine of the Anomœans was, that all men could know Almighty God perfectly.
458:3509[The ordinary title of eminent bishops, especially of the bishop of Alexandria.]
458:3510What the Valentinian προβολὴ was is described in Epiph. Hær. 31, 13 [but see D.C.B. iv. 1086 sqq.] Origen protests against the notion of προβολή, Periarch. iv. p. 190, and Athanasius Expos. §1. The Arian Asterius too considers προβολὴ to introduce the notion of τεκνογονία, Euseb. contr. Marc. i. 4. p. 20. vid. also Epiph. Hær. 72. 7. Yet Eusebius uses the word προβάλλεσθαι. Eccl. Theol. i. 8. On the other hand Tertullian uses it with a protest against the Valentinian sense. Justin has προβληθὲν γέννημα, Tryph. 62. And Nazianzen calls the Almighty Father προβολεὺς of the Holy Spirit. Orat. 29. 2. Arius introduces the word here as an argumentum ad invidiam. Hil. de Trin. vi. 9.
458:3511The Manichees adopting a material notion of the divine substance, considered that it was divisible, and that a portion of it was absorbed by the power of darkness.
458:3512υἱοπατόρα. The term is ascribed to Sabellius, Ammon. in Caten. Joan. i. 1. p. 14: to Sabellius and [invidiously to] Marcellus, Euseb. Eccl. Theol. ii. 5: Cf., as to Marcellus, Cyr. Hier. Catech. xv. 9. also iv. 8. xi. 16; Epiph. Hær. 73. 11 fin.: to Sabellians, Athan. Expos. Fid. 2. and 7, and Greg. Nyssen. contr. Eun. xii. p. 733: to certain heretics, Cyril. Alex. in Joann. p. 243: to Praxeas and Montanus, Mar. Merc. p. 128: to Sabellius, Cæsar. Dial. i. p. 550: to Noetus, Damasc. Hær. 57.
458:3513[On Hieracas, see D.C.B. iii. 24; also Epiph. Hær. 67; Hil. Trin. vi. 12.]
458:3514Bull considers that the doctrine of such Fathers is here spoken of as held that our Lord’s συγκατάβασις to create the world was a γέννησις, and certainly such language as that of Hippol. contr. Noet. §15. favours the supposition. But one class of [Monarchians] may more probably be intended, who held that the Word became the Son upon His incarnation, such as Marcellus, vid. Euseb. Eccles. Theol. i. 1. contr. Marc. ii. 3. vid. also Eccles. Theol. ii. 9. p. 114 b. μηδ᾽ ἄλλοτε ἄλλην κ.τ.λ. Also the Macrostich says, ‘We anathematize those who call Him the mere Word of God, not allowing Him to be Christ and Son of God before all ages, but from the time He took on Him our flesh: such are the followers of Marcellus and Photinus, &c.’ infr. §26. Again, Athanasius, Orat. iv. 15, says that, of those who divide the Word from the Son, some called our Lord’s manhood the Son, some the two Natures together, and some said ‘that the Word Himself became the Son when He was made man.’ It makes it more likely that Marcellus is meant, that Asterius seems to have written against him before the Nicene Council, and that Arius in other of his writings borrowed from Asterius. vid. de Decret. §8.
458:3515Eusebius’s letter to Euphration, which is mentioned just after, expresses this more distinctly—‘If they coexist, how shall the Father be Father and the Son Son? or how the One first, the Other second? and the One ingenerate and the other generate?’ Acta Conc. 7. p. 301. The phrase τὰ πρός τι Bull well explains to refer to the Catholic truth that the Father or Son being named; the Other is therein implied without naming. Defens. F. N. iii. 9. §4. Hence Arius, in his Letter to Eusebius, complains that Alexander says, ἀεὶ ὁ θεός, ἀεὶ ὁ υἱ& 231·ς ἅμα πατήρ, ἅμα υἱ& 231·ς. Theod. H. E. i. 4.
458:3516ἥκω, and so Chrys. Hom. 3. Hebr. init. Epiph. Hær. 73. 31, and 36.
458:3517Most of these original Arians were attacked in a work of Marcellus’s which Eusebius answers. ‘Now he replies to Asterius,’ says Eusebius, ‘now to the great Eusebius’ [of Nicomedia], ‘and then he turns upon that man of God, that indeed thrice blessed person Paulinus [of Tyre]. Then he goes to war with Origen.…Next he marches out against Narcissus, and pursues the other Eusebius,’ [himself]. ‘In a word, he counts for nothing all the Ecclesiastical Fathers, being satisfied with no one but himself.’ contr. Marc. i. 4. [On Maris (who was not at Ariminum, and scarcely at Antioch in 363) see D.C.B. s.v. (2). On Theodotus see vol. i. of this series, p. 320, note 37. On Paulinus, ib. p. 369.]
459:3518[Of Balaneæ, see Ap. Fug. 3; Hist. Ar. 5.]
459:3519Quoted, among other passages from Eusebius, in the 7th General Council, Act. 6. p. 409. [Mansi. xiii. 701 D]. ‘The Son Himself is God, but not Very God.’ [But see Prolegg. ubi supr. note 5].
459:3520Asterius has been mentioned above, p. 155, note 2, &c. Philostorgius speaks of him as adopting Semi-Arian terms; and Acacius gives an extract from him containing them, ap. Epiph. Hær. 72. 6. He seems to be called many-headed with an allusion to the Hydra, and to his activity in the Arian cause and his fertility in writing. He wrote comments on Scripture. [See Prolegg. ii. §3 (2) a, sub. fin.]
459:3521None but the clergy might enter the Chancel, i.e. in Service time. Hence Theodosius was made to retire by S. Ambrose. Theod. v. 17. The Council of Laodicea, said to be held a.d. 372, forbids any but persons in orders, ἱερατικοί, to enter the Chancel and then communicate. Can. 19. vid. also 44. Conc. t. i. pp. 788, 789. It is doubtful what orders the word ἱερατικοὶ is intended to include. vid. Bingham, Antiqu. viii. 6. §7.
460:3522Ep. Æg. 13.
460:3523Vid. infr. §32.
460:3524[On Artemas or Artemon and Theodotus, see Prolegg. ii. §3 (2) a.]
460:3525[See Apol. Ar. 84; Hist. Ar. 1; Prolegg. ii. §5. The first part of the letter will be found supr. Apol. Ar. p. 144.]
460:3526This is supposed to be the same Confession which is preserved by Socr. i. 26. and Soz. ii. 27. and was presented to Constantine by Arius in 330.
461:3527[Prolegg. ch. ii. §6 (2).]
461:35281st Confession or 1st of Antioch, a.d. 341. [See Socr. ii. 10.]
461:35292nd Confession or 2nd of Antioch, a.d. 341. This formulary is that known as the Formulary of the Dedication. It is quoted as such by Socr. ii. 39, 40. Soz. iv. 15. and infr. §29. [On its attribution to Lucian, see Prolegg. ubi supr., and Caspari Alte. u. Neue Q. p. 42 note.]
461:3530Vid. 10th Confession, infr. §30.
461:3531These strong words and those which follow, whether Lucian’s or not, mark the great difference between this confession and the foregoing. The words ‘unalterable and unchangeable’ are formal anti-Arian symbols, as the τρεπτὸν or alterable was one of the most characteristic parts of Arius’s creed. vid. Orat. i. §35, &c.
461:3532On ἀπαράλλακτος εἰκὼν κατ᾽ οὐσίαν, which was synonymous with ὁμοιούσιος, vid. infr. §38. supr. p. 163, note 9. It was in order to secure the true sense of ἀπαράλλακτον that the Council adopted the word ὁμοούσιον ᾽Απαράλλακτον is accordingly used as a familiar word by Athan. de Decr. §§20, 24. Orat. iii. §36. contr. Gent. 41. 46. fin. Philostorgius ascribing it to Asterius, and Acacius quotes a passage from his writings containing it; cf. S. Alexander τὴν κατὰ πάντα ὁμοιότητα αὐτοῦ ἐκ φύσεως ἀπομαξάμενος, in Theod. H. E. i. 4. Χαρακτήρ, Hebr. i. 3. contains the same idea. Basil. contr. Eunom. i. 18.
461:3533This statement perhaps is the most Catholic in the Creed; not that the former are not more explicit in themselves, or that in a certain true sense our Lord may not be called a Mediator before He became incarnate, but because the Arians, even Eusebius, like Philo and the Platonists, consider Him as made in the beginning the ‘Eternal Priest of the Father,’ Demonst. v. 3. de Laud. C. 3, 11, ‘an intermediate divine power,’ §§26, 27, and notes.
461:3534On this phrase, which is justified by S. Hilary, de Syn. 32, and is protested against in the Sardican Confession, Theod. H. E. ii. 6 [see Prolegg. ubi supr.]
461:3535The whole of these anathemas are [a compromise]. The Council anathematizes ‘every heretical heterodoxy;’ not, as Athanasius observes, supr., §7, the Arian.
461:3536Our Lord was, as they held, before time, but still created.
461:3537This emphatic mention of Scripture is also virtually an Arian evasion, admitting of a silent reference to themselves as interpreters of Scripture.
461:3538On this Creed see Prolegg. ubi supr.
461:35393rd Confession or 3rd of Antioch, a.d. 341.
461:3540It need scarcely be said, that ‘perfect from perfect’ is a symbol on which the Catholics laid stress, Athan. Orat. ii. 35. Epiph. Hær. 76. p. 945. but it admitted of an evasion. An especial reason for insisting on it in the previous centuries had been the Sabellian doctrine, which considered the title ‘Word’ when applied to our Lord to be adequately explained by the ordinary sense of the term, as a word spoken by us. In consequence they insisted on His τὸ τέλειον, perfection, which became almost synonymous with His personality. (Thus the Apollinarians, e.g. denied that our Lord was perfect man, because His person was not human. Athan. contr. Apoll. i. 2.) And Athan. condemns the notion of ‘the λόγος ἐν τῷ θεῷ ἀτελὴς, γεννηθεὶς τέλειος, Orat. iv. 11. The Arians then, as being the especial opponents of the Sabellians, insisted on nothing so much as our Lord’s being a real, living, substantial, Word. vid. Eusebius passim. ‘The Father,’ says Acacius against Marcellus, ‘begat the Only-begotten, alone alone, and perfect perfect; for there is nothing imperfect in the Father, wherefore neither is there in the Son, but the Son’s perfection is the genuine offspring of His perfection, and superperfection.’ ap. Epiph. Hær. 72. 7. Τέλειος then was a relative word, varying with the subject matter, vid. Damasc. F. O. i. 8. p. 138. and when the Arians said that our Lord was perfect God, they meant, ‘perfect, in that sense in which He is God’—i.e. as a secondary divinity.—Nay, in one point of view, holding as they did no real condescension or assumption of a really new state, they would use the term of His divine Nature more freely than the Catholics sometimes had. ‘Nor was the Word,’ says Hippolytus, ‘before the flesh and by Himself, perfect Son, though being perfect Word, Only-begotten; nor could the flesh subsist by itself without the Word, because that in the Word it has its consistence: thus then He was manifested One perfect Son of God.’ contr. Noet. 15.
462:3541[See Prolegg.] Marcellus wrote his work against Asterius in 335, the year of the Arian Council of Jerusalem, which at once took cognisance of it, and cited Marcellus to appear before them. The next year a Council held at Constantinople condemned and deposed him.
462:3542a.d. 341.
462:3543[Cf. Prolegg. ii. §6 (3) init.]
462:35444th Confession, or 4th of Antioch, a.d. 342. The fourth, fifth, and sixth Confessions are the same, and with them agree the Creed of Philippopolis [a.d. 343, see Gwatkin, Stud. p. 119, espec. note 2].
462:3545These words, which answer to those [of our present ‘Nicene’ Creed], are directed against the doctrine of Marcellus [on which see Prolegg. ii. §3 (2) c, 3]. Cf. Eusebius, de Eccl. Theol. iii. 8. 17. cont. Marc. ii. 4.
463:3546S. Hilary, as we have seen above, p. 78, by implication calls this the Nicene Anathema; but it omits many of the Nicene clauses, and evades our Lord’s eternal existence, substituting for ‘once He was not,’ ‘there was time when He was not.’ It seems to have been considered sufficient for Gaul, as used now, for Italy as in the 5th Confession or Macrostich, and for Africa as in the creed of Philippopolis.
463:3547Little is known of Macedonius who was Bishop of Mopsuestia, or of Martyrius; and too much of Eudoxius. This Long Confession, or Macrostich, which follows, is remarkable; [see Prolegg, ch. ii. §6 (3), Gwatkin, p. 125 sq.]
463:35485th Confession or Macrostich, a.d. 344. [Published by the Council which deposed Stephen and elected Leontius bishop of Antioch.]
463:3549It is observable that here and in the next paragraph the only reasons they give against using the only two Arian formulas which they condemn is that they are not found in Scripture. Here, in their explanation of the ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων, or from nothing, they do but deny it with Eusebius’s evasion, supr. p. 75, note 5.
463:3550They argue after the usual Arian manner, that the term ‘Son’ essentially implies beginning, and excludes the title ‘co-unoriginate;’ but see supr. §16, note 1, and p. 154, note 5.
463:3551[The four lines which follow are cited by Lightfoot, Ign. p. 91. ed. 2, as from de Syn. §3.]
463:3552Cf. §28, end.
463:3553ἐκ προκοπῆς, de Decr. §10, note 10.
463:3554These strong words, θεὸν κατὰ φύσιν τέλειον καὶ ἀληθῆ are of a different character from any which have occurred in the Arian Confessions. They can only be explained away by considering them used in contrast to the Samosatene doctrine; so that ‘perfect according to nature’ and ‘true,’ will not be directly connected with ‘God’ so much as opposed to, ‘by advance,’ ‘by adoption,’ &c.
463:3555The use of the words ἐνδιάθετος and προφορικός, mental and pronounced, to distinguish the two senses of λόγος, reason and word, came from the school of the Stoics, and is found in Philo, and was under certain limitations allowed in Catholic theology, Damasc. F. O. ii. 21. To use either absolutely and to the exclusion of the other would have involved some form of Sabellianism, or Arianism as the case might be; but each might correct the defective sense of either. S. Theophilus speaks of our Lord as at once ἐνδιάθετος and προφορικός. ad Autol. ii. 10 and 22, S. Cyril as ἐνδιάθετος, in Joann. p. 39. but see also Thesaur. p. 47. When the Fathers deny that our Lord is the προφορικὸς λόγος, they only mean that that title is not, even as far as its philosophical idea went, an adequate representative of Him, a word spoken being insubstantive, vid. Orat. ii. 35; Hil. de Syn. 46; Cyr. Catech. xi. 10; Damas. Ep. ii. p. 203; Cyril in Joann. p. 31; Iren. Hær. ii. 12. n. 5. Marcellus is said by Eusebius to have considered our Lord as first the one and then the other. Eccl. Theol. ii. 15.
463:3556This passage seems taken from Eusebius, and partly from Marcellus’s own words. S. Cyril speaks of his doctrine in like terms. Catech. xv. 27.
463:3557i.e. Photinus. [A note illustrating the frequency of similar nicknames is omitted. On Photinus, see Prolegg. ch. ii. §3. ad fin.]
463:3558Cf. Euseb. contr. Marc. i. 2.
463:3559Cf. §27, notes.
463:3560αὐτοπροσωπῶς and so Cyril Hier. Catech. xv. 14 and 17 (It means, ‘not in personation’), and Philo contrasting divine appearances with those of Angels. Leg. Alleg. iii. 62. On the other hand, Theophilus on the text, ‘The voice of the Lord God walking in the garden,’ speaks of the Word, ‘assuming the person, πρόσωπον, of the Father,’ and ‘in the person of God,’ ad Autol. ii. 22. the word not then having its theological sense.
463:3561ὅμοιον κατὰ πάντα. Here again we have a strong Semi-Arian or almost Catholic formula introduced by the bye. Of course it admitted of evasion, but in its fulness it included ‘essence.’ [See above §8, note 1, and Introd.]
463:3562See vol. i. of this series, p. 295, note 1. In the reason which the Confession alleges against that heretical doctrine it is almost implied that the divine nature of the Son suffered on the Cross. They would naturally fall into this notion directly they gave up our Lord’s absolute divinity. It would naturally follow that our Lord had no human soul, but that His pre-existent nature stood in the place of it:—also that His Mediatorship was no peculiarity of His Incarnation. vid. §23, note 2. §27, Anath. 12, note.
464:3563The Confession still insists upon the unscripturalness of the Catholic positions. On the main subject of this paragraph the θελήσει γεννηθὲν, cf. Orat. iii. 59, &c. The doctrine of the μονογενὲς has already partially come before us in de Decr. §§7–9. pp. 154 sq. Μόνως, not as the creatures. vid. p. 75, note 6.
464:3564The following passage is in its very form an interpolation or appendix, while its doctrine bears distinctive characters of something higher than the old absolute separation between the Father and the Son. [Eusebius of Cæs. had] considered Them as two οὐσίαι, ὅμοιαι like, but not as ὁμοούσιοι; his very explanation of the word τέλειος was ‘independent’ and ‘distinct.’ Language then, such as that in the text, was the nearest assignable approach to the reception of the ὁμοούσιον; [and in fact, to] the doctrine of the περιχώρησις, of which supr. Orat. iii.
464:3565De Decr. §8.
464:3566De Decr. §26.
464:3567Sirmium [Mitrowitz on the Save] was a city of lower Pannonia, not far from the Danube, and was the great bulwark of the Illyrian provinces of the Empire. There Vetranio assumed the purple; and there Constantius was born. The frontier war caused it to be from time to time the Imperial residence. We hear of Constantius at Sirmium in the summer of 357. Ammian. xvi. 10. He also passed there the ensuing winter. ibid. xvii. 12. In October, 358, after the Sarmatian war, he entered Sirmium in triumph, and passed the winter there. xvii. 13 fin. and with a short absence in the spring, remained there till the end of May, 359.
464:3568[Cf. Prolegg. ch. ii. §7]. The leading person in this Council was Basil of Ancyra. Basil held a disputation with Photinus. Silvanus too of Tarsus now appears for the first time: while, according to Socrates, Mark of Arethusa drew up the Anathemas; the Confession used was the same as that sent to Constans, of the Council of Philippopolis, and the Macrostich.
464:3569S. Hilary treats their creed as a Catholic composition. de Syn. 39–63. Philastrius and Vigilius call the Council a meeting of ‘holy bishops’ and a ‘Catholic Council,’ de Hær. 65. in Eutych. v. init. What gave a character and weight to this Council was, that it met to set right a real evil, and was not a mere pretence with Arian objects.
464:35706th Confession, or 1st Sirmian, a.d. 351.
464:3571Eph. iii. 15.
464:3572Vid. p. 77, sqq.
464:3573This Anathema which has occurred in substance in the Macrostich, and again infr. Anath. 18 and 23. is a disclaimer of their in fact holding a supreme and a secondary God. In the Macrostich it is disclaimed upon a simple Arian basis. The Semi-Arians were more open to this imputation; Eusebius, as we have seen above, distinctly calling our Lord a second and another God. vid. p. 75, note 7. It will be observed that this Anathema contradicts the one which immediately follows, and the 11th, in which Christ is called God; except, on the one hand the Father and Son are One God, which was the Catholic doctrine, or, on the other, the Son is God in name only, which was the pure Arian or Anomœan.
464:3574The language of Catholics and heretics is very much the same on this point of the Son’s ministration, with this essential difference of sense, that Catholic writers mean a ministration internal to the divine substance and an instrument connatural with the Father, and Arius meant an external and created medium of operation. Thus S. Clement calls our Lord ‘the All-harmonious Instrument (ὄργανον) of God.’ Protrept. p. 6; Eusebius ‘an animated and living instrument (ὄργανον ἔμψυχον), nay, rather divine and vivific of every substance and nature.’ Demonstr. iv. 4. S. Basil, on the other hand, insists that the Arians reduced our Lord to ‘an inanimate instrument,’ ὀργανον ἄψυχον, though they called Him ὑπουργὸν τελειότατον, most perfect minister or underworker. adv. Eunom. ii. 21. Elsewhere he makes them say, ‘the nature of a cause is one, and the nature of an instrument, ὀργάνου, another;….foreign then in nature is the Son from the Father, since such is an instrument from a workman.’ De Sp. S. n. 6 fin. vid. also n. 4 fin. 19, and 20. And so S. Gregory, ‘The Father signifies, the Word accomplishes, not servilely, nor ignorantly, but with knowledge and sovereignty, and to speak more suitably, in a father’s way, πατρικῶς. Orat. 30. 11. Cf. S. Cyril, in Joann. p. 48. Explanations such as these secure for the Catholic writers some freedom in their modes of speaking, e.g. Athan. speaks of the Son, as ‘enjoined and ministering,’ προσταττόμενος, καὶ ὑπουργῶν, Orat. ii. §22. Thus S. Irenæus speaks of the Father being well-pleased and commanding, κελεύοντος, and the Son doing and framing. Hær. iv. 75. S. Basil too, in the same treatise in which are some of the foregoing protests, speaks of ‘the Lord ordering,’ προστάσσοντα, and the word framing.’ de Sp. S. n. 38, S. Cyril of Jerusalem, of ‘Him who bids, ἐντελλεται, bidding to one who is present with Him,’ Cat. xi. 16. vid. also ὑπηρετῶν τῇ βουλῇ, Justin. Tryph. 126, and ὑπουργόν, Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 10. ἑξυπηρετῶν θελήματι, Clem. Strom. vii. p. 832.
465:3575§26, n. 7.
465:3576Orat. iv. §13.
465:3577§26, n. 4.
465:3578§26 (2) n. (2).
465:3579The 12th and 13th Anathemas are intended to meet the charge which is alluded to §26 (6), note 2, that Arianism involved the doctrine that our Lord’s divine nature suffered. [But see Gwatkin, p. 147.] Athanasius brings this accusation against them distinctly in his work against Apollinaris. contr. Apoll. i. 15. vid. also Ambros. de Fide, iii. 31. Salig in his de Eutychianismo ant. Eutychen takes notice of none of the passages in the text.
465:3580This Anathema is directed against Marcellus, who held the very opinion which it denounces, that the Almighty spake with Himself. Euseb. Eccles. Theol. ii. 15. The Jews said that Almighty God spoke to the Angels. Basil. Hexaem. fin. Others that the plural was used as authorities on earth use it in way of dignity. Theod. in Gen. 19. As to the Catholic Fathers, as is well known, they interpreted the text in the sense here given. See Petav.
465:3581This again, in spite of the wording. which is directed against the Catholic doctrine [or Marcellus?] is a Catholic interpretation. vid. [besides Philo de Somniis. i. 12.) Justin. Tryph. 56. and 126. Iren. Hær. iv. 10. n. 1. Tertull. de carn. Christ. 6. adv. Marc. iii. 9. adv. Prax. 16. Novat. de Trin. 18. Origen. in Gen. Hom. iv. 5. Cyprian. adv. Jud. ii. 5. Antioch. Syn. contr. Paul. apud Routh. Rell. t. 2. p. 469. Athan. Orat. ii. 13. Epiph. Ancor. 29 and 39. Hær. 71. 5. Chrysost. in Gen. Hom. 41. 7. These references are principally from Petavius; also from Dorscheus, who has written an elaborate commentary on this Council, &c. The Catholic doctrine is that the Son has condescended to become visible by means of material appearances. Augustine seems to have been the first who changed the mode of viewing the texts in question, and considered the divine appearance, not God the Son, but a created Angel. Vid. de Trin. ii. passim. Jansenius considers that he did so from a suggestion of S. Ambrose, that the hitherto received view had been the origo hæresis Arianæ, vid. his Augustinus, lib. proœm. c. 12. t. 2. p. 12.
465:3582This and the following Canon are Catholic in their main doctrine, and might be illustrated, if necessary, as the foregoing.
465:3583It was an expedient of the later Macedonians to deny that the Holy Spirit was God because it was not usual to call Him Ingenerate. They asked the Catholics whether the Holy Spirit was Ingenerate, generate, or created, for into these three they divided all things. vid. Basil in Sabell. et Ar. Hom. xxiv. 6. But, as the Arians had first made the alternative only between Ingenerate and created, and Athan. de Decr. §28. shews that generate is a third idea really distinct from one and the other, so S. Greg. Naz. adds. processive, ἐκπορευτὸν, as an intermediate idea, contrasted with Ingenerate, yet distinct from generate. Orat. xxxi. 8. In other words, Ingenerate means, not only not generate, but not from any origin. vid. August. de Trin. xv. 26.
465:3584Supra (16).
465:3585§26 (7).
466:3586[The ‘blasphemia’ of Potamius, bishop of Lisbon; see Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 (2), Hil. de Syn. 11; Socr. ii. 30].
466:35877th Confession, or 2nd Sirmian, a.d. 357.
466:3588κεφάλαιον. vid. de Decr. §31. p. 56; Orat. i. §34; Epiph. Hær. 73. 11.
466:3589It will be observed that this Confession; 1. by denying ‘two Gods,’ and declaring that the One God is the God of Christ, implies that our Lord is not God. 2. It says that the word ‘substance,’ and its compounds, ought not to be used as being unscriptural, mysterious, and leading to disturbance; 3. it holds that the Father is greater than the Son ‘in honour, dignity, and godhead;’ 4. that the Son is subordinate to the Father with all other things; 5. that it is the Father’s characteristic to be invisible and impassible. They also say that our Lord, hominem suscepisse per quem compassus est, a word which Phœbadius condemns in his remarks on this Confession; where, by the way, he uses the word ‘spiritus’ in the sense of Hilary and the Ante-Nicene Fathers, in a connection which at once explains the obscure words of the supposititious Sardican Confession (vid. above, §9, note 3), and turns them into another evidence of this additional heresy involved in Arianism. ‘Impassibilis Deus,’says Phœbadius, ‘quia Deus Spiritus…non ergo passibilis Dei Spiritus, licet in homine suo passus.’ Now the Sardican Confession is thought ignorant, as well as unauthoritative, e.g. by Natalis Alex. Sæc. 4. Diss. 29, because it imputes to Valens and Ursacius the following belief, which he supposes to be Patripassianism, but which exactly answers to this aspect and representation of Arianism: ὅτι ὁ λόγος καὶ ὅτι τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ ἐσταυρώθη καὶ ἐσφάγη καὶ ἀπέθανεν καὶ ἀνέστη. Theod. H. E. ii. 6. p. 844.
466:3590Socrates [wrongly] connects this with the ‘blasphemia.’ Hist. ii. 30.
466:35919th Confession, at Seleucia a.d. 359.
466:3592The Semi-Arian majority in the Council had just before been confirming the Creed of the Dedication; hence this beginning. vid. supr. §11. The present creed, as if to propitiate the Semi-Arian majority, adds an anathema upon the Anomœan as well as on the Homoüsion and Homœusion.
467:3593These two sections seem to have been inserted by Athan. after his Letter was finished, and contain later occurrences in the history of Ariminum, than were contemplated when he wrote supr. §11. vid. note 7 in loc. It should be added that at this Council Ulfilas the Apostle of the Goths, who had hitherto followed the Council of Nicæa, conformed, and thus became the means of spreading through his countrymen the Creed of Ariminum.
467:359410th Confession at Niké and Constantinople, a.d. 359, 360.
467:3595μόνος ἐκ μόνου. This phrase may be considered a symptom of Anomœan influence; μόνος παρά, or ὑπό, μόνον being one special formula adopted by Eunomius, explanatory of μονογενὴς, in accordance with the original Arian theory, mentioned de Decr. §7. supr. p. 154, that the Son was the one instrument of creation. Eunomius said that He alone was created by the Father alone; all other things being created by the Father, not alone, but through Him whom alone He had first created. vid. Cyril. Thesaur. 25. Basil contr. Eunom. ii. 21. Acacius ap. Epiph. Hær. 72. 7. p. 839.
467:3596Here as before, instead of speaking of Arianism, the Confession anathematizes all heresies, vid. supr. §23, n. 4.
467:359711th Confession at Antioch, a.d. 361. [Socr. ii. 45. The occasion was the installation of Euzoius in place of Meletius.]
467:3598Acacius, Eudoxius, and the rest, after ratifying at Constantinople the Creed framed at Niké and subscribed at Ariminum, appear next at Antioch a year and a half later, when they throw off the mask, and, avowing the Anomœan Creed, ‘revert,’ as S. Athanasius says, ‘to their first doctrines,’ i.e. those with which Arius started.
467:3599From ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων, ‘out of nothing,’ one of the original Arian positions concerning the Son. Theodoret says that they were also called Hexakionitæ, from the nature of their place of meeting, Hær. iv. 3. and Du Cange confirms it so far as to show that there was a place or quarter of Constantinople Hexakionium. [Cf. Soph. Lex. s.v.]
467:3600This passage shews that Athanasius did not insert these sections till two years after the composition of the work itself; for Constantine died a.d. 361.
467:3601Euzoius, now Arian Bishop of Antioch, was excommunicated with Arius in Egypt and at Nicæa, and was restored with him to the Church at the Council of Jerusalem.
467:3602ὑπεκρίναντο. Hypocrites is almost a title of the Arians (with an apparent allusion to 1 Tim. iv. 2. vid. Socr. i. p. 5, Orat. i. §8).
Part III. On the Symbols ‘Of the Essence’ And ‘Coessential.’
We must look at the sense not the wording. The offence excited is at the sense; meaning of the Symbols; the question of their not being in Scripture. Those who hesitate only at ‘coessential,’ not to be considered Arians. Reasons why ‘coessential’ is better than ‘like-in-essence,’ yet the latter may be interpreted in a good sense. Explanation of the rejection of ‘coessential’ by the Council which condemned the Samosatene; use of the word by Dionysius of Alexandria; parallel variation in the use of Unoriginate; quotation from Ignatius and another; reasons for using ‘coessential;’ objections to it; examination of the word itself; further documents of the Council of Ariminum.
33. But since they are thus minded both towards each other and towards those who preceded them, proceed we to ascertain from them what absurdity they have seen, or what they complain of in the received phrases, that they have proved ‘disobedient to parents’ (Rom. i. 30), and contend against an Ecumenical Council 3603 ? ‘The phrases “of the essence” and “coessential,”’ say they, ‘do not please us, for they are an offence to some and a trouble to many.’ This then is what they allege in their writings; but one may reasonably answer them thus: If the very words were by themselves a cause of offence to them, it must have followed, not that some only should have been offended, and many troubled, but that we also and all the rest should have been affected by them in the same way; but if on the contrary all men are well content with the words, and they who wrote them were no ordinary persons but men who came together from the whole world, and to these testify in addition the 400 Bishops and more who now met at Ariminum, does not this plainly prove against those who accuse the Council, that the terms are not in fault, but the perverseness of those who misinterpret them? How many men read divine Scripture wrongly, and as thus conceiving it, find fault with the Saints? such were the former Jews, who rejected the Lord, and the present Manichees who blaspheme the Law 3604 ; yet are not the Scriptures the cause to them, but their own evil humours. If then ye can shew the terms to be actually unsound, do so and let the proof proceed, and drop the pretence of offence created, lest you come into the condition of the Pharisees of old. For when they pretended offence at the Lord’s teaching, He said, ‘Every plant, which My heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up’ (Matt. xv. 13). By which He shewed that not the words of the Father planted by Him were really an offence to them, but that they misinterpreted what was well said, and offended themselves. And in like manner they who at that time blamed the Epistles of the Apostle, impeached, not Paul, but their own deficient learning and distorted minds.
34. For answer, what is much to the purpose, Who are they whom you pretend are offended and troubled at these terms? of those who are religious towards Christ not one; on the contrary they defend and maintain them. But if they are Arians who thus feel, what wonder they should be distressed at words which destroy their heresy? for it is not the terms which offend them, but the proscription of their irreligion which afflicts them. Therefore let us have no more murmuring against the Fathers, nor pretence of this kind; or next 3605 you will be making complaints of the Lord’s Cross, because it is ‘to Jews an offence and to Gentiles foolishness,’ as said the Apostle 3606 (1 Cor. 1:23, 24). But as the Cross is not faulty, for to us who believe it is ‘Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God,’ though Jews rave, so neither are the terms of the Fathers faulty, but profitable to those who honestly read, and subversive of all irreligion, though the Arians so often burst with rage as being condemned by them. Since then the pretence that persons are offended does not hold, tell us yourselves, why is it you are not pleased with the phrase ‘of the essence’ (this must first be enquired about), when you yourselves have written that the Son is generated from the Father? If when you name the Father, or use the word ‘God,’ you do not signify essence, or understand Him according to essence, who is that He is, but signify something else about Him 3607 , not to say inferior, then you should not have written that the Son was from the Father, but from what is about Him or in Him 3608 ; and so, shrinking from saying that God is truly Father, and making Him compound who is simple, in a material way, you will be authors of a newer blasphemy. And, with such ideas, you must needs consider the Word, and the title ‘Son,’ not as an essence but as a name 3609 only, and in consequence hold your own views as far as names only, and be talking, not of what you believe to exist, but of what you think not to exist.
35. But this is more like the crime of the Sadducees, and of those among the Greeks who had the name of Atheists. It follows that you will deny that even creation is the handy-work of God Himself that is; at least, if ‘Father’ and ‘God’ do not signify the very essence of Him that is, but something else, which you imagine: which is irreligious, and most shocking even to think of. But if, when we hear it said, ‘I am that I am,’ and, ‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,’ and, ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord,’ and, ‘Thus saith the Lord Almighty’ (Exod. 3:14, Gen. 1:1, Deut. 6:4), we understand nothing else than the very simple, and blessed, and incomprehensible essence itself of Him that is, (for though we be unable to master what He is, yet hearing ‘Father,’ and ‘God,’ and ‘Almighty,’ we understand nothing else to be meant than the very essence of Him that is 3610 ); and if ye too have said, that the Son is from God, it follows that you have said that He is from the ‘essence’ of the Father. And since the Scriptures precede you which say, that the Lord is Son of the Father, and the Father Himself precedes them, who says, ‘This is My beloved Son’ (Matt. iii. 17), and a son is no other than the offspring from his father, is it not evident that the Fathers have suitably said that the Son is from the Father’s essence? considering that it is all one to say rightly ‘from God,’ and to say ‘from the essence.’ For all the creatures, though they be said to have come into being from God, yet are not from God as the Son is; for they are not offsprings in their nature, but works. Thus, it is said, ‘in the beginning God,’ not ‘generated,’ but ‘made the heaven and the earth, and all that is in them’ (Gen. i. 1). And not, ‘who generates,’ but ‘who maketh His angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire’ (Ps. civ. 4). And though the Apostle has said, ‘One God, from whom all things’ (1 Cor. viii. 6), yet he says not this, as reckoning the Son with other things; but, whereas some of the Greeks consider that the creation was held together by chance, and from the combination of atoms 3611 ; and spontaneously from elements of similar structure 3612 , and has no cause; and others consider that it came from a cause, but not through the Word; and each heretic has imagined things at his will, and tells his fables about the creation; on this account the Apostle was obliged to introduce ‘from God,’ that he might thereby certify the Maker, and shew that the universe was framed at His will. And accordingly he straightway proceeds: ‘And one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom all things’ (1 Cor. viii. 6), by way of excepting the Son from that ‘all’ (for what is called God’s work, is all done through the Son; and it is not possible that the things framed should have one origin with their Framer), and by way of teaching that the phrase ‘of God,’ which occurs in the passage, has a different sense in the case of the works, from what it bears when used of the Son; for He is offspring, and they are works: and therefore He, the Son, is the proper offspring of His essence, but they are the handywork of his will.
36. The Council, then, comprehending this 3613 , and aware of the different senses of the same word, that none should suppose, that the Son was said to be ‘from God’ like the creation, wrote with greater explicitness, that the Son was ‘from the essence.’ For this betokens the true genuineness of the Son towards the Father; whereas, by the simple phrase ‘from God,’ only the Creator’s will in framing is signified. If then they too had this meaning, when they wrote that the Word was ‘from the Father,’ they had nothing to complain of in the Council; but if they meant ‘of God,’ in the instance of the Son, as it is used of the creation, then as understanding it of the creation, they should not name the Son, or they will be manifestly mingling blasphemy with religiousness; but either they have to cease reckoning the Lord with the creatures, or at least to refrain from unworthy and unbecoming statements about the Son. For if He is a Son, He is not a creature; but if a creature, then not a Son. Since these are their views, perhaps they will be denying the Holy Laver also, because it is administered into Father and into Son and not into Creator and Creature, as they account it. ‘But,’ they say, ‘all this is not written: and we reject these words as unscriptural.’ But this, again, is an unblushing excuse in their mouths. For if they think everything must be rejected which is not written, wherefore, when the Arian party invent such a heap of phrases, not from Scripture 3614 , ‘Out of nothing,’ and ‘the Son was not before His generation,’ and ‘Once He was not,’ and ‘He is alterable,’ and ‘the Father is ineffable and invisible to the Son,’ and ‘the Son knows not even His own essence;’ and all that Arius has vomited in his light and irreligious Thalia, why do not they speak against these, but rather take their part, and on that account contend with their own Fathers? And, in what Scripture did they on their part find ‘Unoriginate,’ and ‘the term essence,’ and ‘there are three subsistences,’ and ‘Christ is not very God,’ and ‘He is one of the hundred sheep,’ and ‘God’s Wisdom is ingenerate and without beginning, but the created powers are many, of which Christ is one?’ Or how, when in the so-called Dedication, Acacius and Eusebius and their fellows used expressions not in Scripture, and said that ‘the First-born of the creation’ was ‘the exact Image of the essence and power and will and glory,’ do they complain of the Fathers, for making mention of unscriptural expressions, and especially of essence? For they ought either to complain of themselves, or to find no fault with the Fathers.
37. Now, if certain others made excuses of the expressions of the Council, it might perhaps have been set down, either to ignorance or to caution. There is no question, for instance, about George of Cappadocia 3615 , who was expelled from Alexandria; a man, without character in years past, nor a Christian in any respect; but only pretending to the name to suit the times, and thinking ‘religion to be a’ means of ‘gain’ (1 Tim. vi. 5). And therefore there is no reason to complain of his making mistakes about the faith, considering he knows neither what he says, nor whereof he affirms; but, according to the text, ‘goeth after all, as a bird’ (1 Tim. 1:7, Prov. 7:22, 23, not LXX.?) But when Acacius, and Eudoxius, and Patrophilus say this, do not they deserve the strongest reprobation? for while they write what is unscriptural themselves, and have accepted many times the term ‘essence’ as suitable, especially on the ground of the letter 3616 of Eusebius, they now blame their predecessors for using terms of the same kind. Nay, though they say themselves, that the Son is ‘God from God,’ and ‘Living Word,’ ‘Exact Image of the Father’s essence;’ they accuse the Nicene Bishops of saying, that He who was begotten is ‘of the essence’ of Him who begat Him, and ‘Coessential’ with Him. But what marvel if they conflict with their predecessors and their own Fathers, when they are inconsistent with themselves, and fall foul of each other? For after publishing, in the so-called Dedication at Antioch, that the Son is exact Image of the Father’s essence, and swearing that so they held and anathematizing those who held otherwise, nay, in Isauria, writing down, ‘We do not decline the authentic faith published in the Dedication at Antioch 3617 ,’ where the term ‘essence’ was introduced, as if forgetting all this, shortly after, in the same Isauria, they put into writing the very contrary, saying, We reject the words ‘coessential,’ and ‘like-in-essence,’ as alien to the Scriptures, and abolish the term ‘essence,’ as not contained therein 3618 .
38. Can we then any more account such men Christians? or what sort of faith have they who stand neither to word nor writing, but alter and change every thing according to the times? For if, O Acacius and Eudoxius, you ‘do not decline the faith published at the Dedication,’ and in it is written that the Son is ‘Exact Image of God’s essence,’ why is it ye write in Isauria, ‘we reject the Like in essence?’ for if the Son is not like the Father according to essence, how is He ‘exact image of the essence?’ But if you are dissatisfied at having written ‘Exact Image of the essence,’ how is it that ye ‘anathematize those who say that the Son is Unlike?’ for if He be not according to essence like, He is surely unlike: and the Unlike cannot be an Image. And if so, then it does not hold that ‘he that hath seen the Son, hath seen the Father’ (John xiv. 9), there being then the greatest possible difference between Them, or rather the One being wholly Unlike the Other. And Unlike cannot possibly be called Like. By what artifice then do you call Unlike like, and consider Like to be unlike, and pretend to say that the Son is the Father’s Image? for if the Son be not like the Father in essence, something is wanting to the Image, and it is not a complete Image, nor a perfect radiance 3619 . How then read you, ‘In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily?’ and, ‘from His fulness all we received’ (Col. 2:9, John 1:16)? how is it that you expel the Arian Aetius as an heretic, though ye say the same with him? for he is your companion, O Acacius, and he became Eudoxius’s master in this so great irreligion 3620 ; which was the reason why Leontius the Bishop made him deacon, that using the name of the diaconate as sheep’s clothing, he might be able with impunity to pour forth the words of blasphemy.
39. What then has persuaded you to contradict each other, and to procure to yourselves so great a disgrace? You cannot give any good account of it; this supposition only remains, that all you do is but outward profession and pretence, to secure the patronage of Constantius and the gain from thence accruing. And ye make nothing of accusing the Fathers, and ye complain outright of the expressions as being unscriptural; and, as it is written, ‘opened your legs to every one that passed by’ (Ez. xvi. 25); so as to change as often as they wish, in whose pay and keep you are. Yet, though a man use terms not in Scripture, it makes no difference so that his meaning be religious 3621 . But the heretic, though he use scriptural terms, yet, as being equally dangerous and depraved, shall be asked in the words of the Spirit, ‘Why dost thou preach My laws, and takest My covenant in thy mouth’ (Ps. l. 16)? Thus whereas the devil, though speaking from the Scriptures, is silenced by the Saviour, the blessed Paul, though he speaks from profane writers, ‘The Cretans are always liars,’ and, ‘For we are His offspring,’ and, ‘Evil communications corrupt good manners,’ yet has a religious meaning, as being holy,—is ‘doctor of the nations, in faith and verity,’ as having ‘the mind of Christ’ (Titus 1:12, Acts 17:28, 1 Cor. 15:33, 1 Tim. 2:7, 1 Cor. 2:16), and what he speaks, he utters religiously. What then is there even plausible, in the Arian terms, in which the ‘caterpillar’ (Joel ii. 25) and the ‘locust’ are preferred to the Saviour, and He is reviled with ‘Once Thou wast not,’ and ‘Thou wast created,’ and ‘Thou art foreign to God in essence,’ and, in a word, no irreverence is unused among them? But what did the Fathers omit in the way of reverence? or rather, have they not a lofty view and a Christ-loving religiousness? And yet these, they wrote, ‘We reject;’ while those others they endure in their insults towards the Lord, and betray to all men, that for no other cause do they resist that great Council but that it condemned the Arian heresy. For it is on this account again that they speak against the term Coessential, about which they also entertain wrong sentiments. For if their faith was right, and they confessed the Father as truly Father, believed the Son to be genuine Son, and by nature true Word and Wisdom of the Father, and as to saying that the Son is ‘from God,’ if they did not use the words of Him, as of themselves, but understood Him to be the proper offspring of the Father’s essence, as the radiance is from light, they would not every one of them have found fault with the Fathers; but would have been confident that the Council wrote suitably; and that this is the right faith concerning our Lord Jesus Christ.
40. ‘But,’ say they, ‘the sense of such expressions is obscure to us;’ for this is another of their pretences,—‘We reject them 3622 ,’ say they, ‘because we cannot master their meaning.’ But if they were true in this profession, instead of saying, ‘We reject them,’ they should ask instruction from the well informed; else ought they to reject whatever they cannot understand in divine Scripture, and to find fault with the writers. But this were the venture of heretics rather than of us Christians; for what we do not understand in the sacred oracles, instead of rejecting, we seek from persons to whom the Lord has revealed it, and from them we ask for instruction. But since they thus make a pretence of the obscurity of such expressions, let them at least confess what is annexed to the Creed, and anathematize those who hold that ‘the Son is from nothing,’ and ‘He was not before His generation,’ and ‘the Word of God is a creature and work,’ and ‘He is alterable by nature,’ and ‘from another subsistence;’ and in a word let them anathematize the Arian heresy, which has originated such irreligion. Nor let them say any more, ‘We reject the terms,’ but that ‘we do not yet understand them;’ by way of having some reason to shew for declining them. But I know well, and am sure, and they know it too, that if they could confess all this and anathematize the Arian heresy, they would no longer deny those terms of the Council. For on this account it was that the Fathers, after declaring that the Son was begotten from the Father’s essence, and Co-essential with Him, thereupon added, ‘But those who say’—what has just been quoted, the symbols of the Arian heresy,—‘we anathematize;’ I mean, in order to shew that the statements are parallel, and that the terms in the Creed imply the disclaimers subjoined, and that all who confess the terms, will certainly understand the disclaimers. But those who both dissent from the latter and impugn the former, such men are proved on every side to be foes of Christ.
41. Those who deny the Council altogether, are sufficiently exposed by these brief remarks; those, however, who accept everything else that was defined at Nicæa, and doubt only about the Coessential, must not be treated as enemies; nor do we here attack them as Ario-maniacs, nor as opponents of the Fathers, but we discuss the matter with them as brothers with brothers 3623 , who mean what we mean, and dispute only about the word. For, confessing that the Son is from the essence of the Father, and not from other subsistence, and that He is not a creature nor work, but His genuine and natural offspring, and that He is eternally with the Father as being His Word and Wisdom, they are not far from accepting even the phrase, ‘Coessential.’ Now such is Basil, who wrote from Ancyra concerning the faith 3624 . For only to say ‘like according to essence,’ is very far from signifying ‘of the essence,’ by which, rather, as they say themselves, the genuineness of the Son to the Father is signified. Thus tin is only like to silver, a wolf to a dog, and gilt brass to the true metal; but tin is not from silver, nor could a wolf be accounted the offspring of a dog. 3625 But since they say that He is ‘of the essence’ and ‘Like-in-essence,’ what do they signify by these but ‘Coessential 3626 ?’ For, while to say only ‘Like-in-essence,’ does not necessarily convey ‘of the essence,’ on the contrary, to say ‘Coessential,’ is to signify the meaning of both terms, ‘Like-in-essence,’ and ‘of the essence.’ And accordingly they themselves in controversy with those who say that the Word is a creature, instead of allowing Him to be genuine Son, have taken their proofs against them from human illustrations of son and father 3627 , with this exception that God is not as man, nor the generation of the Son as issue of man, but such as may be ascribed to God, and is fit for us to think. Thus they have called the Father the Fount of Wisdom and Life, and the Son the Radiance of the Eternal Light, and the Offspring from the Fountain, as He says, ‘I am the Life,’ and, ‘I Wisdom dwell with Prudence’ (John 14:6, Prov. 8:12). But the Radiance from the Light, and Offspring from Fountain, and Son from Father, how can these be so fitly expressed as by ‘Coessential?’ And is there any cause of fear, lest, because the offspring from men are coessential, the Son, by being called Coessential, be Himself considered as a human offspring too? perish the thought! not so; but the explanation is easy. For the Son is the Father’s Word and Wisdom; whence we learn the impassibility and indivisibility of such a generation from the Father 3628 . For not even man’s word is part of him, nor proceeds from him according to passion 3629 ; much less God’s Word; whom the Father has declared to be His own Son, lest, on the other hand, if we merely heard of ‘Word,’ we should suppose Him, such as is the word of man, impersonal; but that, hearing that He is Son, we may acknowledge Him to be living Word and substantive Wisdom.
42. Accordingly, as in saying ‘offspring,’ we have no human thoughts, and, though we know God to be a Father, we entertain no material ideas concerning Him, but while we listen to these illustrations and terms, we think suitably of God, for He is not as man, so in like manner, when we hear of ‘coessential,’ we ought to transcend all sense, and, according to the Proverb, ‘understand by the understanding what is set before us’ (Prov. xxiii. 1); so as to know, that not by will, but in truth, is He genuine from the Father, as Life from Fountain, and Radiance from Light. Else 3630 why should we understand ‘offspring’ and ‘son,’ in no corporeal way, while we conceive of ‘coessential’ as after the manner of bodies? especially since these terms are not here used about different subjects, but of whom ‘offspring’ is predicated, of Him is ‘coessential’ also. And it is but consistent to attach the same sense to both expressions as applied to the Saviour, and not to interpret ‘offspring’ in a good sense, and ‘coessential’ otherwise; since to be consistent, ye who are thus minded and who say that the Son is Word and Wisdom of the Father, should entertain a different view of these terms also, and understand Word in another sense, and Wisdom in yet another. But, as this would be absurd (for the Son is the Father’s Word and Wisdom, and the Offspring from the Father is one and proper to His essence), so the sense of ‘Offspring’ and ‘Coessential’ is one, and whoso considers the Son an offspring, rightly considers Him also as ‘coessential.’
43. This is sufficient to shew that the meaning of the beloved ones 3631 is not foreign nor far from the ‘Coessential.’ But since, as they allege 3632 (for I have not the Epistle in question), the Bishops who condemned the Samosatene 3633 have said in writing that the Son is not coessential with the Father, and so it comes to pass that they, for caution and honour towards those who have so said, thus feel about that expression, it will be to the purpose cautiously to argue with them this point also. Certainly it is unbecoming to make the one conflict with the others; for all are fathers; nor is it religious to settle, that these have spoken well, and those ill; for all of them fell asleep in Christ. Nor is it right to be disputatious, and to compare the respective numbers of those who met in the Councils, lest the three hundred seem to throw the lesser into the shade; nor to compare the dates, lest those who preceded seem to eclipse those that came after. For all, I say, are fathers; and yet not even the three hundred laid down nothing new, nor was it in any self-confidence that they became champions of words not in Scripture, but they fell back upon fathers, as did the others, and used their words. For there have been two of the name of Dionysius, much older than the seventy who deposed the Samosatene, of whom one was of Rome, and the other of Alexandria. But a charge had been laid by some persons against the Bishop of Alexandria before the Bishop of Rome, as if he had said that the Son was made, and not coessential with the Father. And, the synod at Rome being indignant, the Bishop of Rome expressed their united sentiments in a letter to his namesake. And so the latter, in defence, wrote a book with the title ‘of Refutation and Defence;’ and thus he writes to the other:
44. And 3634 I wrote in another Letter a refutation of the false charge which they bring against me, that I deny that Christ is coessential with God. For though I say that I have not found or read this term anywhere in holy Scripture, yet my remarks which follow, and which they have not noticed, are not inconsistent with that belief. For I instanced a human production, which is evidently homogeneous, and I observed that undeniably fathers differed from their children, only in not being the same individuals; otherwise there could be neither parents nor children. And my Letter, as I said before, owing to present circumstances, I am unable to produce, or I would have sent you the very words I used, or rather a copy of it all; which, if I have an opportunity, I will do still. But I am sure from recollection, that I adduced many parallels of things kindred with each other, for instance, that a plant grown from seed or from root, was other than that from which it sprang, and yet altogether one in nature with it; and that a stream flowing from a fountain, changed its appearance and its name, for that neither the fountain was called stream, nor the stream fountain, but both existed, and that the fountain was as it were father, but the stream was what was generated from the fountain.
45. Thus the Bishop. If then any one finds fault with those who met at Nicæa, as if they contradicted the decisions of their predecessors, he might reasonably find fault also with the seventy, because they did not keep to the statements of their own predecessors; but such were the Dionysii and the Bishops assembled on that occasion at Rome. But neither these nor those is it pious to blame; for all were charged with the embassy of Christ, and all have given diligence against the heretics, and the one party condemned the Samosatene, while the other condemned the Arian heresy. And rightly have both these and those written, and suitably to the matter in hand. And as the blessed Apostle, writing to the Romans, said, ‘The Law is spiritual, the Law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good’ (Rom. 7:14, 12); and soon after, ‘What the Law could not do, in that it was weak’ (Rom. 8.3), but wrote to the Hebrews, ‘The Law has made no one perfect’ (Heb. vii. 19); and to the Galatians, ‘By the Law no one is justified’ (Gal. iii. 11), but to Timothy, ‘The Law is good, if a man use it lawfully’ (1 Tim. i. 8); and no one would accuse the Saint of inconsistency and variation in writing, but rather would admire how suitably he wrote to each, to teach the Romans and the others to turn from the letter to the spirit, but to instruct the Hebrews and Galatians to place their hopes, not in the Law, but in the Lord who had given the Law;—so, if the Fathers of the two Councils made different mention of the Coessential, we ought not in any respect to differ from them, but to investigate their meaning, and this will fully show us the agreement of both the Councils. For they who deposed the Samosatene took Coessential in a bodily sense, because Paul had attempted sophistry and said, ‘Unless Christ has of man become God, it follows that He is Coessential with the Father; and if so, of necessity there are three essences, one the previous essence, and the other two from it;’ and therefore guarding against this they said with good reason, that Christ was not Coessential 3635 . For the Son is not related to the Father as he imagined. But the Bishops who anathematized the Arian heresy, understanding Paul’s craft, and reflecting that the word ‘Coessential’ has not this meaning when used of things immaterial 3636 , and especially of God, and acknowledging that the Word was not a creature, but an offspring from the essence, and that the Father’s essence was the origin and root and fountain of the Son, and that he was of very truth His Father’s likeness, and not of different nature, as we are, and separate from the Father, but that, as being from Him, He exists as Son indivisible, as radiance is with respect to Light, and knowing too the illustrations used in Dionysius’s case, the ‘fountain,’ and the defence of ‘Coessential’ and before this the Saviour’s saying, symbolical of unity 3637 , ‘I and the Father are one’ and ‘he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father’ (John 10:30, John 14:9), on these grounds reasonably asserted on their part, that the Son was Coessential. And as, according to a former remark, no one would blame the Apostle, if he wrote to the Romans about the Law in one way, and to the Hebrews in another; in like manner, neither would the present Bishops find fault with the ancient, having regard to their interpretation, nor again in view of theirs and of the need of their so writing about the Lord, would the ancient censure their successors. Yes surely, each Council has a sufficient reason for its own language; for since the Samosatene held that the Son was not before Mary, but received from her the origin of His being, therefore those who then met deposed him and pronounced him heretic; but concerning the Son’s Godhead writing in simplicity, they arrived not at accuracy concerning the Coessential, but, as they understood the word, so spoke they about it. For they directed all their thoughts to destroy the device of the Samosatene, and to shew that the Son was before all things, and that, instead of becoming God from man, He, being God, had put on a servant’s form, and being Word, had become flesh, as John says (Phil. 2:7, John 1:14). This is how they dealt with the blasphemies of Paul; but when Eusebius, Arius, and their fellows said that though the Son was before time, yet was He made and one of the creatures, and as to the phrase ‘from God,’ they did not believe it in the sense of His being genuine Son from Father, but maintained it as it is said of the creatures, and as to the oneness 3638 of likeness 3639 between the Son and the Father, did not confess that the Son is like the Father according to essence, or according to nature as a son resembles his father, but because of Their agreement of doctrines and of teaching 3640 ; nay, when they drew a line and an utter distinction between the Son’s essence and the Father, ascribing to Him an origin of being, other than the Father, and degrading Him to the creatures, on this account the Bishops assembled at Nicæa, with a view to the craft of the parties so thinking, and as bringing together the sense from the Scriptures, cleared up the point, by affirming the ‘Coessential;’ that both the true genuineness of the Son might thereby be known, and that to things originate might be ascribed nothing in common with Him. For the precision of this phrase detects their pretence, whenever they use the phrase ‘from God,’ and gets rid of all the subtleties with which they seduce the simple. For whereas they contrive to put a sophistical construction on all other words at their will, this phrase only, as detecting their heresy, do they dread; which the Fathers set down as a bulwark 3641 against their irreligious notions one and all.
46. Let then all contention cease, nor let us any longer conflict, though the Councils have differently taken the phrase ‘Coessential,’ for we have already assigned a sufficient defence of them; and to it the following may be added:—We have not derived the word ‘Unoriginate’ from Scripture, (for no where does Scripture call God Unoriginate,) yet since it has many authorities in its favour, I was curious about the term, and found that it too has different senses 3642 . Some, for instance, call what is, but is neither generated, nor has any personal cause at all, unoriginate; and others, the uncreate. As then a person, having in view the former of these senses, viz. ‘that which has no personal cause,’ might say that the Son was not unoriginate, yet would not blame any one whom he perceived to have in view the other meaning, ‘not a work or creature but an eternal offspring,’ and to affirm accordingly that the Son was unoriginate, (for both speak suitably with a view to their own object); so, even granting that the Fathers have spoken variously concerning the Coessential, let us not dispute about it, but take what they deliver to us in a religious way, when especially their anxiety was directed in behalf of religion.
47. Ignatius, for instance, who was appointed Bishop in Antioch after the Apostles, and became a martyr of Christ, writes concerning the Lord thus: ‘There is one physician, fleshly and spiritual, originate and unoriginate 3643 ,’ God in man, true life in death, both from Mary and from God;’ whereas some teachers who followed Ignatius, write in their turn, ‘One is the Unoriginate, the Father, and one the genuine Son from Him, true offspring, Word and Wisdom of the Father 3644 .’ If therefore we have hostile feelings towards these writers, then have we right to quarrel with the Councils; but if, knowing their faith in Christ, we are persuaded that the blessed Ignatius was right in writing that Christ was originate on account of the flesh (for He became flesh), yet unoriginate, because He is not in the number of things made and originated, but Son from Father; and if we are aware too that those who have said that the Unoriginate is One, meaning the Father, did not mean to lay down that the Word was originated and made, but that the Father has no personal cause, but rather is Himself Father of Wisdom, and in Wisdom has made all things that are originated; why do we not combine all our Fathers in religious belief, those who deposed the Samosatene as well as those who proscribed the Arian heresy, instead of making distinctions between them and refusing to entertain a right opinion of them? I repeat, that those, in view of the sophistical explanation of the Samosatene, wrote, ‘He is not coessential 3645 ;’ and these, with an apposite meaning, said that He was. For myself, I have written these brief remarks, from my feeling towards persons who were religious to Christ-ward; but were it possible to come by the Epistle which we are told that the former wrote, I consider we should find further grounds for the aforesaid proceeding of those blessed men. For it is right and meet thus to feel, and to maintain a good conscience toward the Fathers, if we be not spurious children, but have received the traditions from them, and the lessons of religion at their hands.
48. Such then, as we confess and believe, being the sense of the Fathers, proceed we even in their company to examine once more the matter, calmly and with a kindly sympathy, with reference to what has been said before, viz. whether the Bishops collected at Nicæa do not really prove to have thought aright. For if the Word be a work and foreign to the Father’s essence, so that He is separated from the Father by the difference of nature, He cannot be one in essence with Him, but rather He is homogeneous by nature with the works, though He surpass them in grace 3646 . On the other hand, if we confess that He is not a work but the genuine offspring of the Father’s essence, it would follow that He is inseparable from the Father, being connatural, because He is begotten from Him. And being such, good reason He should be called Coessential. Next, if the Son be not such from participation, but is in His essence the Father’s Word and Wisdom, and this essence is the offspring of the Father’s essence 3647 , and its likeness as the radiance is of the light, and the Son says, ‘I and the Father are One,’ and, ‘he that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father’ (John 10:30, John 14:9), how must we understand these words? or how shall we so explain them as to preserve the oneness of the Father and the Son? Now as to its consisting in agreement 3648 of doctrines, and in the Son’s not disagreeing with the Father, as the Arians say, such an interpretation is a sorry one; for both the Saints, and still more Angels and Archangels, have such an agreement with God, and there is no disagreement among them. For he who disagreed, the devil, was beheld to fall from the heavens, as the Lord said. Therefore if by reason of agreement the Father and the Son are one, there would be things originated which had this agreement with God, and each of these might say, ‘I and the Father are One.’ But if this be absurd, and so it truly is, it follows of necessity that we must conceive of Son’s and Father’s oneness in the way of essence. For things originate, though they have an agreement with their Maker, yet possess it only by influence 3649 , and by participation, and through the mind; the transgression of which forfeits heaven. But the Son, being an offspring from the essence, is one by essence, Himself and the Father that begat Him.
49. This is why He has equality with the Father by titles expressive of unity 3650 , and what is said of the Father, is said in Scripture of the Son also, all but His being called Father 3651 . For the Son Himself said, ‘All things that the Father hath are Mine’ (John xvi. 15); and He says to the Father, ‘All Mine are Thine, and Thine are Mine’ (John xvii. 10),—as for instance 3652 , the name God; for ‘the Word was God;’—Almighty, ‘Thus saith He that is, and that was, and that is to come, the Almighty’ (John 1:1, Rev. 1:8):—the being Light, ‘I am,’ He says, ‘the Light’ (John viii. 12):—the Operative Cause, ‘All things were made by Him,’ and, ‘whatsoever I see the Father do, I do also’ (John 1:3, John 5:19):—the being Everlasting, ‘His eternal power and godhead,’ and, ‘In the beginning was the Word,’ and, ‘He was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world;’—the being Lord, for, ‘The Lord rained fire and brimstone from the Lord,’ and the Father says, ‘I am the Lord,’ and, ‘Thus saith the Lord, the Almighty God;’ and of the Son Paul speaks thus, ‘One Lord Jesus Christ, through whom all things’ (Rom. 1:20, John 1:1, 9, Gen. 19:24, Isa. 45:5, Amos 5:16, 1 Cor. 8:6). And on the Father Angels wait, and again the Son too is worshipped by them, ‘And let all the Angels of God worship Him;’ and He is said to be Lord of Angels, for ‘the Angels ministered unto Him,’ and ‘the Son of Man shall send His Angels.’ The being honoured as the Father, for ‘that they may honour the Son,’ He says, ‘as they honour the Father;’—being equal to God, ‘He counted it not a prize to be equal with God’ (Heb. 1:6, Matt. 4:11, Matt. 24:31, John 5:23, Phil. 2:6):— the being Truth from the True, and Life from the Living, as being truly from the Fountain, even the Father;—the quickening and raising the dead as the Father, for so it is written in the Gospel. And of the Father it is written, ‘The Lord thy God is One Lord,’ and, ‘The God of gods, the Lord, hath spoken, and hath called the earth;’ and of the Son, ‘The Lord God hath shined upon us,’ and, ‘The God of gods shall be seen in Sion.’ And again of God, Isaiah says, ‘Who is a God like unto Thee, taking away iniquities and passing over unrighteousness?’ (Deut. 6:4, Ps. 50:1, Ps. 18:27, Ps. 84:7, 70, Mic. 7:18). But the Son said to whom He would, ‘Thy sins are forgiven thee;’ for instance, when, on the Jews murmuring, He manifested the remission by His act, saying to the paralytic, ‘Rise, take up thy bed, and go unto thy house.’ And of God Paul says, ‘To the King eternal;’ and again of the Son, David in the Psalm, ‘Lift up your gates, O ye rulers, and be ye lift up ye everlasting doors, and the King of glory shall come in.’ And Daniel heard it said, ‘His Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom, and His Kingdom shall not be destroyed’ (Matt. 9:5, Mark 2:11, 1 Tim. 1:17, Ps. 24:7, Dan. 4:3, Dan. 7:14). And in a word, all that you find said of the Father, so much will you find said of the Son, all but His being Father, as has been said.
50. If then any think of other beginning, and other Father, considering the equality of these attributes, it is a mad thought. But if, since the Son is from the Father, all that is the Father’s is the Son’s as in an image and Expression, let it be considered dispassionately, whether an essence foreign from the Father’s essence admit of such attributes; and whether such a one be other in nature and alien in essence, and not coessential with the Father. For we must take reverent heed, lest transferring what is proper to the Father to what is unlike Him in essence, and expressing the Father’s godhead by what is unlike in kind and alien in essence, we introduce another essence foreign to Him, yet capable of the properties of the first essence 3653 , and lest we be silenced by God Himself, saying, ‘My glory I will not give to another,’ and be discovered worshipping this alien God, and be accounted such as were the Jews of that day, who said, ‘Wherefore dost Thou, being a man, make Thyself God?’ referring, the while, to another source the things of the Spirit, and blasphemously saying, ‘He casteth out devils through Beelzebub’ (Isa. 42:8, John 10:33, Luke 11:15). But if this is shocking, plainly the Son is not unlike in essence, but coessential with the Father; for if what the Father has is by nature the Son’s, and the Son Himself is from the Father, and because of this oneness of godhead and of nature He and the Father are one, and He that hath seen the Son hath seen the Father, reasonably is He called by the Fathers ‘Coessential;’ for to what is other in essence, it belongs not to possess such prerogatives.
51. And again, if, as we have said before, the Son is not such by participation, but, while all things originated have by participation the grace of God, He is the Father’s Wisdom and Word of which all things partake 3654 , it follows that He, being the deifying and enlightening power of the Father, in which all things are deified and quickened, is not alien in essence from the Father, but coessential. For by partaking of Him, we partake of the Father; because that the Word is the Father’s own. Whence, if He was Himself too from participation, and not from the Father His essential Godhead and Image, He would not deify 3655 , being deified Himself. For it is not possible that He, who merely possesses from participation, should impart of that partaking to others, since what He has is not His own, but the Giver’s; and what He has received, is barely the grace sufficient for Himself. However, let us fairly examine the reason why some, as is said, decline the ‘Coessential,’ whether it does not rather shew that the Son is coessential with the Father. They say then, as you have written, that it is not right to say that the Son is coessential with the Father, because he who speaks of ‘coessential’ speaks of three, one essence pre-existing, and that those who are generated from it are coessential: and they add, ‘If then the Son be coessential with the Father, then an essence must be previously supposed, from which they have been generated; and that the One is not Father and the Other Son, but they are brothers together. 3656 ’ As to all this, though it be a Greek interpretation, and what comes from them does not bind us 3657 , still let us see whether those things which are called coessential and are collateral, as derived from one essence presupposed, are coessential with each other, or with the essence from which they are generated. For if only with each other, then are they other in essence and unlike, when referred to that essence which generated them; for other in essence is opposed to coessential; but if each be coessential with the essence which generated them, it is thereby confessed that what is generated from any thing, is coessential with that which generated it; and there is no need of seeking for three essences, but merely to seek whether it be true that this is from that 3658 . For should it happen that there were not two brothers, but that only one had come of that essence, he that was generated would not be called alien in essence, merely because there was no other from the essence than he; but though alone, he must be coessential with him that begat him. For what shall we say about Jephtha’s daughter; because she was only-begotten, and ‘he had not,’ says Scripture, ‘other child’ (Jud. xi. 34); and again, concerning the widow’s son, whom the Lord raised from the dead, because he too had no brother, but was only-begotten, was on that account neither of these coessential with him that begat? Surely they were, for they were children, and this is a property of children with reference to their parents. And in like manner also, when the Fathers said that the Son of God was from His essence, reasonably have they spoken of Him as coessential. For the like property has the radiance compared with the light. Else it follows that not even the creation came out of nothing. For whereas men beget with passion 3659 , so again they work upon an existing subject matter, and otherwise cannot make. But if we do not understand creation in a human way 3660 , when we attribute it to God, much less seemly is it to understand generation in a human way, or to give a corporeal sense to Coessential; instead of receding from things originate, casting away human images, nay, all things sensible, and ascending 3661 to the Father 3662 , lest we rob the Father of the Son in ignorance, and rank Him among His own creatures.
52. Further, if, in confessing Father and Son, we spoke of two beginnings or two Gods as Marcion and Valentinus 3663 , or said that the Son had any other mode of godhead, and was not the Image and Expression of the Father, as being by nature born from Him, then He might be considered unlike; for such essences are altogether unlike each other. But if we acknowledge that the Father’s godhead is one and sole, and that of Him the Son is the Word and Wisdom; and, as thus believing, are far from speaking of two Gods, but understand the oneness of the Son with the Father to be, not in likeness of their teaching, but according to essence and in truth, and hence speak not of two Gods but of one God; there being but one Form 3664 of Godhead, as the Light is one and the Radiance; (for this was seen by the Patriarch Jacob, as Scripture says, ‘The sun rose upon him when the Form of God passed by,’ Gen. xxxii. 31, LXX.); and beholding this, and understanding of whom He was Son and Image, the holy Prophets say, ‘The Word of the Lord came to me;’ and recognising the Father, who was beheld and revealed in Him, they made bold to say, ‘The God of our fathers hath appeared unto me, the God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob’ (Exod. iii. 16); this being so, wherefore scruple we to call Him coessential who is one with the Father, and appears as doth the Father, according to likeness and oneness of godhead? For if, as has been many times said, He has it not to be proper to the Father’s essence, nor to resemble, as a Son, we may well scruple: but if this be the illuminating and creative Power, specially proper to the Father, without Whom He neither frames nor is known (for all things consist through Him and in Him); wherefore, perceiving the fact, do we decline to use the phrase conveying it? For what is it to be thus connatural with the Father, but to be one in essence with Him? for God attached not to Him the Son from without 3665 , as needing a servant; nor are the works on a level with the Creator, and honoured as He is, or to be thought one with the Father. Or let a man venture to make the distinction, that the sun and the radiance are two lights, or different essences; or to say that the radiance accrued to it over and above, and is not a simple and pure offspring from the sun; such, that sun and radiance are two, but the light one, because the radiance is an offspring from the Sun. But, whereas not more divisible, nay less divisible is the nature 3666 of the Son towards the Father, and the godhead not accruing to the Son, but the Father’s godhead being in the Son, so that he that hath seen the Son hath seen the Father in Him; wherefore should not such a one be called Coessential?
53. Even this is sufficient to dissuade you from blaming those who have said that the Son was coessential with the Father, and yet let us examine the very term ‘Coessential,’ in itself, by way of seeing whether we ought to use it at all, and whether it be a proper term, and is suitable to apply to the Son. For you know yourselves, and no one can dispute it, that Like is not predicated of essence, but of habits, and qualities; for in the case of essences we speak, not of likeness, but of identity. Man, for instance, is said to be like man, not in essence, but according to habit and character; for in essence men are of one nature. And again, man is not said to be unlike dog, but to be of different nature. Accordingly while the former are of one nature and coessential, the latter are different in both. Therefore, in speaking of Like according to essence, we mean like by participation; (for Likeness is a quality, which may attach to essence), and this would be proper to creatures for they, by partaking, are made like to God. For ‘when He shall appear,’ says Scripture, ‘we shall be like Him’ (1 John iii. 2), like, that is, not in essence but in sonship, which we shall partake from Him. If then ye speak of the Son as being by participation, then indeed call Him Like-in-essence; but thus spoken of, He is not Truth, nor Light at all, nor in nature God. For things which are from participation, are called like, not in reality, but from resemblance to reality; so that they may swerve, or be taken from those who share them. And this, again, is proper to creatures and works. Therefore, if this be out of place, He must be, not by participation, but in nature and truth Son, Light, Wisdom, God; and being by nature, and not by sharing, He would properly be called, not Like-in-essence, but Coessential. But what would not be asserted, even in the case of others (for the Like has been shewn to be inapplicable to essences), is it not folly, not to say violence, to put forward in the case of the Son, instead of the ‘Coessential?’
54. This is why the Nicene Council was correct in writing, what it was becoming to say, that the Son, begotten from the Father’s essence, is coessential with Him. And if we too have been taught the same thing, let us not fight with shadows, especially as knowing, that they who have so defined, have made this confession of faith, not to misrepresent the truth, but as vindicating the truth and religiousness towards Christ, and also as destroying the blasphemies against Him of the Ario-maniacs. For this must be considered and noted carefully, that, in using unlike-in-essence, and other-in-essence, we signify not the true Son, but some one of the creatures, and an introduced and adopted Son, which pleases the heretics; but when we speak uncontroversially of the Coessential, we signify a genuine Son born of the Father; though at this Christ’s enemies often burst with rage 3667 . What then I have learned myself, and have heard men of judgment say, I have written in few words; but do you, remaining on the foundation of the Apostles, and holding fast the traditions of the Fathers, pray that now at length all strife and rivalry may cease, and the futile questions of the heretics may be condemned, and all logomachy 3668 ; and the guilty and murderous heresy of the Arians may disappear, and the truth may shine again in the hearts of all, so that all every where may ‘say the same thing’ (1 Cor. i. 10), and think the same thing 3669 , and that, no Arian contumelies remaining, it may be said and confessed in every Church, ‘One Lord, one faith, one baptism’ (Eph. iv. 5), in Christ Jesus our Lord, through whom to the Father be the glory and the strength, unto ages of ages. Amen.
Postscript.
55. After I had written my account of the Councils 3670 , I had information that the most irreligious 3671 Constantius had sent Letters to the Bishops remaining in Ariminum; and I have taken pains to get copies of them from true brethren and to send them to you, and also what the Bishops answered; that you may know the irreligious craft of the Emperor, and the firm and unswerving purpose of the Bishops towards the truth.
Interpretation of the Letter 3672 .
Constantius, Victorious and Triumphant, Augustus, to all Bishops who are assembled at Ariminum.
That the divine and adorable Law is our chief care, your excellencies are not ignorant; but as yet we have been unable to receive the twenty Bishops sent by your wisdom, and charged with the legation from you, for we are pressed by a necessary expedition against the Barbarians; and as ye know, it beseems to have the soul clear from every care, when one handles the matters of the Divine Law. Therefore we have ordered the Bishops to await our return at Adrianople; that, when all public affairs are well arranged, then at length we may hear and weigh their suggestions. Let it not then be grievous to your constancy to await their return, that, when they come back with our answer to you, ye may be able to bring matters to a close which so deeply affect the well-being of the Catholic Church.
This was what the Bishops received at the hands of three emissaries.
Reply of the Bishops.
The letter of your humanity we have received, most God-beloved Lord Emperor, which reports that, on account of stress of public affairs, as yet you have been unable to attend to our deputies; and in which you command us to await their return, until your godliness shall be advised by them of what we have defined conformably to our ancestors. However, we now profess and aver at once by these presents, that we shall not recede from our purpose, as we also instructed our deputies. We ask then that you will with serene countenance command these letters of our mediocrity to be read; but also that you will graciously receive those, with which we charged our deputies. This however your gentleness comprehends as well as we, that great grief and sadness at present prevail, because that, in these your most happy days, so many Churches are without Bishops. And on this account we again request your humanity, most God-beloved Lord Emperor, that, if it please your religiousness, you would command us, before the severe winter weather sets in, to return to our Churches, that so we may be able, unto God Almighty and our Lord and Saviour Christ, His Only-begotten Son, to fulfil together with our flocks our wonted prayers in behalf of your imperial sway, as indeed we have ever performed them, and at this time make them.
Additional Note.
The ‘list of Sirmian confessions’ published by Newman as an Excursus to the de Synodis is omitted here. It will be found printed as ‘Appendix iii.’ to his Arians of the Fourth Century.
The Excursus on a Creed ascribed (at the Council of Ephesus, see Hard. Conc. i. 1640, Hahn. §83; Routh Rell. iii. 367) to the 70 bishops who condemned Paul of Samosata, at Antioch a.d. 269, and containing the formula ὁμοούσιον (against this, supr. §§43–47), is also omitted, as bearing only very indirectly on the de Synodis. Caspari Alte und Neue Quellen (xi), p. 161, has thoroughly investigated the Confession since Newman wrote, and has proved (what Newman half suspected) that the document is of Apollinarian origin. As Caspari was unaware of Newman’s discussion, this result comes as the result of two independent investigations pursued on very different lines.]
Footnotes
468:3603The subject before us, naturally rises out of what has gone before. The Anomœan creed was hopeless; but with the Semi-Arians all that remained was the adjustment of phrases. Accordingly, Athan. goes on to propose such explanations as might clear the way for a re-union of Christendom. §47, note.
468:3604Vid. Orat. i. 8; iv. 23.
468:3605ὥρα. vid. Orat. i. §15; iv. §10; Serap. ii. 1. καίρος de Decr. §15. init.
468:3606‘The Apostle’ is a common title of S. Paul in antiquity. Cf. August. ad Bonifac. iii. 3.
469:3607Cf. de Decr. 22, note 1.
469:3608De Decr. 24, note 9.
469:3609Vid. supr. Orat. i. §15; de Decr. §22, note 1.
469:3610De Decr. 29, note 7.
469:3611Democritus, or Epicurus.
469:3612Anaxagoras.
469:3613De Decr. §19.
470:3614De Decr. 18, note 8.
470:3615[Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 (1).]
470:3616Supr. p. 73.
470:3617Supr. §29.
470:3618Supr. §8.
470:3619It must not be supposed from this that he approves [as adequate] the phrase ὅμοιος κατ᾽ οὐσίαν or ὁμοιούσιος, in this Treatise, for infr. §53. he rejects it on the ground that when we speak of ‘like,’ we imply qualities, not essence. Yet he himself frequently uses it, as other Fathers, and Orat. i. §26. uses ὅμοιος τῆς οὐσίας.
471:3620[Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 (2) a.]
471:3621Vid. p. 162, note 8. Cf. Greg. Naz. Orat. 31. 24. vid. also Hil. contr. Constant. 16. August. Ep. 238. n. 4–6. Cyril. Dial. i. p. 391. Petavius refers to other passages. de Trin. v. 5. §6.
471:3622§8.
472:3623[See Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 (2) c.]
472:3624[Ath. is referring to the Council of Ancyra, 358.]
472:3625So also de Decr. §23. p. 40. Pseudo-Ath. Hyp. Mel. et Euseb. Hil. de Syn. 89. The illustration runs into this position, ‘Things that are like, [need] not be the same.’ vid. §39. note 5. On the other hand, Athan. himself contends for the ταὐτὸν τῇ ὁμοιώσει, ‘the same in likeness.’ de Decr. §20.
472:3626Vid. Socr. iii. 25. p. 204. a.b. Una substantia religiose prædicabitur quæ ex nativitatis proprietate et ex naturæ similitudine ita indifferens sit, ut una dicatur. Hil. de Syn. 67.
472:3627Here at last Athan. alludes to the Ancyrene Synodal Letter, vid. Epiph. Hær. 73, 5 and 7. about which he has kept a pointed silence above, when tracing the course of the Arian confessions. That is, he treats the Semi-Arians as tenderly as S. Hilary, as soon as they break company with the Arians. The Ancyrene Council of 358 was a protest against the ‘blasphemia’ or second Sirmian Confession
472:3628It is usual with the Fathers to use the two terms ‘Son’ and ‘Word,’ to guard and complete the ordinary sense of each other, vid. p. 157, note 6; and p. 167, note 4. The term Son, used by itself, was abused into Arianism; and the term Word into Sabellianism; again the term Son might be accused of introducing material notions, and the term Word of imperfection and transitoriness. Each of them corrected the other. Orat. i. §28. iv. §8. Euseb. contr. Marc. ii. 4. p. 54. Isid. Pel. Ep. iv. 141. So S. Cyril says that we learn ‘from His being called Son that He is from Him, τὸ ἐξ αὐτοῦ; from His being called Wisdom and Word, that He is in Him,’ τὸ ἐν αὐτῷ. Thesaur. iv. p. 31. However, S. Athanasius observes, that properly speaking the one term implies the other, i.e. in its fulness. Orat. iii. §3. iv. §24 fin. On the other hand the heretics accused Catholics of inconsistency, or of a union of opposite errors, because they accepted all the Scripture images together. Vigilius of Thapsus, contr. Eutych. ii. init. vid. also i. init. and Eulogius, ap. Phot. 225, p. 759.
472:3629De Decr. §10.
472:3630Vid. Epiph. Hær. 73. 3, &c.
473:3631§54, note 2.
473:3632Vid. Hilar. de Syn. 81 init.; Epiph. Hær. 73. 12.
473:3633There were three Councils held against Paul of Samosata, of the dates of 264, 269, and an intermediate year. The third is spoken of in the text, which contrary to the opinion of Pagi, S. Basnage, and Tillemont, Pearson fixes at 265 or 266.
473:3634Vid. p. 167, and a different translation, p. 183.
474:3635This is in fact the objection which Arius urges against the Coessential, supr. §16, when he calls it the doctrine of Manichæus and Hieracas, vid. §16, note 11. The same objection is protested against by S. Basil, contr. Eunom. i. 19. Hilar. de Trin. iv. 4. Yet, while S. Basil agrees with Athan. in his account of the reason of the Council’s rejection of the word, S. Hilary on the contrary reports that Paul himself accepted it, i.e. in a Sabellian sense, and therefore the Council rejected it. ‘Male homoüsion Samosatenus confessus est, sed numquid melius Arii negaverunt.’ de Syn. 86.
474:3636Cf. Soz. iii. 18. The heretical party, starting with the notion in which their heresy in all its shades consisted, that the Son was a distinct being from the Father, concluded that ‘like in essence’ was the only term which would express the relation of the Son to the Father. Here then the word ‘coessential’ did just enable the Catholics to join issue with them, as exactly expressing what the Catholics wished to express, viz. that there was no such distinction between Them as made the term ‘like’ necessary, but that as material parent and offspring are individuals under one common species, so the Eternal Father and Son are Persons under one common individual essence.
474:3637§49.
474:3638τὴν τῆς ὁμοιώσεως ἑνότητα: and so pp. 163, note 9, 165, 166. And Basil. ταὐτότητα τῆς φύσεως, Ep. 8. 3: [but] ταὐτότητα τῆς οὐσιάς, Cyril in Joan. lib. iii. c. v. p. 302. [cf. ταὐτοούσιον, p. 315, note 6.] It is uniformly asserted by the Catholics that the Father’s godhead, θεότης, is the Son’s; e.g. infr. §52; supr. p. 329 b, line 8; p. 333, note 5; Orat. i. 49 fin. ii. §18. §73. fin. iii. §26; iii. §5 fin. iii. §53; μίαν τὴν θεότητα καὶ τὸ ἴδιον τῆς οὐσίας τοῦ πατρός. §56 supr. p. 84 fin. vid. §52. note. This is an approach to the doctrine of the Una Res, defined in the fourth Lateran Council [in 1215, see Harnack Dogmg. iii. 447, note, and on the doctrine of the Greek Fathers, Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) b.]
474:3639Vid. Epiph. Hær. 73. 9 fin.
474:3640§23, note 3.
474:3641ἐπιτείχισμα; in like manner σύνδεσμον πίστεως. Epiph. Ancor. 6; cf. Hær. 69. 70; Ambros. de Fid. iii. 15.
475:3642[In this passage the difficulties and confusion which surround the terms ἀγένητος and ἀγέννητος (supr. p. 149, &c.) come to a head. The question is (assuming, as proved by Lightfoot, the validity of the distinction of the two in Athan.) which word is to be read here. The mss. are divided throughout between the two readings, but it is clear (so Lightf. and Zahn on Ign. Eph. 7) that one word alone is in view throughout the present passage. That word, then, is pronounced by Lightf., partly on the strength of the quotation from the unnamed teachers (infr. note 7), partly on the ground of a reference to §26 (see note 10 there), to be ἀγέννητος. With all deference to so great an authority, I cannot hesitate to pronounce for ἀγένητος. (1.) The parallelism of the two senses with the third and fourth senses of ἀγέν. Orat. i. 30. is almost decisive by itself. (2.) Ath.’s explanation of Ignatius. viz. that Christ is γένητος on account of the flesh (he would have referred γέννητος to His Essence, Orat. i. 56, certainly not to the flesh), while as Son and Word He is distinct from γένητα and ποιήματα, is even more decisive. (3.) His explanation §46, sub fin. that the Son is ἀγένητος because He is ἀΐδιον γέννημα would lose all sense if ἀγέννητος were read. As a matter of fact, ἀγέννητος is the specific, ἀγένητος the generic term: the former was not applicable to the Eternal Son; the latter was, except in the first of the two senses distinguished in the text; a sense, however, more properly coming under the specific idea of ἀγέννητος. This was the ambiguity which made the similarity of the two words so dangerous a weapon in Arian hands. The above note does not of course affect the true reading of Ign. Eph. 7, as to which Lightfoot and Zahn speak with authority: but it seems clear that Athan., however mistakenly, quotes Ign. with the reading ἀγένητος.]
475:3643Ign. ad Eph. [Lightf. Ign. p. 90, Zahn Patr. Apost. ii. p. 338.]
475:3644Not known, but cf. Clement. Strom. vi. 7. p. 769. ἓν μὲν τὸ ἀγέννητον, ὁ παντοκράτωρ θεὸς, ἓν δὲ καὶ τὸ προγεννηθὲν δι᾽ οὖ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδὲ ἕν.
475:3645[On the subject of the rejection of the ὁμοούσιον at this Council of Antioch, see Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) b.]
475:3646De Decr. §1.
476:3647§51, note.
476:3648§23, note 3, yet vid. Hipp. contr. Noet. 7.
476:3649κινήσει vid. Cyril. contr. Jul. viii. p. 274. Greg. Nyss. de Hom. Op. p. 87.
476:3650§45.
476:3651By ‘the Son being equal to the Father,’ is but meant that He is His ‘exact image;’ it does not imply any distinction of essence. Cf. Hil. de Syn. 73. But this implies some exception, for else He would not be like or equal, but the same. ibid. 72. Hence He is the Father’s image in all things except in being the Father, πλὴν τῆς ἀγεννησίας καὶ τῆς πατρότητος. Damasc. de Imag. iii. 18. p. 354. vid. also Basil. contr. Eun. ii. 28; Theod. Inconfus. p. 91; Basil. Ep. 38. 7 fin. [Through missing this point the] Arians asked why the Son was not the beginning of a θεογονία. Supr. p. 319 a, note 1. vid. infr. note 8.
476:3652Vid. Orat. iii. §4.
477:3653Arianism was in the dilemma of denying Christ’s divinity, or introducing a second God. The Arians proper went off on the former side of the alternative, the Semi-Arians on the latter; and Athan., as here addressing the Semi Arians, insists on the greatness of the latter error. This of course was the objection which attached to the words ὁμοιούσιον, ἀπαράλλακτος εἴκων, &c., when disjoined from the ὁμοούσιον; and Eusebius’s language, supr. p. 75, note 7, shews us that it is not an imaginary one.
477:3654De Decr. §10. p. 15, note 4.
477:3655ἐθεοποίησε Orat.ii. §70. de Decr. §14.
477:3656Cf. supr. p. 314, note 1, Cyr. Thesaur. pp. 22, 23.
477:3657Cf. p. 169, note 4a [and on οὐσία as a philosophical and theological term, Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) b. On the divergence of its theological use from its philosophical sense, see] Anastasius, Hodeg. 6. and Theorian, Legat. ad Arm. pp. 441, 2. Socr. iii. 25. Damascene, speaking of the Jacobite use of φύσις and ὑπόστασις says, ‘Who of holy men ever thus spoke? unless ye introduce to us your S. Aristotle, as a thirteenth Apostle, and prefer the idolater to the divinely inspired.’ cont. Jacob. 10. p. 399. and so again Leontius, speaking of Philoponus, who from the Monophysite confusion of nature and hypostasis was led into Tritheism. ‘He thus argued, taking his start from Aristotelic principles; for Aristotle says that there are of individuals particular substances as well as one common.’ De Sect. v. fin.
477:3658The argument, when drawn out, is virtually this: if, because two subjects are coessential, a third is pre-supposed of which they partake, then, since either of these two is coessential with that of which both partake, a new third must be supposed in which it and the pre-existing substance partake and thus an infinite series of things coessential must be supposed. Vid. Basil. Ep. 52. n. 2. [Cf. Aristot. Frag. 183, p. 1509 b 23.]
478:3659Orat. i. §28.
478:3660Vid. de Decr. §11, note 6: also Cyril, Thesaur. iv. p. 29: Basil. contr. Eun. ii. 23: Hil. de Syn. 17.
478:3661Naz. Orat. 28. 2.
478:3662S. Basil says in like manner that, though God is Father κυρίως properly, supr. p. 156, note 1, 157, note 6, 171, note 5, 319, note 3), yet it comes to the same thing if we were to say that He is τροπικῶς and ἐκ μεταφορᾶς, figuratively, such, contr. Eun. ii. 24; γέννησις implies two things,—passion, and relationship, οἰκείωσις φύσεως; accordingly we must take the latter as an indication of the divine sense of the term. Cf. also supr. p. 158, note 7, p. 322, Orat. ii. 32, iii. 18, 67, and Basil. contr. Eunom. ii. 17; Hil. de Trin. iv. 2. Vid. also Athan. ad Serap. i. 20. and Basil. Ep. 38. n. 5. and what is said of the office of faith in each of these.
478:3663Supr. p. 167, note 7, and p. 307.
478:3664ἕνος ὄντος εἴδους θεότητος: for the word εἶδος, cf. Orat. iii. 16 is generally applied to the Son, as in what follows, and is synonymous [?] with hypostasis; but it is remarkable that here it is almost synonymous with οὐσία or φύσις. Indeed in one sense nature, substance, and hypostasis, are all synonymous, i.e. as one and all denoting the Una Res, which is Almighty God. The apparent confusion is useful as reminding us of this great truth; vid. note 8, infr.
478:3665De Decr. §31.
478:3666[φύσις is here (as the apodosis of the clause shows) as well as in the next section, used as a somewhat more vague equivalent for οὐσία, not, as Newman contends in an omitted note, for ‘person,’ a use which is scarcely borne out by the (no doubt somewhat fluctuating) senses of φύσις in the passages quoted by him from Alexander (in Theod. H. E. i. 4, cf. Origen’s use of οὐσία, Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) a) and Cyril c. Nest. iii. p. 91. φύσις and οὐσία are nearly equivalent in the manifesto of Basil of Ancyra, whom Ath. has in view here, see Epiph. Hær. 73. 12–22.]
479:3667p. 171, note 6.
479:3668And so ταῖς λογομαχίαις, Basil de Sp. S. n. 16. It is used with an allusion to the fight against the Word, as χριστομαχεῖν and θεομαχεῖν. Thus λογομαχεῖν μελετήσαντες, καὶ λοιπὸν πνευματομαχοῦντες, ἔσονται μετ᾽ ὀλίγον νεκροὶ τῇ ἀλογί& 139·. Serap. iv. 1.
479:3669Cf. Hil. de Syn. 77, and appendix, note 3, also supr. p. 303, and note. The ὁμοούσιον was not imposed upon Ursacius and Valens, a.d. 347, by Pope Julius; nor in the Council of Aquileia in 381, was it offered by S. Ambrose to Palladius and Secundianus. S. Jerome’s account of the apology made by the Fathers of Ariminum is of the same kind. ‘We thought,’ they said, ‘the sense corresponded to the words, nor in the Church of God, where there is simplicity, and a pure confession, did we fear that one thing would be concealed in the heart, another uttered by the lips. We were deceived by our good opinion of the bad.’ ad Lucif. 19.
479:3670§11, note 7.
479:3671§12, note 2.
479:3672These two Letters are both in Socr. ii. 37. And the latter is in Theod. H. E. ii. 15. p. 878. in a different version from the Latin original.
Introduction to Tomus Ad Antiochenos.
————————————
The word ‘tome’ (τόμος) means either a section, or, in the case of such a document as that before us, a concise statement. It is commonly applied to synodical letters (cf. the ‘Tome’ of Leo, a.d. 450, to Flavian).
Upon the accession of Julian (November, 361) the Homœan ascendancy which had marked the last six years of Constantius collapsed. A few weeks after his accession (Feb. 362) an edict recalled all the exiled Bishops. On Feb. 21 Athanasius re-appeared in Alexandria. He was joined there by Lucifer of Cagliari and Eusebius of Vercellæ, who were in exile in Upper Egypt. Once more free, he took up the work of peace which had busied him in the last years of his exile (see Prolegg. ch. ii. §9). With a heathen once more on the throne of the Cæsars, there was everything to sober Christian party spirit, and to promise success to the council which met under Athanasius during the ensuing summer. Among the twenty-one bishops who formed the assembly the most notable are Eusebius of Vercellæ, Asterius of Petra, and Dracontius of Lesser Hermopolis and Adelphius of Onuphis, the friends and correspondents of Athanasius. The rest, with the exception of Anatolius of Eubœa, were all from Egypt and Marmarica, and (probably three only) from S.W. Asia. The council (Newman, Arians, v. i.; Gwatkin, Stud. p. 205, Krüger, Lucif. 45–53, was occupied with four problems: (1) The terms on which communion should be vouchsafed to those Arians who desired to re-unite (§§3, 8). They were to be asked for nothing beyond the Nicene test, and an express anathema against Arianism, including the doctrine that the Holy Spirit is a Creature. The latter point had been rising into prominence of late, and had called forth from Athanasius his four Discourses to Serapion of Thmuis. The emphatic way in which the point is pressed in §3, implies that an attempt was being made in some quarter to subscribe the Nicene Creed, while maintaining the Arian position with regard to the Holy Spirit. The language of §3 cannot be reconciled with the hypothesis (Gwatkin, Studies, 233), that no formal requirement was made by this council on the subject. The person aimed at was possibly Acacius, who (Serap. iv. 7) had treated the subject with levity, and yet was now disposed to come to terms (as he did a year later, Socr. iii. 25). It is true that we find the names of Macedonius and his followers (N.B. not Eleusius) in the number of the 59 who betook themselves to Liberius (Socr. iv. 12), and neither in their letter nor in his reply is there any allusion to the doctrine of the Holy Spirit; and that Basil (Ep. 204), with the sanction of Athanasius (cf. below, Letters 62, 63), did not press the test upon those who were otherwise orthodox. But the council of 362 has Syrian circumstances specially in view; and however we may explain it, its language is too clear to be mistaken. (On the general subject, cf. Letter 55.) (2) The Arian Christology also occupied the council (§7). The integrity of Christ’s human nature on the one hand, its perfect Union with the Word on the other, are clearly emphasised. This question had begun to come into prominent discussion in several parts of the Christian world (e.g. at Corinth, see infr. Letter 59), and was soon to give rise to the system of Apollinarius, who, however, it is interesting to note, was a party, by his legates, to the present decision. (3) The state of the Church at Antioch was the most practical problem before the council. Meletius was returning to the presidency of the main body of the Antiochene church, whose chief place of worship was the ‘Palaea’ (§3). Since the deposition of Eustathius (c. 330), the intransigent or ‘protestant’ body had been without a bishop, and were headed by the respected presbyter Paulinus. Small in numbers, and dependent for a church upon the good will of the Arians, they were yet strong in the unsullied orthodoxy of their antecedents, in the sympathy of the West and of Athanasius himself, who had given offence at Antioch in 346 by worshipping with them alone. Clearly the right course was that they should reunite with the main body under Meletius, and this was what the council recommended (§3), although, perhaps in deference to the more uncompromising spirits, the union is treated (ib. and 4) as a return of the larger body to the smaller, instead of vice versa. (For the sequel, see Prolegg. ubi supra.) (4) With the rivalry of parties at Antioch, a weighty question of theological terminology was indirectly involved. The word ὑπόστασις had been used in the Nicene anathema as a synonym of οὐσία (see Excursus A, pp. 77 sqq. above), and in this sense it was commonly used by Athanasius in agreement with the New Testament use of the word (Westcott on Heb. i. 3), with Dionysius of Rome, and with the West, to whom ὑπόστασις was etymologically identified with ‘Substantia’ their (perhaps imperfect) equivalent for οὐσία. On the other hand, the general tendency of Eastern Theology had been to use ὑπόστασις in the sense of Subject or Person, for which purpose it expressed the idea of individual essence less ambiguously than πρόσωπον. This was the use of the word adopted by Origen, Dionysius Alex. (supr. de Sent. Dionys.), Alexander of Alexandria (in his letter Thdt. H. E. i. 4. p. 16, l. 19), and by Athanasius himself in an earlier work (p. 90, supr.) At Antioch the Eustathians appear to have followed the Nicene and Western usage, using the word to emphasise the Individual Unity of God as against Arian or Subordinationist views, while the Meletians protested against the Marcellian monarchianism by insisting on three Hypostases in the Godhead. The contradiction was mainly verbal, the two parties being substantially at one as to the doctrine, but varying in its expression. Hence the wise and charitable decision of the council, which came naturally from one who, like Athanasius, could use either expression, though he had come to prefer the Western to the Eastern use 3673 .
The Tome was carried to Antioch by the five bishops named at the beginning of §1, and there subscribed by Paulinus and Karterius of Antaradus. As to its effect among the friends of Meletius our information is only inferential (see Gwatkin, Studies, p. 208). On the supposed disciplinary legislation of this council in relation to the Syntagma Doctrinæ, see Prolegg. ch. ii. §§9.
N.B. The translation of the present tract as well as that of the ad Afros and of Letters 56, 59, 60, 61, was made independently of that by Dr. Bright in his Later Treatises of S. Athanasius (see Prolegg. ch. i. §2), but has been carefully collated with it, and in not a few cases improved by its aid. For a fuller commentary on these pieces than has been possible in this volume, the reader is referred to Dr. Bright’s work.
Footnotes
482:3673It may be well to trace briefly the sense of these technical terms, the history and significance of which is a forcible reminder of the inability of Theology to bring the Infinite within the categories of the Finite, to do more than guard our Faith by pointing out the paths which experience has shewn to lead to some false limitation of the fulness of the Revelation of God in Christ.
The distinction (drawn out Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) b) between the primary and secondary sense of οὐσία in Greek metaphysics does not easily fit the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The οὐσία common to Father and Son is not the name of a Species, as ‘Man’ applies to Peter and Paul. But neither can the idea of πρώτη οὐσία be reconciled with inherence in three distinct personal existences. (Cf. supr. p. 409, note 7.)
But here the word ὑπόστασις comes in to help our imagination. The word (see Socr. H. E. iii. 7. Westcott, ubi supr. and Newman, Arians, App. 4), from various literal senses came to be transferred to the philosophical vocabulary, doing duty as verbal substantive not only for ὑφεστάναι but for ὑποκεῖσθαι. Like the concrete ὑποκείμενον it was applied (a) to matter as underlying form, (b) to substance as underlying attributes. In this latter use it served to distinguish πρώτη from δευτέρα οὐσία, expressing moreover a complete self-contained existence in a way that οὐσία did not. When therefore the idea of personal individuality has to be expressed, ὑπόστασις is more suitable than οὐσία. But the ambiguity of the latter word remains. Those who preferred to speak of μία ὑπόστασις thought of the Divine Essence rather as πρώτη οὐσία, and of One Personal God, with whom Father, Son, and Spirit were each absolutely and fully identified (περιχώρησις), while with those who preferred πρεῖς ὑποστάσεις the idea of the Divine οὐσία approximated to δευτέρα οὐσία, and guarded against Tritheism solely by holding fast to the Monarchia of the Father. The corrective to each position lay in the recognition of the other, i.e. of its own incompleteness. (See further Prolegg. ubi supr. and Zahn, Marcell. p. 87, sq.)
Tome or Synodal Letter to the People of Antioch.
————————————
To our beloved and much-desired fellow-ministers Eusebius 3674 , Lucifer 3675 , Asterius 3676 , Kymatius, and Anatolius, Athanasius and the bishops present in Alexandria from Italy and Arabia, Egypt and Libya; Eusebius, Asterius, Gaius, Agathus, Ammonius, Agathodæmon, Dracontius, Adelphius, Hermæon, Marcus, Theodorus, Andreas, Paphnutius, another Marcus, Zoilus, Menas, George, Lucius, Macarius and the rest, all greeting in Christ.
We are persuaded that being ministers of God and good stewards ye are sufficient to order the affairs of the Church in every respect. But since it has come to us, that many who were formerly separated from us by jealousy now wish for peace, while many also having severed their connection with the Arian madmen are desiring our communion, we think it well to write to your courtesy what ourselves and the beloved Eusebius and Asterius have drawn up: yourselves being our beloved and truly most-desired fellow-ministers. We rejoice at the said tidings, and pray that even if any be left still far from us, and if any appear to be in agreement with the Arians, he may promptly leave their madness, so that for the future all men everywhere may say, ‘One Lord, one faith 3677 .’ For as the psalmist says, what is so good or pleasant as for brethren to dwell in unity 3678 . But our dwelling is the Church, and our mind ought to be the same. For thus we believe that the Lord also will dwell with us, who says, ‘I will dwell with them and walk in them 3679 ’ and ‘Here will I dwell for I have a delight therein 3680 .’ But by ‘here’ what is meant but there where one faith and religion is preached?
2. Mission of Eusebius and Asterius.
We then of Egypt truly wished to go to you along with our beloved Eusebius and Asterius, for many reasons, but chiefly that we might embrace your affection and together enjoy the said peace and concord. But since, as we declared in our other letters, and as ye may learn from our fellow-ministers, the needs of the church detain us, with much regret we begged the same fellow-ministers of ours, Eusebius and Asterius, to go to you in our stead. And we thank their piety in that although they might have gone at once to their dioceses, they preferred to go to you at all costs, on account of the pressing need of the Church. They therefore having consented, we consoled ourselves with the consideration that you and they being there, we all were present with you in mind.
3. The ‘Meletians’ to be acknowledged, and all who renounce heresy, especially as to the Holy Spirit.
As many then as desire peace with us, and specially those who assemble in the Old [Church] 3681 and those again who are seceding from the Arians, do ye call to yourselves, and receive them as parents their sons, and welcome them as tutors and guardians; and unite them to our beloved Paulinus and his people, without requiring more from them than to anathematise the Arian heresy and confess the faith confessed by the holy fathers at Nicæa, and to anathematise also those who say that the Holy Spirit is a Creature and separate from the Essence of Christ. For this is in truth a complete renunciation of the abominable heresy of the Arians, to refuse to divide the Holy Trinity, or to say that any part of it is a creature. For those who, while pretending to cite the faith confessed at Nicæa, venture to blaspheme the Holy Spirit, do nothing more than in words deny the Arian heresy while they retain it in thought. But let the impiety of Sabellius and of Paul of Samosata also be anathematised by all, and the madness of Valentinian and Basilides, and the folly of the Manichæans. For if this be done, all evil suspicion will be removed on all hands, and the faith of the Catholic Church alone be exhibited in purity.
4. The parties at Antioch to unite.
But that we, and they who have ever remained in communion with us, hold this faith, we think no one of yourselves nor any one else is ignorant. But since we rejoice with all those who desire re-union, but especially with those that assemble in the Old [church], and as we glorify the Lord exceedingly, as for all things so especially for the good purpose of these men, we exhort you that concord be established with them on these terms, and, as we said above, without further conditions, without namely any further demand upon yourselves on the part of those who assemble in the Old [church], or Paulinus and his fellows propounding anything else, or aught beyond the Nicene definition.
5. The creed of Sardica not an authorised formula. Question of ‘hypostasis.’
And prohibit even the reading or publication of the paper, much talked of by some, as having been drawn up concerning the Faith at the synod of Sardica. For the synod made no definition of the kind. For whereas some demanded, on the ground that the Nicene synod was defective, the drafting of a creed, and in their haste even attempted it 3682 , the holy synod assembled in Sardica was indignant, and decreed that no statement of faith should be drafted, but that they should be content with the Faith confessed by the fathers at Nicæa, inasmuch as it lacked nothing but was full of piety, and that it was undesirable for a second creed to be promulged, lest that drafted at Nicæa should be deemed imperfect, and a pretext be given to those who were often wishing to draft and define a creed. So that if a man propound the above or any other paper, stop them, and persuade them rather to keep the peace. For in such men we perceive no motive save only contentiousness. For as to those whom some were blaming for speaking of three Subsistences 3683 , on the ground that the phrase is unscriptural and therefore suspicious, we thought it right indeed to require nothing beyond the confession of Nicæa, but on account of the contention we made enquiry of them, whether they meant, like the Arian madmen, subsistences foreign and strange, and alien in essence from one another, and that each Subsistence was divided apart by itself, as is the case with creatures in general and in particular with those begotten of men, or like different substances, such as gold, silver, or brass;—or whether, like other heretics, they meant three Beginnings and three Gods, by speaking of three Subsistences.
They assured us in reply that they neither meant this nor had ever held it. But upon our asking them ‘what then do you mean by it, or why do you use such expressions?’ they replied, Because they believed in a Holy Trinity, not a trinity in name only, but existing and subsisting in truth, ‘both a Father truly existing and subsisting, and a Son truly substantial and subsisting, and a Holy Spirit subsisting and really existing do we acknowledge,’ and that neither had they said there were three Gods or three beginnings, nor would they at all tolerate such as said or held so, but that they acknowledged a Holy Trinity but One Godhead, and one Beginning, and that the Son is coessential with the Father, as the fathers said; while the Holy Spirit is not a creature, nor external, but proper to and inseparable from the Essence of the Father and the Son.
6. The question of one Subsistence (Hypostasis) or three, not to be pressed.
Having accepted then these men’s interpretation and defence of their language, we made enquiry of those blamed by them for speaking of One Subsistence, whether they use the expression in the sense of Sabellius, to the negation of the Son and the Holy Spirit, or as though the Son were non-substantial, or the Holy Spirit impersonal 3684 . But they in their turn assured us that they neither meant this nor had ever held it, but ‘we use the word Subsistence thinking it the same thing to say Subsistence or Essence;’ ‘But we hold that there is One, because the Son is of the Essence of the Father, and because of the identity of nature. For we believe that there is one Godhead, and that it has one nature, and not that there is one nature of the Father, from which that of the Son and of the Holy Spirit are distinct.’ Well, thereupon they who had been blamed for saying there were three Subsistences agreed with the others, while those who had spoken of One Essence, also confessed the doctrine of the former as interpreted by them. And by both sides Arius was anathematised as an adversary of Christ, and Sabellius, and Paul of Samosata, as impious men, and Valentinus and Basilides as aliens from the truth, and Manichæus as an inventor of mischief. And all, by God’s grace, and after the above explanations, agree together that the faith confessed by the fathers at Nicæa is better than the said phrases, and that for the future they would prefer to be content to use its language.
7. The human Nature of Christ complete, not Body only.
But since also certain seemed to be contending together concerning the fleshly Economy of the Saviour, we enquired of both parties. And what the one confessed, the others also agreed to, that the Word did not, as it came to the prophets, so dwell in a holy man at the consummation of the ages, but that the Word Himself was made flesh, and being in the Form of God, took the form of a servant 3685 , and from Mary after the flesh became man for us, and that thus in Him the human race is perfectly and wholly delivered from sin and quickened from the dead, and given access to the kingdom of the heavens. For they confessed also that the Saviour had not a body without a soul, nor without sense or intelligence; for it was not possible, when the Lord had become man for us, that His body should be without intelligence: nor was the salvation effected in the Word Himself a salvation of body only, but of soul also. And being Son of God in truth, He became also Son of Man, and being God’s Only-begotten Son, He became also at the same time ‘firstborn among many brethren 3686 .’ Wherefore neither was there one Son of God before Abraham, another after Abraham 3687 : nor was there one that raised up Lazarus, another that asked concerning him; but the same it was that said as man, ‘Where does Lazarus lie 3688 ;’ and as God raised him up: the same that as man and in the body spat, but divinely as Son of God opened the eyes of the man blind from his birth 3689 ; and while, as Peter says 3690 , in the flesh He suffered, as God opened the tomb and raised the dead. For which reasons, thus understanding all that is said in the Gospel, they assured us that they held the same truth about the Word’s Incarnation and becoming Man.
8. Questions of words must not be suffered to divide those who think alike.
These things then being thus confessed, we exhort you not hastily to condemn those who so confess, and so explain the phrases they use, nor to reject them, but rather to accept them as they desire peace and defend themselves, while you check and rebuke, as of suspicious views, those who refuse so to confess and to explain their language. But while you refuse toleration to the latter, counsel the others also who explain and hold aright, not to enquire further into each other’s opinions, nor to fight about words to no useful purpose, nor to go on contending with the above phrases, but to agree in the mind of piety. For they who are not thus minded, but only stir up strife with such petty phrases, and seek something beyond what was drawn up at Nicæa, do nothing except ‘give their neighbour turbid confusion to drink 3691 ,’ like men who grudge peace and love dissensions. But do ye, as good men and faithful servants and stewards of the Lord, stop and check what gives offence and is strange, and value above all things peace of that kind, faith being sound. Perhaps God will have pity on us, and unite what is divided, and, there being once more one flock 3692 , we shall all have one leader, even our Lord Jesus Christ.
9. The above terms unanimously agreed upon.
These things, albeit there was no need to require anything beyond the synod of Nicæa, nor to tolerate the language of contention, yet for the sake of peace, and to prevent the rejection of men who wish to believe aright, we enquired into. And what they confessed, we put briefly into writing, we namely who are left in Alexandria, in common with our fellow-ministers, Asterius and Eusebius. For most of us had gone away to our dioceses. But do you on your part read this in public where you are wont to assemble, and be pleased to invite all to you thither. For it is right that the letter should be there first read, and that there those who desire and strive for peace should be re-united. And then, when they are re-united, in the spot where all the laity think best, in the presence of your courtesy, the public assemblies should be held, and the Lord be glorified by all together. The brethren who are with me greet you. I pray that you may be well, and remember us to the Lord; both I, Athanasius, and likewise the other bishops assembled, sign, and those sent by Lucifer, bishop of the island of Sardinia, two deacons, Herennius and Agapetus; and from Paulinus, Maximus and Calemerus, deacons also. And there were present certain monks of Apolinarius 3693 the bishop, sent from him for the purpose.
10. Signatures.
The names of the several bishops to whom the letter is addressed are: Eusebius of the city of Virgilli in Gaul 3694 , Lucifer of the island of Sardinia, Asterius of Petra, Arabia, Kymatius of Paltus, Cœle-Syria, Anatolius of Eubœa.
Senders: the Pope Athanasius, and those present with him in Alexandria, viz.: Eusebius, Asterius, and the others above-mentioned, Gaius of Paratonium 3695 in Hither Libya, Agathus of Phragonis and part of Elearchia in Egypt, Ammonius of Pachnemunis 3696 and the rest of Elearchia, Agathodæmon of Schedia 3697 and Menelaitas, Dracontius of Lesser Hermupolis, Adelphius of Onuphis 3698 in Lychni, Hermion of Tanes 3699 , Marcus of Zygra 3700 , Hither Libya, Theodorus of Athribis 3701 , Andreas of Arsenoe, Paphnutius of Sais, Marcus of Philæ, Zoilus of Andrôs 3702 , Menas of Antiphra 3703 .
Eusebius also signs the following in Latin, of which the translation is:
I Eusebius, according to your exact confession made on either side by agreement concerning the Subsistences, also add my agreement; further concerning the Incarnation of our Saviour, namely that the Son of God has become Man, taking everything upon Himself without sin, like the composition of our old man, I ratify the text of the letter. And whereas the Sardican paper is ruled out, to avoid the appearance of issuing anything beyond the creed of Nicæa, I also add my consent, in order that the creed of Nicæa may not seem by it to be excluded, and [I agree] that it should not be published. I pray for your health in the Lord.
I Asterius agree to what is above written, and pray for your health in the Lord.
11. The ‘Tome’ signed at Antioch.
And after this Tome was sent off from Alexandria, thus signed by the aforesaid, [the recipients] in their turn signed it:
I Paulinus hold thus, as I received from the fathers, that the Father perfectly exists and subsists, and that the Son perfectly subsists, and that the Holy Spirit perfectly subsists. Wherefore also I accept the above explanation concerning the Three Subsistences, and the one Subsistence, or rather Essence, and those who hold thus. For it is pious to hold and confess the Holy Trinity in one Godhead. And concerning the Word of the Father becoming Man for us, I hold as it is written, that, as John says, the Word was made Flesh, not in the sense of those most impious persons who say that He has undergone a change, but that He has become Man for us, being born of the holy Virgin Mary and of the Holy Spirit. For the Saviour had a body neither without soul, nor without sense, nor without intelligence. For it were impossible, the Lord being made Man for us, that His body should be without intelligence. Wherefore I anathematise those who set aside the Faith confessed at Nicæa, and who do not say that the Son is of the Father’s Essence, and coessential with the Father. Moreover I anathematise those who say that the Holy Spirit is a Creature made through the Son. Once more I anathematise the heresy of Sabellius and of Photinus 3704 , and every heresy, walking in the Faith of Nicæa, and in all that is above written. I Karterius 3705 pray for your health.
Footnotes
483:3674Eusebius of Vercellæ, exiled (Hist. Ar. 33; Ap. Fug. 4) after Milan 355. See D.C.B. ii. 374 (93).
483:3675Lucifer of Calaris: cf. Letters 50, 51, below, and Hist. Ar. 33; Apol. Fug. 4.
483:3676The following are all the details that can be collected with regard to the bishops named in the text. Asterius (Hist. Ar. 18 note); Kymatius of Paltus in Syria Prima (Apol. Fug. 3; Hist. Ar. 5); Anatolius of Eubœa (not in D.C.B.); Gaius (Apol. Fug. 7; Hist. Ar. 72, D.C.B. i. 387, No. 19??); Agathus, Hist. Ar. 72 (not in D.C.B.); Ammonius (see Hist. Ar. 72 sub.-fin.; Ap. Fug. 7, Letter 49. 7, and infr. Appendix, note 1 as to names in D.C.B.); Agathodæmon (Hist. Ar. ibid.); Dracontius and Adelphius (Letters 49, 60); Hermæon (Hermion in §10) unknown, unless the ‘Hermes’ of Hist. Ar. 72; Marcus (2), (cf. D.C.B iii. 825 (7) for works ascribed to one or the other); Paphnutius, (Hist. Ar. 72; D. C B. iv. 184 (4)); Zoilus of Andropolis (Harduin, &c., suo jure, identify him with the bishop of the Syrian Larissa, who signs at Antioch in 363, Conc. i. 742; D.C.B. iv. 1220); Andreas, George, Lucius, Macarius, Menas, and Theodore, are unknown and not in D.C.B. The names all recur (excepting those of George, Lucius, Macarius), in §10, where the sees are specified.
483:3677Eph. iv. 5.
483:3678See Ps. cxxxiii. 1.
483:36792 Cor. 6:16, Lev. 26:122 Cor. vi. 16, and Lev. xxvi. 12.
483:3680Ps. cxxxii. 14.
483:3681᾽Εν τῇ παλαιᾷ, cf. Theodt. H. E. i. 3: possibly the old Town is meant, viz. the main part of Antioch on the left bank of the Orontes, so called in distinction from the ‘New’ town of Seleucu Callinicus which occupied the Island in the river. The ‘Old’ Church, or Church of the Apostles, was situated in the Old Town, and was at present occupied by the orthodox party of Meletius. The old orthodox party of Paulinus had only one small church in the New Town, granted for their use out of respect for Paulinus by the Arian Bishop Euzoius (Socr. H. E. iii. 9.).
484:3682The draft is given by Theodt. H. E. ii. 8; it insists vehemently on the ‘One Hypostasis.’
484:3683ὐποστάσεις
485:3684ἀνουσίου, ἀνυποστάτου, the words are rendered ‘unessential’ and ‘not subsisting’ in another connection, supr. p. 434, &c.
485:3685Phil. ii. 7, &c.
485:3686Rom. viii. 29.
485:3687John viii. 58.
485:3688John 11.34.
485:3689Mark viii. 22, &c.
485:36901 Pet. iv. 1.
485:3691Hab. ii. 15.
485:3692John x. 16.
486:3693Of Laodicea, the later heresiarch.
486:3694i.e. Vercellæ, in ‘Cisalpine’ Gaul, or Lombardy.
486:3695In Marmarica or ‘Libya Siccior’ near the Ras el Harzeit.
486:3696Capital of the Sebennytic nome, near Handahur.
486:3697A town and custom-house near Andropolis, between Alxa. and the Canopic arm of the Nile.
486:3698Chief town of a nome in the Delta.
486:3699‘Zoan.’
486:3700West of Alxa. toward the Libyan dessert, and not far from Zygra in Marmarica.
486:3701A very important town near the head of the Tanite arm. See Amm. Marc. xxii. 16. 6, who calls it one of the four largest cities in Egypt proper.
486:3702i.e. Andropolis (above, note 11).
486:3703West of Alxa. toward the Libyan dessert, and not far from Zygra in Marmarica.
486:3704See Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) ad fin. This is remarkable as the first Eastern condemnation of Photinus by name from the Nicene side. He had been condemned at Sirmium in 347, and under pressure from the East apparently at Milan in 345 and 347, as well as in the Councils of Antioch in 344, and Sirmium in 351 (supr. pp. 463, 464). On the document of Paulinus, see Epiph. Hær. lxxvii. 20, 21, also Dr. Bright’s note.
486:3705Bishop of Antaradus on the Syrian coast (D.C.B. i. 410 (3)); see de Fuga, 3, and Hist. Ar. 5. note 6a.
Appendix.
Exile of Athanasius under Julian, 362–363.
————————————
The fragment which follows, containing an interesting report of a story told by Athanasius to Ammonius, Bishop of Pachnemunis, is inserted here as furnishing undesignedly important details as to the movements of Athanasius in 363. See Prolegg. ch. v. §3 h, also ch. ii. §9. It is excerpted by Montfaucon from an account of the Abbat Theodore, written for Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria (385–412) by a certain Ammon (Acta SS. Maii, Tom. iii. Append., pp. 63–71). The writer was at that time a bishop (see unknown): he was born about 335, as he was seventeen years old when he embraced the monastic life a year ‘and more’ after the proclamation of Gallus as Cæsar (Mark 15:0, Mark 351:0). About the time of the expulsion of Athanasius by Syrianus he retired to Nitria, where he remained many years, and finally returned to Alexandria, where he appears (infra) as one of the clergy; the date of his elevation to the Episcopate cannot be fixed, but it obviously cannot be as early as 356–7 (so D.C.B. i. 102 (2), and probably is much later even than 362, in which year he would still be hardly twenty-eight. (He mentions the objections to the election of Athanasius, who was probably 30 in 328, on the ground of his youth.) Accordingly (apart from the different form of his name) he cannot 3706 be identified with either of the Ammonii referred to in Tom. ad. Ant. 1, note 3; Hist. Ar. 72, &c. The elder of the two does not concern us here: the younger (supr. pp. 483, 486), is the Ammonius to whom Athanasius told the story in the hearing of Ammon, and was now dead. Of Hermon, Bishop of Bubastis, mentioned as present along with Ammonius, Theophilus, and Ammon when the story was told, nothing is known (except that the date D.C.B. iii. 4 (2) is over 25 years too early). As he is not ‘of blessed memory,’ he was possibly still living during the Episcopate of Theophilus and Ammon. (There is nothing to identify him with the bishop of Tanes in Tom. Ant. 1, 10.)
The story itself is given at second-hand, from Ammon’s recollection of a statement by Athanasius some 12 to 15 years (at least) before he wrote. The prophetic details about Jovian may therefore be put down to natural accretion (Letter 56, note 2). But (apart from the fact that Julian’s death must have been rumoured long before the tardy official announcement of it, Tillem. Emp. iv. 449 sqq., Prolegg. ubi supr.) that Athanasius told of the φήμη of Julian’s death among the monks of the Thebaid need not be doubted. The story is one of a very large class, many of which are fairly authenticated. To say nothing of the φήμη at the battle of Mycale; we have in recent times the authority of Mr. R. Stuart Poole, of the British Museum, for the fact that on the night of the death of the Duke of Cambridge (July 9, 1850), Mr. Pooles’s brother ‘suddenly took out his watch and said, “Note the time, the Duke of Cambridge is dead,” and that the time proved to be correct;’ also the case of Mr. Edmonds who saw at Leicester, early in the morning of Nov. 4, 1837, an irruption of water into the works of the Thames tunnel, by which a workman was drowned; (other curious cases in ‘Phantasms of the Living’ vol. 2, pp. 367 sqq.). The letter or memoir from which this ‘Narratio’ is taken, was published by the Bollandists from a Medicean ms., and it bears every internal mark of genuineness. In what way it is integrally connected with the Vita Antonii (Gwatkin, Studies, p. 101), except by the fact that it happens to mention Antony, I fail to see. On the subject of Theodore of Tabenne, the main subject of the memoir, see Amélineau’s S. Pakhôme ( ut supra, p. 188), also infr. Letter 58, note 3.
“As I think your holiness was present and heard, when his blessedness Pope Athanasius, in the presence of other clergy of Alexandria and of my insignificance, formerly related in the Great Church something about Theodorus 3707 , to the Ammonius of blessed memory, bishop of Elearchia 3708 , and to Hermon, bishop of the city of Bumastica 3709 ; I write only what is necessary to put your reverence in mind of what he said. When the famous bishops were wondering at the Blessed Antony, Pope Athanasius—for Antony was often with him—said to them:—
I saw also at that season great men of God, who are lately dead, Theodorus chief of the Tabennesian monks, and the father of the monks around 3710 Antinoopolis, called Abbas Pammon. For when I was pursued by Julian, and was expecting to be slain by him—for this news was shewn me by good friends—these two came to me on the same day at Antinoopolis. And having planned to hide with Theodorus, I embarked on his vessel, which was completely covered in, while Abbas Pammon accompanied us. And when the wind was unfavourable, I was very anxious and prayed; and the monks with Theodore got out and towed the boat. And as Abbas Pammon was encouraging me in my anxiety, I said ‘Believe me when I say that my heart is never so trustful in time of peace as in time of persecution. For I have good confidence that suffering for Christ, and strengthened by His mercy, even though I am slain, I shall find mercy with Him.’ And while I was still saying this, Theodorus fixed his eyes on Abbas Pammon and smiled, while the other nearly laughed. So I said to them, ‘Why have you laughed at my words, do you convict me of cowardice?’ and Theodorus said to Abbas Pammon, ‘Tell him why we smiled.’ At which the latter said, ‘You ought to tell him.’ So Theodorus said, ‘in this very hour Julian has been slain in Persia’ for so God had declared beforehand concerning him: ‘the haughty man, the despiser and the boaster, shall finish nothing 3711 . But a Christian Emperor shall arise who shall be illustrious, but shall live only a short time 3712 . Wherefore you ought not to harass yourselves by departing into the Thebaid, but secretly to go to the Court, for you will meet him by the way, and having been kindly received by him, will return to your Church. And he soon shall be taken by God.’ And so it happened. From which cause I believe, that many who are well pleasing to God live unnoticed, especially among the monks. For those men unnoticed also, such as the blessed Amun and the holy Theodorus 3713 in the mountain of Nitria, and the servant of God, the happy old man Pammon.”
Footnotes
487:3706The Articles in D.C.B. i. 102 (2) and (3), combine variously data belonging to three distinct persons. (1) The old bishop ordained by Alexander (see unknown, see Hist. Ar. 72 init.). Signs the synodal letter of the Sardican Council; is one of the infirm prelates cruelly expelled by George, along with coffins to bury them in case of the journey being fatal (see also Apol. Fug. 7). (2) Another Ammonius, probably not a signatory of Sardica (cf. Apol. Ar. 50, with Ep. Fest. for 347), but a contemporary of Serapion, sent by Athanasius with Serap. to Constantius in 353. He had been a monk, but was then (Dracont. 7) bishop of Pachnemunis and part of Elearchia (Tom. 10), in which capacity, along with other exiles of 356–7 (Hist. Ar. 72; Ap. Fug. 7), he attends the Council of 362. He is the ‘Ammonius of blessed memory’ in the text. (3) Ammon, born 335, baptized 352, monk at Tabenne and Nitria 352–367 (?), then at Alexandria, and finally (about 390) bishop of an unknown see in Egypt: wrote a short account of S. Theodore for Pope Theophilus.
487:3707Cf. Vit. Ant. 60, and see below, letters 57, 58, and Acta SS. Maii, vol. iii. pp. 334–357, and Appx.; also D.C.B. iv. 954 (53).
487:3708Tom. Ant. 4.
487:3709i.e. Bubastis.
487:3710Opposite Hermupolis Magna in Upper Egypt.
487:3711Habak. ii. 5.
487:3712Cf. Letter 56, note 2.
487:3713On this Theodore, see D.C.B. s.v. no. (67).
Introduction to Ad Afros Epistola Synodica.
————————————
(Written About 369.)
The synodical letter which follows was written after the accession of Damasus to the Roman see (366). Whether it was written before any Western synod had formally condemned Auxentius of Milan (see Letter 59. 1) may be doubted: the complaint (§10) is rather that he still retains possession of his see, which in fact he did until 374, the year after the death of Athanasius. At any rate, Damasus had had time to hold a large synod, the letter of which had reached Athanasius. The history of the synods held by Damasus seems hopelessly obscure, and the date of our encyclical is correspondingly doubtful. Damasus certainly held at one time a synod of some 90 bishops from Italy and the Gauls, the letter of which was sent to Illyricum and to the East (Thdt. H. E. ii. 22; Soz. vi. 23; Hard. Conc. i. 771: the Latin of the copy sent to Illyricum is dated ‘Siricio et Ardabure vv. cl. coss.,’ an additional element of confusion). The name of Sabinus at the end of the Latin copy sent to the East seems to fix the date of this synod (D.C.B. i. 294) to 372. Thus the synod referred to §1 below must have been an earlier one, the acts of which are lost. It cannot have been held before the end of 367 or beginning of 368 (Montf. Vit. Ath.), as the earlier period of the episcopate of Damasus was fully occupied by different matters. Accordingly our encyclical falls between 368 and 372, probably as soon as Damasus had been able to assemble so large a synod, and Athanasius to write in reply (§10). It may be added that the letter of the Damasine synod of 372 refers in ambiguous terms to the condemnation of Auxentius as having already taken place, (‘damnatum esse liquet:’ was this because they felt unable to dislodge him? see Tillem. viii. 400).
The occasion of the letter is two-fold: principally to counteract the efforts that were being made in the West, and especially in Africa (still later in the time of S. Augustine, see Collat. cum Maximin. 4; and for earlier Arian troubles in Africa, Nicene Lib. vol. i. p. 287), to represent the council of Ariminum as a final settlement of the Faith, and so to set aside the authority of the Nicene definition. The second object is involved in the first. The head and centre of the dying efforts of Arianism in the Roman West was apparently Auxentius, ‘one of the last survivors of the victory of Ariminum.’ That he should be still undisturbed in his see, while working far and wide to the damage of the Catholic cause, was to Athanasius a distressing surprise, and he was urging the Western bishops to put an end to such an anomaly.
In the encyclical before us he begins (1–3) by contrasting the synod of Nicæa with that of Ariminum, and pointing out the real history of the latter, going over again to some extent the ground of the earlier sections of the de Synodis. He touches (3. end) on the disastrous termination of the Council. He then proceeds to vindicate the Nicene creed (4–8) as essentially Scriptural, i.e. as the only possible bar to the unscriptural formulæ of the Arians. This he illustrates (5, 6) by an account, substantially identical with that in the de Decretis, of the evasions of every other test by the Asian bishops at Nicæa. He repeatedly urges that the formula was no invention of the Nicene Fathers (6, 9), appealing to the admission of Eusebius to this effect. He attacks the Homœan position, shewing that its characteristic watchword merely dissembles the alternative between Anomœanism and the true co-essentiality of the Son (7). The most novel argument in the Letter is that of §4, where he refutes the repudiation of οὐσία and ὑπόστασις in the creed of Niké by an argument from Scripture, starting from Ex. iii. 14 (as de Decr. 22 and de Syn. 29), and turning upon the equivalence of the two terms in question. This would appeal to Westerns, and expresses the usual view of Ath. himself (Tom. ad Ant. Introd.) but would not have much force with those who were accustomed to the Eastern terminology.
The insistence (in §11) that the Nicene formula involves the Godhead of the Spirit should be noted. It seems to imply that, as a rule, such an explicit assurance as is insisted upon in Tom ad Ant. 3, would be superfluous.
The completeness of the work of Athanasius, now very near his end, in winning over all Egypt to unanimity in faith and in personal attachment to himself, is quaintly reflected in the naive assurance (§10) that the bishops of Egypt and the Libyas ‘are all of one mind, and we always sign for one another if any chance not to be present.’
The translation has been carefully compared with that of Dr. Bright (supr. p. 482).
To the Bishops of Africa.
Letter of Ninety Bishops of Egypt and Libya, including Athanasius.
————————————
1. Pre-Eminence of the Council of Nicæa. Efforts to exalt that of Ariminum at its expense.
The letters are sufficient which were written by our beloved fellow-minister Damasus, bishop of the Great Rome, and the large number of bishops who assembled along with him; and equally so are those of the other synods which were held, both in Gaul and in Italy, concerning the sound Faith which Christ gave us, the Apostles preached, and the Fathers, who met at Nicæa from all this world of ours, have handed down. For so great a stir was made at that time about the Arian heresy, in order that they who had fallen into it might be reclaimed, while its inventors might be made manifest. To that council, accordingly, the whole world has long ago agreed, and now, many synods having been held, all men have been put in mind, both in Dalmatia and Dardania, Macedonia, Epirus and Greece, Crete, and the other islands, Sicily, Cyprus, Pamphylia, Lycia, and Isauria, all Egypt and the Libyas, and most of the Arabians have come to know it, and marvelled at those who signed it, inasmuch as even if there were left among them any bitterness springing up from the root of the Arians; we mean Auxentius, Ursacius, Valens and their fellows, by these letters they have been cut off and isolated. The confession arrived at at Nicæa was, we say once more, sufficient and enough by itself, for the subversion of all irreligious heresy, and for the security and furtherance of the doctrine of the Church. But since we have heard that certain wishing to oppose it are attempting to cite a synod supposed to have been held at Ariminum, and are eagerly striving that it should prevail rather than the other, we think it right to write and put you in mind, not to endure anything of the sort: for this is nothing else but a second growth of the Arian heresy. For what else do they wish for who reject the synod held against it, namely the Nicene, if not that the cause of Arius should prevail? What then do such men deserve, but to be called Arians, and to share the punishment of the Arians? For they were not afraid of God, who says, ‘Remove not the eternal boundaries which thy fathers placed 3714 ,’ and ‘He that speaketh against father or mother, let him die the death 3715 :’ they were not in awe of their fathers, who enjoined that they who hold the opposite of their confession should be anathema.
2. The Synod of Nicæa contrasted with the local Synods held since.
For this was why an ecumenical synod has been held at Nicæa, 318 bishops assembling to discuss the faith on account of the Arian heresy, namely, in order that local synods should no more be held on the subject of the Faith, but that, even if held, they should not hold good. For what does that Council lack, that any one should seek to innovate? It is full of piety, beloved; and has filled the whole world with it. Indians have acknowledged it, and all Christians of other barbarous nations. Vain then is the labour of those who have often made attempts against it. For already the men we refer to have held ten or more synods, changing their ground at each, and while taking away some things from earlier decisions, in later ones make changes and additions. And so far they have gained nothing by writing, erasing, and using force, not knowing that ‘every plant that the Heavenly Father hath not planted shall be plucked up 3716 .’ But the word of the Lord which came through the ecumenical Synod at Nicæa, abides for ever 3717 . For if one compare number with number, these who met at Nicæa are more than those at local synods, inasmuch as the whole is greater than the part. But if a man wishes to discern the reason of the Synod at Nicæa, and that of the large number subsequently held by these men, he will find that while there was a reasonable cause for the former, the others were got together by force, by reason of hatred and contention. For the former council was summoned because of the Arian heresy, and because of Easter, in that they of Syria, Cilicia and Mesopotamia differed from us, and kept the feast at the same season as the Jews. But thanks to the Lord, harmony has resulted not only as to the Faith, but also as to the Sacred Feast. And that was the reason of the synod at Nicæa. But the subsequent ones were without number, all however planned in opposition to the ecumenical.
3. The true nature of the proceedings at Ariminum.
This being pointed out, who will accept those who cite the synod of Ariminum, or any other, against the Nicene? or who could help hating men who set at nought their fathers’ decisions, and put above them the newer ones, drawn up at Ariminum with contention and violence? or who would wish to agree with these men, who do not accept even their own? For in their own ten or more synods, as I said above, they wrote now one thing, now another, and so came out clearly as themselves the accusers of each one. Their case is not unlike that of the Jewish traitors in old times. For just as they left the one well of the living water, and hewed for themselves broken cisterns, which cannot hold water, as the prophet Jeremiah has it 3718 , so these men, fighting against the one ecumenical synod, ‘hewed for themselves’ many synods, and all appeared empty, like ‘a sheaf without strength 3719 .’ Let us not then tolerate those who cite the Ariminian or any other synod against that of Nicæa. For even they who cite that of Ariminum appear not to know what was done there, for else they would have said nothing about it. For ye know, beloved, from those who went from you to Ariminum, how Ursacius and Valens, Eudoxius 3720 and Auxentius 3721 (and there Demophilus 3722 also was with them), were deposed, after wishing to write something to supersede the Nicene decisions. For on being requested to anathematise the Arian heresy, they refused, and preferred to be its ringleaders. So the bishops, like genuine servants of the Lord and orthodox believers (and there were nearly 200 3723 ), wrote that they were satisfied with the Nicene alone, and desired and held nothing more or less than that. This they also reported to Constantius, who had ordered the assembling of the synod. But the men who had been deposed at Ariminum went off to Constantius, and caused those who had reported against them to be insulted, and threatened with not being allowed to return to their dioceses, and to be treated with violence in Thrace that very winter, to compel them to tolerate their innovations.
4. The Nicene formula in accordance with Scripture.
If then any cite the synod of Ariminum, firstly let them point out the deposition of the above persons, and what the bishops wrote, namely that none should seek anything beyond what had been agreed upon by the fathers at Nicæa, nor cite any synod save that one. But this they suppress, but make much of what was done by violence in Thrace 3724 ; thus shewing that they are dissemblers of the Arian heresy, and aliens from the sound Faith. And again, if a man were to examine and compare the great synod itself, and those held by these people, he would discover the piety of the one and the folly of the others. They who assembled at Nicæa did so not after being deposed: and secondly, they confessed that the Son was of the Essence of the Father. But the others, after being deposed again and again, and once more at Ariminum itself, ventured to write that it ought not to be said that the Son had Essence or Subsistence. This enables us to see, brethren, that they of Nicæa breathe the spirit of Scripture, in that God says in Exodus 3725 , ‘I am that I am,’ and through Jeremiah, ‘Who is in His substance 3726 and hath seen His word;’ and just below, ‘if they had stood in My subsistence 3727 and heard My words:’ now subsistence is essence, and means nothing else but very being, which Jeremiah calls existence, in the words, ‘and they heard not the voice of existence 3728 .’ For subsistence, and essence, is existence: for it is, or in other words exists. This Paul also perceiving wrote to the Hebrews, ‘who being the brightness of his glory, and the express Image of his subsistence 3729 .’ But the others, who think they know the Scriptures and call themselves wise, and do not choose to speak of subsistence in God (for thus they wrote at Ariminum and at other synods of theirs), were surely with justice deposed, saying as they did, like the fool did in his heart 3730 , ‘God is not.’ And again the fathers taught at Nicæa that the Son and Word is not a creature, nor made, having read ‘all things were made through Him 3731 ,’ and ‘in Him were all things created, and consist 3732 ;’ while these men, Arians rather than Christians, in their other synods have ventured to call Him a creature, and one of the things that are made, things of which He Himself is the Artificer and Maker. For if ‘through Him all things were made’ and He too is a creature, He would be the creator of Himself. And how can what is being created create? or He that is creating be created?
5. How the test ‘Coessential’ came to be adopted at Nicæa.
But not even thus are they ashamed, although they say such things as cause them to be hated by all; citing the Synod of Ariminum, only to shew that there also they were deposed. And as to the actual definition of Nicæa, that the Son is coessential with the Father, on account of which they ostensibly oppose the synod, and buzz around everywhere like gnats about the phrase, either they stumble at it from ignorance, like those who stumble at the stone of stumbling that was laid in Sion 3733 ; or else they know, but for that very reason are constantly opposing and murmuring, because it is an accurate declaration and full in the face of their heresy. For it is not the phrases that vex them, but the condemnation of themselves which the definition contains. And of this, once again, they are themselves the cause, even if they wish to conceal the fact of which they are perfectly aware,—But we must now mention it, in order that hence also the accuracy of the great synod may be shewn. For 3734 the assembled bishops wished to put away the impious phrases devised by the Arians, namely ‘made of nothing,’ and that the Son was ‘a thing made,’ and a ‘creature,’ and that ‘there was a time when He was not,’ and that ‘He is of mutable nature.’ And they wished to set down in writing the acknowledged language of Scripture, namely that the Word is of God by nature Only-begotten, Power, Wisdom of the Father, Very God, as John says, and as Paul wrote, brightness of the Father’s glory and express image of His person 3735 . But Eusebius and his fellows, drawn on by their own error, kept conferring together as follows: ‘Let us assent. For we also are of God: for “there is one God of whom are all things 3736 ,” and “old things are passed away, behold all things are made new, but all things are of God 3737 .”’ And they considered what is written in the Shepherd 3738 , ‘Before all things believe that God is one, who created and set all things in order, and made them to exist out of nothing.’ But the Bishops, beholding their craftiness, and the cunning of their impiety, expressed more plainly the sense of the words ‘of God,’ by writing that the Son is of the Essence of God, so that whereas the Creatures, since they do not exist of themselves without a cause, but have a beginning of their existence, are said to be ‘of God,’ the Son alone might be deemed proper to the Essence of the Father. For this is peculiar to one who is Only-begotten and true Word in relation to a Father, and this was the reason why the words ‘of the essence’ were adopted. Again 3739 , upon the bishops asking the dissembling minority if they agreed that the Son was not a Creature, but the Power and only Wisdom of the Father, and the Eternal Image, in all respects exact, of the Father, and true God, Eusebius and his fellows were observed exchanging nods with one another, as much as to say ‘this applies to us men also, for we too are called “the image and glory of God 3740 ,” and of us it is said, “For we which live are alway 3741 ,” and there are many Powers, and “all the power 3742 of the Lord went out of the land of Egypt,” while the caterpillar and the locust are called His “great power 3743 .” And “the Lord of powers 3744 is with us, the God of Jacob is our help.” For we hold that we are proper 3745 to God, and not merely so, but insomuch that He has even called us brethren. Nor does it vex us, even if they call the Son Very God. For when made He exists in verity.’
6. The Nicene test not unscriptural in sense, nor a novelty.
Such was the corrupt mind of the Arians. But here too the Bishops, beholding their craftiness, collected from the Scriptures the figures of brightness, of the river and the well, and of the relation of the express Image to the Subsistence, and the texts, ‘in thy light shall we see light 3746 ,’ and ‘I and the Father are one 3747 .’ And lastly they wrote more plainly, and concisely, that the Son was coessential with the Father; for all the above passages signify this. And their murmuring, that the phrases are unscriptural, is exposed as vain by themselves, for they have uttered their impieties in unscriptural terms: (for such are ‘of nothing’ and ‘there was a time when He was not’), while yet they find fault because they were condemned by unscriptural terms pious in meaning. While they, like men sprung from a dunghill, verily ‘spoke of the earth 3748 ,’ the Bishops, not having invented their phrases for themselves, but having testimony from their Fathers, wrote as they did. For ancient bishops, of the Great Rome and of our city, some 130 years ago, wrote 3749 and censured those who said that the Son was a creature and not coessential with the Father. And Eusebius knew this, who was bishop of Cæsarea, and at first an accomplice 3750 of the Arian heresy; but afterwards, having signed at the Council of Nicæa, wrote to his own people affirming as follows: ‘we know that certain eloquent and distinguished bishops and writers even of ancient date used the word “coessential” with reference to the Godhead of the Father and the Son.’
7. The position that the Son is a Creature inconsistent and untenable.
Why then do they go on citing the Synod of Ariminum, at which they were deposed? Why do they reject that of Nicæa, at which their Fathers signed the confession that the Son is of the Father’s Essence and coessential with Him? Why do they run about? For now they are at war not only with the bishops who met at Nicæa, but with their own great bishops and their own friends. Whose heirs or successors then are they? How can they call men fathers, whose confession, well and apostolically drawn up, they will not accept? For if they think they can object to it, let them speak, or rather answer, that they may be convicted of falling foul of themselves, whether they believe the Son when He says, ‘I and my Father are one,’ and ‘he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father 3751 .’ ‘Yes,’ they must answer, ‘since it is written we believe it.’ But if they are asked how they are one, and how he that hath seen the Son hath seen the Father, of course, we suppose they will say, ‘by reason of resemblance,’ unless they have quite come to agree with those who hold the brother-opinion to theirs, and are called 3752 Anomœans. But if once more they are asked, ‘how is He like?’ they brasen it out and say, ‘by perfect virtue and harmony, by having the same will with the Father, by not willing what the Father wills not.’ But let them understand that one assimilated to God by virtue and will is liable also to the purpose of changing; but the Word is not thus, unless He is ‘like’ in part, and as we are, because He is not like [God] in essence also. But these characteristics belong to us, who are originate, and of a created nature. For we too, albeit we cannot become like God in essence, yet by progress in virtue imitate God, the Lord granting us this grace, in the words, ‘Be ye merciful as your Father is merciful:’ ‘be ye perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect 3753 .’ But that originate things are changeable, no one can deny, seeing that angels transgressed, Adam disobeyed, and all stand in need of the grace of the Word. But a mutable thing cannot be like God who is truly unchangeable, any more than what is created can be like its creator. This is why, with regard to us, the holy man said, ‘Lord, who shall be likened unto thee 3754 ,’ and ‘who among the gods is like unto thee, Lord 3755 ;’ meaning by gods those who, while created, had yet become partakers of the Word, as He Himself said, ‘If he called them gods to whom the word of God came 3756 .’ But things which partake cannot be identical with or similar to that whereof they partake. For example, He said of Himself, ‘I and the Father are one 3757 ,’ implying that things originate are not so. For we would ask those who allege the Ariminian Synod, whether a created essence can say, ‘what things I see my Father make, those I make also 3758 .’ For things originate are made and do not make; or else they made even themselves. Why, if, as they say, the Son is a Creature and the Father is His Maker, surely the Son would be His own maker, as He is able to make what the Father makes, as He said. But such a supposition is absurd and utterly untenable, for none can make himself.
8. The Son’s relation to the Father essential, not merely ethical.
Once more, let them say whether things originate could say 3759 , ‘all things whatsoever the Father hath are Mine.’ Now, He has the prerogative of creating and making, of Eternity, of omnipotence, of immutability. But things originate cannot have the power of making, for they are creatures; nor eternity, for their existence has a beginning; nor of omnipotence and immutability, for they are under sway, and of changeable nature, as the Scriptures say. Well then, if these prerogatives belong to the Son, they clearly do so, not on account of His virtue, as said above, but essentially, even as the synod said, ‘He is of no other essence’ but of the Father’s, to whom these prerogatives are proper. But what can that be which is proper to the Father’s essence, and an offspring from it, or what name can we give it, save ‘coessential?’ For that which a man sees in the Father, that sees he also in the Son; and that not by participation, but essentially. And this is [the meaning of] ‘I and the Father are one,’ and ‘he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father.’ Here especially once more it is easy to shew their folly. If it is from virtue, the antecedent of willing and not willing, and of moral progress, that you hold the Son to be like the Father; while these things fall under the category of quality; clearly you call God compound of quality and essence. But who will tolerate you when you say this? For God, who compounded all things to give them being, is not compound, nor of similar nature to the things made by Him through the Word. Far be the thought. For He is simple essence, in which quality is not, nor, as James says, ‘any variableness or shadow of turning 3760 .’ Accordingly, if it is shewn that it is not from virtue (for in God there is no quality, neither is there in the Son), then He must be proper to God’s essence. And this you will certainly admit if mental apprehension is not utterly destroyed in you. But what is that which is proper to and identical with the essence of God, and an Offspring from it by nature, if not by this very fact coessential with Him that begat it? For this is the distinctive relation of a Son to a Father, and he who denies this, does not hold that the Word is Son in nature and in truth.
9. The honest repudiation of Arianism involves the acceptance of the Nicene test.
This then the Fathers perceived when they wrote that the Son was coessential with the Father, and anathematised those who say that the Son is of a different Subsistence 3761 : not inventing phrases for themselves, but learning in their turn, as we said, from the Fathers who had been before them. But after the above proof, their Ariminian Synod is superfluous, as well as any 3762 other synod cited by them as touching the Faith. For that of Nicæa is sufficient, agreeing as it does with the ancient bishops also, in which too their fathers signed, whom they ought to respect, on pain of being thought anything but Christians. But if even after such proofs, and after the testimony of the ancient bishops, and the signature of their own Fathers, they pretend as if in ignorance to be alarmed at the phrase ‘coessential,’ then let them say and hold, in simpler terms and truly, that the Son is Son by nature, and anathematise as the synod enjoined those who say that the Son of God is a Creature or a thing made, or of nothing, or that there was once a time when He was not, and that He is mutable and liable to change, and of another Subsistence. And so let them escape the Arian heresy. And we are confident that in sincerely anathematising these views, they ipso facto confess that the Son is of the Father’s Essence, and coessential with Him. For this is why the Fathers, having said that the Son was coessential, straightway added, ‘but those who say that He is a creature, or made, or of nothing, or that there was once a time when He was not,’ the Catholic Church anathematises: namely in order that by this means they might make it known that these things are meant by the word ‘coessential.’ And the meaning ‘Coessential’ is known from the Son not being a Creature or thing made: and because he that says ‘coessential’ does not hold that the Word is a Creature: and he that anathematises the above views, at the same time holds that the Son is coessential with the Father; and he that calls Him ‘coessential,’ calls the Son of God genuinely and truly so; and he that calls Him genuinely Son understands the texts, ‘I and the Father are one,’ and ‘he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father 3763 .’
10. Purpose of this Letter; warning against Auxentius of Milan.
Now it would be proper to write this at greater length. But since we write to you who know, we have dictated it concisely, praying that among all the bond of peace might be preserved, and that all in the Catholic Church should say and hold the same thing. And we are not meaning to teach, but to put you in mind. Nor is it only ourselves that write, but all the bishops of Egypt and the Libyas, some ninety in number. For we all are of one mind in this, and we always sign for one another if any chance not to be present. Such being our state of mind, since we happened to be assembled, we wrote, both to our beloved Damasus, bishop of the Great Rome, giving an account of Auxentius 3764 who has intruded upon the church at Milan; namely that he not only shares the Arian heresy, but is also accused of many offences, which he committed with Gregory 3765 , the sharer of his impiety; and while expressing our surprise that so far he has not been deposed and expelled from the Church, we thanked [Damasus] for his piety and that of those who assembled at the Great Rome, in that by expelling Ursacius and Valens, and those who hold with them, they preserved the harmony of the Catholic Church. Which we pray may be preserved also among you, and therefore entreat you not to tolerate, as we said above, those who put forward a host of synods held concerning the Faith, at Ariminum, at Sirmium, in Isauria, in Thrace, those in Constantinople, and the many irregular ones in Antioch. But let the Faith confessed by the Fathers at Nicæa alone hold good among you, at which all the fathers, including those of the men who now are fighting against it, were present, as we said above, and signed: in order that of us too the Apostle may say, ‘Now I praise you that ye remember me in all things, and as I handed the traditions to you, so ye hold them fast 3766 .’
11. Godhead of the Spirit also involved in the Nicene Creed.
For this Synod of Nicæa is in truth a proscription of every heresy. It also upsets those who blaspheme the Holy Spirit, and call Him a Creature. For the Fathers, after speaking of the faith in the Son, straightway added, ‘And we believe in the Holy Ghost,’ in order that by confessing perfectly and fully the faith in the Holy Trinity they might make known the exact form of the Faith of Christ, and the teaching of the Catholic Church. For it is made clear both among you and among all, and no Christian can have a doubtful mind on the point, that our faith is not in the Creature, but in one God, Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible: and in one Lord Jesus Christ His Only-begotten Son, and in one Holy Ghost; one God, known in the holy and perfect Trinity, baptized into which, and in it united to the Deity, we believe that we have also inherited the kingdom of the heavens, in Christ Jesus our Lord, through whom to the Father be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen.
Footnotes
489:3714Prov. xxii. 28.
489:3715Ex. xxi. 17.
489:3716Matt. xv. 13.
489:37171 Pet. i. 25.
490:3718ii. 13.
490:3719Hos. viii. 7, LXX.
490:3720Eudoxius was at Seleucia, not at Ariminum.
490:3721See note on §10 infr.
490:3722Bishop of Berœa in Macedonia Tertia, and from 370–380 successor of Eudoxius as Arian bishop of CP.
490:3723There were some 400 in all, so that the orthodox majority must have been far more than 200 (see de Syn. 8, 33). But Gwatkin (Stud. 170, note 3), inclines to accept the statement in the text.
490:3724i.e. at Niké, 359.
490:3725Ex. iii. 14.
490:3726ὑποστήματι, Jer. xxiii. 18, LXX.
490:3727ὑποστάσει, Jer. 23.22.
490:3728ὕπαρξις, Jer. ix. 10, LXX.
490:3729Heb. i. 3.
491:3730Ps. xiv. 1.
491:3731John i. 3.
491:3732Col. i. 16.
491:3733Rom. ix. 33.
491:3734This passage repeats in substance the account in de Decr. 19.
491:3735ὑπόστασις
491:37361 Cor. viii. 6.
491:37372 Cor. 5:17, 18.
491:3738Herm. Mand. 1.
491:3739Cf. de Decr. §20, ubi supr.
491:37401 Cor. xi. 7.
491:3741Ps. 115:18, 2 Cor. 4:11Ps. cxv. 18 (v. 26, LXX.); cf. 2 Cor. iv. 11.
491:3742δύναμις, Ex. xii. 41
491:3743Joel ii. 25.
491:3744δυνάμεων, Ps. xlvi. 7.
491:3745ἰδίους.
491:3746Ps. xxxvi. 9.
491:3747John x. 30.
492:3748John iii. 31.
492:3749See de Syn. §43, and de Sent. Dionys. 18, 19, also supr. p. 76.
492:3750But see Socrates, ii. 21, and D.C.B. ii. p. 347.
492:3751John 10:30, John 14:9John x. 30, and xiv. 9.
492:3752Cf. de Syn. §31 (a chapter added after the death of Constantius). The Anomœan sect, headed by Eunomius, and deriving its intellectual impetus from Aetias, belongs to the second generation of the Arian movement (their watchword is characterised as recent in the creed of Niké, 359 a.d.), and was comparatively unfamiliar to Athanasius. Cf. Prolegg. ch. ii. §8.
492:3753Luke vi. 36; Matt. v. 48.
492:3754Ps. lxxxiii. 1, LXX.
492:3755Ps. lxxxvi. 8.
492:3756John x. 35.
492:3757John 10.30.
492:3758John 5.19: the word ποίεω is taken in the sense of making.
492:3759John xvi. 15.
493:3760James i. 17.
493:3761ὑπόστασις
493:3762Omit ἡ with most mss.
493:3763John 10:30, John 14:9John x. 30, and xiv. 9.
493:3764Auxentius (not in D.C.B.) was a native of Cappadocia (Hist. Ar. 75), and had been ordained presbyter at Alexandria by Gregory (next note). Upon the expulsion of the somewhat weak-kneed Dionysius after the council at Milan (355) he was appointed to that see by Constantius, although according to Athanasius (ubi supr.) he knew no Latin, nor any thing else except irreligion (‘a busybody rather than a Christian’). He took a leading part along with Valens and others at the Council of Ariminum (de Syn. 8, 10) and was included in the deposition of Arian leaders by that synod. Under the orthodox Valentinian he maintained his see in spite of the efforts of Philaster, Evagrius, and Eusebius of Vercellæ, and in spite of the condemnations passed upon him by various Western synods (362–371, see ad Epict. 1). In 364, Hilary travelled to Milan on purpose to expose him before Valentinian. In a discussion ordered by the latter, Hilary extorted from Auxentius a confession which satisfied the Emperor, but not Hilary himself, whose persistent denunciation of its insincerity caused his dismissal from the town. Auxentius seems after this to have intrigued to obtain Illyrian signatures to the creed of ( Niké or) Ariminum (Hard. Conc. 1. pp. 771, 773). Upon his death (374) Ambrose was elected bishop of Milan, but was confronted by the Arian party with a rival bishop in the person of a second Auxentius, said to have been a pupil of Ulfilas.
494:3765The intrusive bishop of Alexandria, 339–346. He had ordained his fellow-countryman Auxentius (Hilar. in Aux. 8).
494:37661 Cor. xi. 2.
Letters of Athanasius,
with Two Ancient Chronicles of His Life.
————————————
The Letters cannot be arranged in strict sequence of time without breaking into the homogeneity of the corpus of Easter Letters. Accordingly we divide them into two parts: (1) all that remain of the Easter or Festal Epistles: (2) Personal Letters. From the latter class we exclude synodical or encyclical documents, or treatises merely inscribed to a friend, such as those printed above pp. 91, 149, 173, 222, &c., &c., the ad Serapionem, ad Marcellinum, &c. There remain a number of highly interesting letters, the survivals of what must have been a large correspondence, all of which, excepting six (Nos. 52, 54, 56, 59, 60, 61), now appear in English for the first time. They are arranged as nearly as possible in strict chronological order, though this is in some cases open to doubt (e.g. 60, 64, &c.). They mostly belong to the later half of the episcopate of Athanasius, and are therefore placed after the Festal Collection, which however itself extends to the end of the Bishop’s life. The immemorial numbering of the latter collection is of course retained, although many of the forty-five are no longer to be found.
Prefixed to the Letters are two almost contemporary chronicles, the one preserved in the same ms. as Letters 46, 47, the other prefixed to the Syriac ms., which is our sole channel for the bulk of the Easter Letters. A memorandum appended to Letter 64 specifies certain fragments not included in this volume. The striking fragment Filiis suis has been conjecturally placed among the remains of Letter 29.
For the arrangement of the Letters, the reader is referred to the general Table of Contents to this volume. We now give
a. The Historia Acephala or Maffeian fragment, with short introduction.
b. The Chronicon Prævium or Festal Index, with introduction to it and to the Festal Letters.
A.—The Historia Acephala.
————————————
This most important document was brought to light in 1738 by the Marchese F. Scipio Maffei († 1755), from a Latin ms. (uncial parchment) in the Chapter Library at Verona. It was reprinted from Maffei’s Osservazioni Letterarie in the Padua edition of Athanasius; also in 1769 by Gallandi (Bibl. Patr. v. 222), from which edition (the reprint in Migne, xxvi. 1443 sqq. being full of serious misprints) the following version has been made. The Latin text (including letters 46, 47, and a Letter of the Council of Sardica) is very imperfect, but the annalist is so careful in his reckonings, and so often repeats himself, that the careful reader can nearly always use the document to make good its own gaps or wrong readings. Beyond this (except the insertion of the consuls for 372, §17 ad fin.) the present editor has not ventured 3767 to go. The importance and value of the fragment must now be shewn.
The annalist evidently writes under the episcopate of Theophilus, to which he hurriedly brings down his chronology after the death of Athanasius (§19). At the fortieth anniversary of the episcopate of Athanasius, June 8, 368, he makes a pause (§17) in order to reckon up his dates. This passage is the key of the whole of his chronological data. He accounts for the period of forty years (thus placing the accession of Ath. at June 8, 328, in agreement with the Index), shewing how it is exactly made up by the periods of ‘exile’ and of ‘quiet’ previously mentioned. To ‘quiet’ he assigns ‘xxii years v months and x days,’ to ‘exile’ xvii years vi months xx days; total xl years. He then shews how the latter is made up by the several exiles he has chronicled. As the text stands we have the following sum:
Table A.
Exiles
(1)
xc months
iii days
[(2)]
(3)
lxxii "
xiv "
(4)
xv "
xxii "
(5)
iv "
‘exact result’
xvii years
vi months
xx days
Now the exact result of the figures as they stand is 182 months, 9 days, i.e. 15 years 2 months and 9 days, or 2 years 4 months and 11 days too little. Moreover of the well-known ‘five exiles,’ only four are accounted for. An exile has thus dropped out, and an item of 2 years 4 months 11 days. Now this corresponds exactly with the interval from Epiphi 17 (July 11), 335 (departure for Tyre, Fest. Ind. viii), to Athyr 27 (Nov. 23), 337 (return to Alexandria F. I. x). The annalist then (followed apparently by Theodt. H. E. ii. 1) reckoned the first exile at the above figure. But what of the first figure in our table, xc months iii days? It again exactly coincides with the interval from Pharm. 21 (Apr. 16, Easter Monday), 339 to Paophi 24 (Oct. 21), 346, on which day (§1) Athan. returned from his second exile. This double coincidence cannot be an accident. It demonstrates beyond all dispute that the missing item of ‘ann. ii, mens. iv, d. xii’ has dropped out after ‘Treveris in Galliis,’ and that ‘mens. xc, dies iii’ relates to the second exile, so that, in §1 also, the annalist wrote not ‘annos vi’ but ‘annos vii menses vi dies iii,’ which he repeats §17 by its equivalent ‘mens. xc, d. iii,’ while words have dropped out in §1 to the effect of what is supplied in brackets. (Hefele, ii. 50, Eng. Tr., is therefore in error here).
I would add that the same obvious principle of correcting a clearly corrupt figure by the writer’s own subsequent reference to it, enables us also to correct the last figures of §2 by those of §5, to correct the items by the sum total of §§6, 7, and lastly to correct the corrupt readings ‘Gregorius’ for Georgius, and ‘Constans’ for Constantius, by the many uncorrupt places which shew that the annalist himself was perfectly aware of the right names.
In one passage alone (§13 ‘Athyr’ twice for Mechir, cf. Fest. Ind. viii) is conjecture really needed; but even here the consuls are correctly given, and support the right date.
We are now in a position to construct tables of ‘exiles’ and ‘quiet’ periods from the Historia as corrected by itself.
Table B. Exiles &c., of Athanasius.
Exiles lasted
No.
Years
Months
Days
beginning
(a) ii
iv
xi
(b) Epiphi 17, 335 (July 11)
vii
vi
iii
(b) Pharmuthi 21, 339 (Apr. 16)
vi
xiv
Mechir 13, 356 (Feb. 8)
iii
xxii
Paophi 27, 362 (Oct. 24)
iv
Paophi 8, 365 (Oct. 5)
Total Exiles
xvii
vi
xx
Quiet periods lasting
No.
Years
Months
Days
beginning
vii
iii (b)
Payni 14, 328 (June 8)
iv
xxiv (b)
(b) Athyr 27, 337 (Nov. 23)
ix
iii
xix (§5)
Paophi 24, 346 (Oct. 21)
viii
(§10)
Mechir 27, 362 (Feb. 21)
vii
xvii (b)
(c) Mechir 19, 364 (Feb. 14)
ii
iv
vii (a)
Mechir 7, 366 (Feb. 1)
Total ‘quiet’ (to June 8, 368)
xxii
N.B. In the above Table, (a) denotes dates or figures directly implied in the existing text, (b) those implied by it in combination with other sources, (c) those based on conjectural emendation of the existing text. All unmarked data are expressly given.
Table B shews the deliberate and careful calculation which runs through the system of our annalist. Once or twice he indulges in a round figure, exiles 1 and 5 are each a day too long by the Egyptian calendar, and this is set off by his apparently reckoning the fifth quiet period as two days too short. But the writer clearly knew his own mind. In fact, the one just ground on which we might distrust his chronology is its systematic character. He has a thorough scheme of his own, which he carries out to a nicety. Now such a chronology is not necessarily untrustworthy. Its consistency may be artificial; on the other hand, it may be due to accurate knowledge of the facts. Whether this is so or not must be ascertained partly from a writer’s known opportunities and capacity, partly from his agreement or discrepancy with other sources of knowledge. Now our annalist wrote in the time of Theophilus (385–412), and may therefore rank as a contemporary of Athanasius (cf. Prolegg. ch. v.) His opportunities therefore were excellent. As to his capacity, his work bears every trace of care and skill. He is no historian, nor a stylist, but as an annalist he understood what he was doing. As to agreement with other data, we remark to begin with that it was the publication of this fragment in the 18th century that first shed a ray of light on the Erebus and Chaos of the chronology of the Council of Sardica and its adjacent events; that it at once justified the critical genius of Montfaucon, Tillemont and others, against the objections with which their date for the death of Athanasius 3768 was assailed, and here again upset the confused chronological statements of the fifth-century historians in favour of the incidental evidence of many more primary authorities 3769 . But most important of all is its confirmation by the evidence of the Festal Letters discovered in 1842, and especially by their Index, the so-called ‘Chronicon Athanasianum.’ It is evident at a glance that our annalist is quite independent of the Index, as he gives many details which it does not contain. But neither can the Index be a compilation from the annalist. Each writer had access to information not embodied in the other, and there is no positive evidence that either used the other in any way. When they agree, therefore, their evidence has the greatest possible weight. Their main heads of agreement are indicated in the Chronological Table, Prolegg. sub fin.
It remains to notice shortly the two digressions on the doings of Eudoxius and the Anomœans (§§2, 12 of Migne, paragraphs II, IX of Gallandi). Here the annalist is off his own ground, and evidently less well informed. In §2 we learn nothing of interest: but the ‘Ecthesis’ of the Anomœans in par. IX is of importance, and only too evidently authentic. It still awaits a critical examination, and it is not easy to give it its exact place in the history of the later Arianism. Apparently it belongs to the period 360–364, when the Anomœans were organising their schism (Gwatkin, pp. 226, 180) the names being those of the ultra-Arians condemned by the Homœans in 360 (Prolegg. ch. ii. §8 fin.).
The contrast between the vagueness of statement in these digressions, and the writer’s firmness of touch in dealing with Alexandrian affairs is most significant.
The fragment runs as follows:
Footnotes
495:3767The corrections were made before he could obtain the essay and text of Sievers (Zeitsch. Hist. Theol. 1868), where he now finds them nearly all anticipated. Sievers’ discussion has been carefully and gratefully used, but his text is defective, especially from the accidental omission of one of the key-clauses of the whole (§17).
496:3768But our annalist gives May 3, while Fest. Ind. gives May 2, the day solemnised in the Coptic Martyrologies (Mai, Script. Vett. vol. 4, part 2, pp. 29, 114), and doubtless the right one. Perhaps, if Athanasius died in the night of May 2–3, the former day might be chosen for his commemoration, while our annalist may still be literally exact.
496:3769See Tillem. viii. 719 sqq.
Historia Acephala.
I. 1. The Emperor Constantius also wrote concerning the return of Athanasius, and among the Emperor’s letters this one too is to be found.
2. And it came to pass after the death of Gregory that Athanasius returned from the city of Rome and the parts of Italy, and entered Alexandria Paophi xxiv, Coss. Constantius IV, Constans III (October 21, 346); that is after [vii] years vi [months and iii days,] and remained quiet at Alexandria ix 3770 years iii 3771 months [and xix days].
II. Now after his return, Coss. Limenius 3772 and Catulinus (349), Theodore 3773 , Narcissus 3774 , and George, with others, came to Constantinople, wishing to persuade Paul to communicate with them, who received them not even with a word, and answered their greeting with an anathema. So they took to themselves Eusebius of Nicomedia 3775 , and laid snares for the most blessed Paul, and lodging a calumny against him concerning Constans and Magnentius, expelled him from CP. that they might have room there, and sow the Arian heresy. Now the people of CP., desiring the most blessed Paul, raised continual riots to prevent his being taken from the city, for they loved his sound doctrine. The Emperor, however, was angry, and sent Count Hermogenes to cast him out; but the people, hearing this, dragged forth Hermogenes through the midst of the town. From which matter they obtained a pretext against the Bishop, and exiled him to Armenia. Theodore and the rest wishing to place in the See of that Town Eudoxius, an ally and partisan of the Arian heresy, ordained [Bishop] of Germanicia, while the people were stirred to riot, and would not allow any one to sit in the See of blessed Paul,—they took Macedonius, a presbyter of Paul, and ordained him bishop of the town of CP., whom the whole assembly of bishops condemned, since against his own father he had disloyally received laying on of hands from heretics.
However, after Macedonius had communicated with them and signed, they brought in pretexts of no importance, and removing him from the Church, they instal the aforesaid Eudoxius of Antioch 3776 , whence [the partakers] in this secession are called Macedonians, making shipwreck concerning the Holy Spirit.
III. 3. After this time Athanasius, hearing that there was to be disturbance against him, the Emperor Constantius 3777 being in residence at Milan (353), sent to court a vessel with v Bishops, Serapion of Thmuis, Triadelphus of Nicotas, Apollo of Upper Cynopolis, Ammonius of Pachemmon,…and iii Presbyters of Alexandria, Peter the Physician, Astericus, and Phileas. After their setting sail from Alexandria, Coss. Constantius VI Augustus, and Constantius 3778 Cæsar II, Pachom xxiv (May 19, 353), presently four days after Montanus of the Palace entered Alexandria Pachom xxviii, and gave a letter of the same Constantius 3779 Augustus to the bishop Athanasius, forbidding him to come to court, on which account the bishop was exceedingly desolate, and the whole people much troubled 3780 . So Montanus, accomplishing nothing, set forth, leaving the bishop at Alexandria.
4. Now after a while Diogenes, Imperial Notary, came to Alexandria in the month of Mensor (August, 355) Coss. Arbetion and Lollianus: that is ii years and v months 3781 from when Montanus left Alexandria. And Diogenes pressed every one urgently to compel the bishop to leave the town, and afflicted all not a little. Now on the vi day of the month Thoth, he made a sharp attempt to besiege the church, and he spent iv months in his efforts, that is from the month Mensor, or from the [first] day of those intercalated until the xxvi day of Choiac (Dec. 23). But as the people and the judges strongly resisted Diogenes, Diogenes returned without success on the xxvi day of the said month Choiac, Coss. Arbetion and Lollianus, after iv months as aforesaid.
IV. 5. Now Duke Syrianus, and Hilary the Notary, came from Egypt to Alexandria on the tenth day of Tybi (Jan. 6, 356) after Coss. Arbetion and Lollianus. And sending in front all the legions of soldiers throughout Egypt and Libya, the Duke and the Notary entered the Church of Theonas with their whole force of soldiers by night, on the xiii day of Mechir, during the night preceding the xiv. And breaking the doors of the Church of Theonas, they entered with an infinite force of soldiers. But bishop Athanasius escaped their hands, and was saved, on the aforesaid xiv of Mechir 3782 . Now this happened ix years iii months and xix days from the Bishop’s return from Italy. But when the Bishop was delivered, his presbyters and people remained in possession of the Churches, and holding communion iv months, until there entered Alexandria the prefect Cataphronius and Count Heraclius in the month Pahyni xvi day, Coss. Constantius 3783 VIII and Julianus Cæsar I (June 10, 356).
V. 6. And four days after they entered 3784 the Athanasians were ejected from the Churches, and they were handed over to those who belonged to George 3785 , and were expecting him as Bishop. So they received the Churches on the xxi day of Pahyni. Moreover George 3786 arrived at Alexandria, Coss. Constantius 3787 IX, and Julianus Cæsar II, Mechir xxx (Feb. 24, 357), that is, eight months and xi days from when his party received the Churches. So George 3788 entered Alexandria, and kept the Churches xviii whole months: and then the common people attacked him in the Church of Dionysius, and he was hardly delivered with danger and a great struggle on the i day of the month Thoth, Coss. Tatianus and Cerealis (Aug. 29, 358). Now George 3789 was ejected from Alexandria on the x 3790 day after the riot, namely v of Paophi (Oct. 2). But they who belonged to Bishop Athanasius, ix days after the departure of George, that is on the xiv of Pa[ophi], cast out the men of George 3791 , and held the Churches two months and xiv days; until there came Duke Sebastian from Egypt and cast them out, and again assigned the Churches to the party of George on the xxviii day of the month Choiac (Dec. 24).
7. Now ix whole months after the departure of George from Alexandria, Paulus the Notary arrived Pahyni xxix, Coss. Eusebius, Hypatius (June 23, 359), and published an Imperial Order on behalf of George, and coerced many in vengeance for him. And [ii years and] v months after, George came to Alexandria Athyr xxx (Coss. Taurus, and Florentius) from court (Nov. 26, 361), that is iii years and two months after he had fled. And at Antioch they of the Arian heresy, casting out the Paulinians from the Church, appointed Meletius. When he would not consent to their evil mind, they ordained Euzoius a presbyter of George 3792 of Alexandria in his stead.
VI. 8. Now George, having entered Alexandria as aforesaid on the xxx Athyr, remained safely in the town iii days, that is [till] iii Choiac. For, on the iv day of that same month, the prefect Gerontius announced the death of the Emperor Constantius, and that Julianus alone held the whole Empire. Upon which news, the citizens of Alexandria and all shouted against George, and with one accord placed him under custody. And he was in prison bound with iron from the aforesaid iv day of Choiac, up to the xxvii of the same month, xxiv days. For on the xxviii day of the same month early in the morning, nearly all the people of that town led forth George from prison, and also the Count who was with him, the Superintendent of the building of the Church which is called Cæsareum, and killed them both, and carried their bodies round through the midst of the town, that of George on a camel, but that of Dracontius, men dragging it by ropes; and so having insulted them, at about the vii hour of the day, they burnt the bodies of each.
VII. 9. Now in the next.…day of Mechir the x day of the month, after Coss. Taurus and Florentius (Feb. 4, 362), an order of the Emperor Julian was published commanding those things to be restored to the idols and temple attendants and the public account, which in former times had been taken away from them.
10. But after iii days, Mechir xiv, an order was given of the same Emperor Julian, also of the Vicar Modestus, to Gerontius prefect, ordering all Bishops hitherto defeated by factions and exiled to return to their towns and provinces. Now this letter was published on the following day Mechir xv, while subsequently an edict also of the prefect Gerontius was published, by which the Bishop Athanasius was ordered to return to his Church. And xii days after the publication of this Edict Athanasius was seen at Alexandria, and entered the Church in the same month Mechir, xxvii day, so that there is from his flight which took place in the times of Syrianus and Hilary till his return, when Julianus.…Mechir xxvii. He remained in the Church until Paophi xxvi, Coss. Mamertinus and Nevitta (Oct. 23, 362), viii whole months.
11. Now on the aforesaid day, Paophi xxvii, he [the prefect] published an Edict of the Emperor Julianus, that Athanasius, Bishop, should retire from Alexandria, and no sooner was the Edict published, than the Bishop left the town and abode round about Thereu 3793 . Soon after his departure Olympus the prefect, in obedience to the same 3794 Pythiodorus, and those who were with him, most difficult persons, sent into exile Paulus and Astericius, presbyters of Alexandria, and directed them to live at the town of Andropolis.
VIII. 12. Now Olympus the same prefect, in the month Mensor, xxvi day, Coss. Julianus Augustus IV. and Sallustius (Aug. 20, 363), announced that Julian the Emperor was dead, and that Jovianus a Christian was Emperor. And in the following month, Thoth xviii, a letter of the Emperor Jovianus came to Olympus the prefect that only the most high God should be worshipped, and Christ, and that the peoples, holding communion in the Churches, should practise religion. Moreover Paulus and Astericius, the aforesaid presbyters, returned from exile at the town of Andropolis, and entered Alexandria, on the x day of Thoth, after x months.
13. Now Bishop Athanasius, having tarried as aforesaid at Thereon, went up to the higher parts of Egypt as far as Upper Hermopolis in the Thebaid, and as far as Antinoopolis. And while he was staying in these places, it was learned that the Emperor Julian was dead, and that Jovian a Christian was Emperor. So the Bishop entered Alexandria secretly, his arrival not being known to many, and went by sea to meet the Emperor Jovian, and afterwards, Church affairs being settled 3795 , received a letter, and came to Alexandria and entered into the Church on the xix day of Athyr 3796 Coss. Jovianus and Varronianus. From his leaving Alexandria according to the order of Julian until he arrived on the aforesaid xix day of Athyr 3797 after one year and iii months, and xxii days.
IX. Now at CP. Eudoxius of Germanicia held the Church, and there was a division between him and Macedonius; but by means of Eudoxius there went forth another worse heresy from the spurious [teaching] of the Arians, Aetius and Patricius 3798 of Nicæa, who communicated with Eunomius, Heliodorus, and Stephen. And Eudoxius adopting this, communicated with Euzoius, Bishop at Antioch, of the Arian sect, and they deposed on a pretext Seleucius 3799 and Macedonius, and Hypatian 3800 , and other xv Bishops belonging to them, since they would not receive ‘Unlike’ nor ‘Creature of the Uncreated.’ Now their Exposition is as follows:—
Exposition of Patricius 3801 and Aetius, who communicated with Eunomius, Heliodorus, and Stephen.
These are the attributes of God, Unbegotten, without origin, Eternal, not to be commanded, Immutable, All-seeing, Infinite, Incomparable, Almighty, knowing the future without foresight; without beginning 3802 . These do not belong to the Son, for He is commanded, is under command, is made from nothing, has an end, is not compared [with the Father], the Father surpasses Him…of Christ is found: as pertaining to the Father, He is ignorant of the future. He was not God, but Son of God; God of those who are after Him: and in this He possesses invariable likeness with the Father, namely He sees all things because all things…because He is not changed in goodness; [but] not like in the quality of Godhead, nor in nature. But if we said that He was born of the quality of Godhead, we say that He resembles the offspring of serpents 3803 , and that is an impious saying: and like as a statue produces rust from itself, and will be consumed by the rust itself, so also the Son, if He is produced from the nature of the Father, will consume the Father. But from the work, and the newness of work, the Son is naturally God, and not from the Nature, but from another nature like as the Father, but not from Him. For He was made the image of God, and we are out of God, and from God. Inasmuch as all things are from God, and the Son also, as if from something [else]. Like as iron if it has rust will be diminished, like as a body if it produces worms is eaten up, like as a wound if it produce discharges will be consumed by them, so [thinks] he who says that the Son is from the Nature of the Father; now let him who does not say that the Son is like the Father be put outside the Church and be anathema. If we shall say that the Son of God is God, we bring in Two without beginning: we call Him Image of God; he who calls Him ‘out from God’ Sabellianises. And he who says that he is ignorant of the nativity of God Manicheanizes: if any one shall say that the Essence of the Son is like the Essence of the Father unbegotten, he blasphemes. For just as snow and white lead are similar in whiteness but dissimilar in kind, so also the Essence of the Son is other than the Essence of the Father. But snow has a different whiteness 3804 …
Be pleased to hear that the Son is like the Father in His operations; like as Angels cannot comprehend the Nature of Archangels, let them please to understand, nor Archangels the Nature of a Cherubin, nor Cherubins the Nature of the Holy Spirit, nor the Holy Spirit the Nature of the Only-begotten, nor the Only-begotten the nature of the Unbegotten God.
14. Now when the Bishop Athanasius was about coming from Antioch to Alexandria, the Arians Eudoxius, Theodore, Sophronius, Euzoius and Hilary took counsel and appointed Lucius, a presbyter of George, to seek audience of the Emperor Jovian at the Palace, and to say what is contained in the copies 3805 . Now here we have omitted some less necessary matter.
X. 15. Now after Jovian, Valentinian and Valens having been somewhat rapidly summoned to the throne, a decree of theirs, circulated everywhere, which also was delivered at Alexandria on Pachon x, Coss. Valentinian and Valens (May 5, 365), to the effect that the Bishops deposed and expelled from their Churches under Constantius, who had in the time of Julian’s reign reclaimed for themselves and taken back their Bishopric, should now be cast out anew from the Churches, a penalty being laid on the courts of a fine of ccc pounds of gold, unless that is they should have [ba]nished the Bishops from the Churches and towns. On which account at Alexandria great confusion and riot arose, insomuch that the whole Church was troubled, since also the officials were few in number with the prefect Flavian and his staff: and on account of the imperial order and the fine of gold they were urgent that the Bishops should leave the town; the Christian multitude resisting and gainsaying the officials and the judge, and maintaining that the Bishop Athanasius did not come under this definition nor under the Imperial order, because neither did Constantius banish him, but even restored him. Likewise also Julian persecuted him; he recalled all, and him for the sake of idolatry he cast out anew, but Jovian brought him back. This opposition and riot went on until the next month Payni, on the xiv day; for on this day the prefect Flavian made a report, declaring that he had consulted the Emperors on this very point which was stirred at Alexandria, and so they all became quiet in a short time 3806 .
XI. 16. iv months and xxiv days after, that is on Paophi viii, the Bishop Athanasius left the Church secretly by night, and retired to a villa near the New River 3807 . But the prefect Flavian and Duke Victorinus not knowing that he had retired, on the same night arrived at the Church of Dionysius with a force of soldiers: and having broken the back door, and entered the upper parts of the house in search of the Bishop’s apartment, they did not find him, for, not long before he had retired, and he remained, staying at the aforesaid property from the above day, Paophi viii, till Mechir vi, that is iv whole months (Oct. 5–Jan. 31). After this, the Imperial notary Bresidas, in the same month Mechir came to Alexandria with an Imperial letter, ordering the said Bishop Athanasius to return to Town, and hold the Churches as usual; and on the vii day of the month Mechir, after Coss. Valentinian and Valens, that is Coss. Gratian and Degalaifus, the said notary Bresidas with Duke Victorinus and Flavian the Prefect assembled at the palace and announced to the officers of the courts who were present, and the people, that the Emperors had ordered the Bishop to return to town, and straightway the said Bresidas the notary went forth with the officers of the courts, and a multitude of the people of the Christians to the aforesaid villa, and taking the Bishop Athanasius with the Imperial order, led him in to the Church which is called that of Dionysius on the vii day of the mouth Mechir.
XII. 17. From Coss. Gratian and Dagalaifus (366) to the next consulships of Lupicinus and Jovinus (367) and that of [Valentinian II. and] Valens II. on Payni xiv (June 8, 368) in [this] Consulship xl [years of the Bishopric] of Athanasius are finished. Out of which [years] he abode at Treveri in Gaul [ii years iv months xi days 3808 , and in Italy and the West] xc months and iii days. At Alexandria [and] in uncertain places in hiding, when he was being harassed by Hilary the notary and the Duke, lxxii months and xiv days. In Egypt and Antioch upon journeys xv months and xxii days: upon the property near the new river iv months. The result will be exactly vi 3809 months and xvii years and 3810 xx days. Moreover, he remained in quiet at Alexandria xxii years and v months x days. But also, he twice stayed a little time outside Alexandria in his last journey and at Tyre and at CP. Accordingly, the result will be as I have stated above, xl years of the episcopate of Athanasius until Payni [x]iv, Coss. Valentinian and Valens. And in the following consulate of Valentinian and Victor, Payni xiv, i year, and in the following consulships of Valentinian [III] and Valens III Payni xiv, and in the following Consulships of Gratian and Probus, [and the next of Modestus and Arintheus], and another consulship of Valentinian [IV] and Valens IV, on Pachon viii he falls asleep (May 3, 373).
XIII. 18. Now in the aforesaid consulship of Lupicinus and Jovinus, Lucius being specially desirous to claim for himself the episcopate of the Arians a long time after he had left Alexandria, arrived in the aforesaid consulship, and entered the town secretly by night on the xxvi day of the month Thoth (Sept. 24, 367): and as it is said, abode in a certain small house keeping in hiding for that day. But next day he went to a house where his mother was staying; and his arrival being known at once all over the town, the whole people assembled and blamed his entry. And Duke Trajanus and the Prefect were extremely displeased at his irrational and bold arrival, and sent officials to cast him out of the town. So the officials came to Lucius, and considering all of them that the people were angry and very riotous against him they feared to bring him out of the house by themselves, lest he should be killed by the multitude. And they reported this to the judges. And presently the judges themselves, Duke Trajan, and the Prefect Tatianus [came] to the place with many soldiers, entered the house and brought out Lucius themselves at the vii hour of the day, on the xxvii day of Thoth. Now while Lucius was following the judges, and the whole people of the town after them, Christians and Pagans, and of divers religions, all alike with one breath, and with one mind, and of one accord, did not cease, from the house whence he was led, through the middle of the town, as far as the house of the Duke, from shouting, and hurling at him withal insults and criminal charges, and from crying, ‘Let him be taken out of the town.’ However, the Duke took him into his house, and he stayed with him for the remaining hours of the day, and the whole night, and on the following the xxviii of the same month, the Duke early in the morning, and taking him in charge as far as Nicopolis 3811 , handed him over to soldiers to be escorted from Egypt.
19. Now whereas Athanasius died on the viii of the month Pachon, the v day before he fell asleep, he ordained Peter, one of the ancient presbyters, Bishop, who carried on the Episcopate, following him in all things. After whom Timothy his B[rother] succeeded to the Episcopate for iv years. After him Theophilus from [being] deacon was ordained Bishop (385). The End.
Footnotes
497:3770Corrected from §§5, 17, infr.; text ‘xvi.’
497:3771Corrected from §5; text ‘6 months.’
497:3772Text ‘Hypatius.’
497:3773Of Heraclea.
497:3774Cf. Apol. Fug. 1, &c., &c.
497:3775Bishop of CP. 338–341. On his death Paul was restored, but Maccdonius appointed by the Arians. This was in 341–2. The final expulsion and death of Paul was about the date given in the text; but the events of several years are lumped together without clear distinction.
497:3776In 360.
497:3777Text ‘Constans.’ This passage (3–5), is used by Soz. iv. 9.
497:3778Text ‘Constans.’ This passage (3–5), is used by Soz. iv. 9.
497:3779Text ‘Constans.’ This passage (3–5), is used by Soz. iv. 9.
497:3780Fatigatus,’ Soz. ἐταράχθησαν
497:3781Cf. Apol. Const. 22; read ii years ii months.
497:3782Text throughout ‘Methir.’
497:3783Text ‘Constans.’ This passage (3–5), is used by Soz. iv. 9.
497:3784Supr. p. 290.
497:3785Text ‘Gregory;’ §§6, 7 are used by Soz. iv. 10, §8 by Soz. v. 7.
497:3786Text ‘Gregory;’ §§6, 7 are used by Soz. iv. 10, §8 by Soz. v. 7.
497:3787Text ‘Constans.’ This passage (3–5), is used by Soz. iv. 9.
497:3788Text ‘Gregory;’ §§6, 7 are used by Soz. iv. 10, §8 by Soz. v. 7.
497:3789Text ‘Gregory;’ §§6, 7 are used by Soz. iv. 10, §8 by Soz. v. 7.
497:3790Read ‘34th.’
497:3791Text ‘Gregory;’ §§6, 7 are used by Soz. iv. 10, §8 by Soz. v. 7.
497:3792Text ‘Gregory;’ §§6, 7 are used by Soz. iv. 10, §8 by Soz. v. 7.
498:3793Compare ‘Chereu’ in Vit. Ant. 86.
498:3794The previous reference to him has dropped out; see Fest. Ind. xxxv.
498:3795Used by Soz. vi. 5.
498:3796Read Mechir, i.e. Feb. 14, 364.
498:3797Read Mechir, i.e. Feb. 14, 364.
498:3798Can this be the Hypatius of Philst. ix. 19? For Heliodorus and Stephen, see Hist. Ar. p. 294; de Syn. 12; Theod. H. E. ii. 28 and Gwatkin, Studies, pp. 226, 180 note.
498:3799i.e. Eleusius.
498:3800i.e. Eustathius.
498:3801Can this be the Hypatius of Philst. ix. 19? For Heliodorus and Stephen see Hist. Ar. p. 294; de Syn. 12; Theod. H. E. ii. 28 and Gwatkin, Studies, pp. 226, 180 note.
498:3802Lat. ‘dominio’ for ἄρχῃ.
498:3803Cf. Matt. iii. 7
498:3804Text imperfect, ‘Externo autem conniventes oculos egressi.’
498:3805i.e. the memoranda printed as Appendix to Letter 56. §14 is used, but badly, by Soz. vi. 5.
499:3806§§15, 16 are used by Soz. vi. 12.
499:3807i.e. in the western suburb.
499:3808i.e. July 11, 335, to Nov. 23, 337, see above, p. 496.
499:3809Migne xi. (misprint).
499:3810The following 14 words are left out by an error in Sievers.
499:3811A short distance east of Alexandria, see Dict. Gr. and Rom. Geog. s.v.
B.—The Festal Letters, and Their Index,
Or Chronicon Athanasianum.
————————————
The latter document is from the hand, it would seem, of the original collector of the Easter Letters of Athanasius (yet see infr. note 6a). He gives, in a paragraph corresponding to each Easter in the episcopate of Athanasius, a summary of the calendar data for the year, a notice of the most important events, and especially particulars as to the Letter for the Easter in question, viz., Whether any peculiar circumstances attended its publication, and whether for some reason the ordinary Letter was omitted.
The variations of practice which had rendered the Paschal Feast a subject of controversy from very early times (see Dict. Christ. Antiq. Easter) had given rise to the custom of the announcement of Easter at a convenient interval beforehand by circular letters. In the third century the Bishops of Alexandria issued such letters (e.g. Dionysius in Eus. H. E. vii. 20), and at the Council of Nicæa, where the Easter question was dealt with (ad Afros. 2), the Alexandrian see was requested to undertake the duty of announcing the correct date to the principal foreign Churches as well as to its own suffragan sees. (This is doubted in the learned article Paschal Letters D.C.A. p. 1562, but the statement of Cyril. Alex. in his ‘Prologus Paschalis’ is express: cf. Ideler 2, 259. The only doubt is, whether the real reference is to Sardica, see Index xv. and Ep. 18.) This was probably due to the astronomical learning for which Alexandria was famous 3812 . At any rate we have fragments of the Easter letters of Dionysius and of Theophilus, and a collection of the Letters of Cyril 3813 .
The Easter letters of Athanasius were, until 1842, only known to us by allusions in Jerome (de V. illustr. 87) and others, and by fragments in Cosmas Indicopleustes purporting to be taken from the 2nd, 5th, 6th, 22nd, 24th, 28th, 29th, 40th, and 45th. Cardinal Mai had also shortly before the discovery of the ‘Corpus’ unearthed a minute fragment of the 13th. But in 1842 Archdeacon Tattam brought home from the Monastery of the Theotokos in the desert of Skete a large number of Syriac mss., which for over a century European scholars had been vainly endeavouring to obtain. Among these, when deposited in the British Museum, Cureton discovered a large collection of the Festal Letters of Athanasius, with the ‘Index,’ thus realising the suspicion of Montfaucon (Migne xxvi.) that the lost treasure might be lurking in some Eastern monastery. Another consignment of mss. from the same source produced some further portions, which were likewise included in the translation revised for the present volume 3814 .
(1) Number of Festal Letters of Athanasius.—This question, which is of first-rate importance for the chronology of the period, must be regarded as settled, at any rate until some discovery which shall revolutionise all existing data. The number 45, which was the maximum known to antiquity 3815 , is confirmed by the Index, and by the fact that the citations from Cosmas (see above) tally with the order of the Letters in this Syriac version in every case where the letter is preserved entire, while Letter 39, preserved by a different writer, also tallies with the reference to it in the Index. It is therefore unassailably established on our existing evidence that the last Easter letter of Ath. was his ‘45th,’ in other words that 45 is the full or normal number of his festal letters. This clinches the reckoning of the Index and Hist. Aceph. that he was bishop for 45 Easters (329–373 inclusive), i.e. for parts of 46 years (328–373 inclusive). Moreover it corroborates, and is rivetted firm by, the statement of Cyril. Alex. Ep. 1, that Athan. graced the see of Alexandria ‘fully 46 years.’ ‘Il le dit en voulant faire son eloge: de sorte qu’il y a tout lieu de croire qu’il n’a point passé les 46 ans: car pour peu qu’il fust entré dans la 47me année, S. Cyrille auroit dû naturellement luy donner 47 ans 3816 .’ So Tillemont (viii. 719), whose opinion is all the more valuable from the fact that he is unable to harmonise it with his date for the accession of Ath., and accordingly forgets, p. 720 (sub. fin.), what he has said on the previous page.
But we observe that many of the 45 Letters are represented in the ‘corpus’ by blanks. This is doubtless often the result of accidental loss. But the Index informs us that in several years, owing to his adversities, ‘the Pope was unable to write.’ This however may be fairly understood to refer to the usual public or circular letter. Often when unable to write this, he sent a few cordial lines to some friend (Letter 12) or to the clergy (17, 18) or people (29? see notes there) of Alexandria, in order that the true Easter might be kept (cf. the Arian blunder in 340, Ind. xii, with the note to Serapion Letter 12 from Rome). But occasionally the Index is either corrupt or mistaken, e.g. No. xiii, where the Pope is stated to have written no letter, while yet the ‘Corpus’ contains one, apparently entire and of the usual public kind. We may therefore still hope for letters or fragments for any of the ‘missing’ years.
(2) The Festal Letters are fully worthy to rank with any extant writings of Athanasius. The same warmth, vigour, and simplicity pervades them as we find elsewhere in his writings, especially in such gems as the letter to Dracontius (Ep. 49). Their interest, however (apart from chronology), is mainly personal and practical. Naturally the use and abuse of Fast and Festival occupy a prominent place throughout. Repeatedly he insists on the joyfulness of Christian feasts, and on the fact that they are typical of, and intended to colour, the whole period of the Christian’s life. We gather from Ep. 12 that Lent was kept less strictly in Egypt than in some other Christian countries. He insists not only upon fasting, but upon purity and charity, especially toward the poor (Ep. 1. 11, cf. Ep. 47. 4, &c.). We trace the same ready command of Scripture, the same grave humour in the unexpected turn given to some familiar text (Ep. 39) as we are used to in Athanasius. The Eucharist is a feeding upon the Word (4. 3), and to be prepared for by amendment of life, repentance, and confession of sin (i.e. to God, Ep. 7. 10). Of special importance is the Canon of Holy Scripture in Ep. 39, on which see Prolegg. ch. iv § 4.
It should be observed that the interval before Easter at which notice was given varied greatly. Some letters (e.g. 1, 2, 20) by a natural figure of speech, refer to the Feast as actually come; but others (17, 18) were certainly written as early as the preceding Easter. Letter 4 was written not long before Lent, but was (§ 1) unusually late. The statement of Cassian referred to below (note to Ep. 17) is therefore incorrect at any rate for our period.
(3) The Index to the Festal Letters.—This chronicle, so constantly referred to throughout this volume, is of uncertain date, but probably (upon internal evidence) only ‘somewhat later’ (Hefele, E. Tr. vol. ii. p. 50) than Athanasius himself. Its special value is in the points where it agrees with the Hist. Aceph. (supr. Prolegg. ch. v.), where we recognise the accredited reckoning of the Alexandrian Church as represented by Cyril and Proterius (see Tillem. ubi supr.). The writer undoubtedly makes occasional slips (cf. Index iii. with Letter iv. and p. 512, note 1, Index xiii. with Letter 3817 xiii.!), and the text would be a miracle if it had come down to us uncorrupt (see notes passim): but on the main dates he is consistent with himself, with the Chron. Aceph. and (so far as they come in contact) with the notices of the Alexandrian bishops above mentioned.
The writer’s method, however, must be attended to if we are to avoid a wrong impression as to his accuracy. Firstly, his year is not the Julian but the Egyptian year (infr. Table C) from Aug. 29 to Aug. 28. Each year is designated by the new consuls who come into office in the fifth month. Secondly, in each year he takes a leading event or events, round which he groups antecedent or consequent facts, which often belong to other years. Two or three examples will make this clear. (α) Year Aug. 30, 335–Aug. 28, 336: leading event, exile of Athanasius (he reaches CP. Oct. 30, 335, leaves for Gaul [Feb. 7], both in the same Egyptian year). Antecedent: His departure for Tyre July 11, 335, at end of previous Egyptian Year. (β) The ‘eventful’ year Aug. 337–Aug. 338: leading event, triumphant return of Athanasius from Gaul, Oct. 21, 337. Antecedent: death of Constantine on previous 22nd of May (i.e. 337 3818 ). (γ) Year 342–3: leading event, Council of Sardica (summons issued, at any rate, before end of Aug. 343). Consequent events: temporary collapse of Arian party and recantation of Ursacius and Valens (344–347? Further examples in Gwatkin, Studies, p. 105). Bearing this in mind, the discriminating student will derive most important help from the study of the Index: when its data agree with those derived from other good sources, they must be allowed first-rate authority. This is the principle followed in the Prolegomena (ch. v.) and throughout this volume. On the main points in dispute, as strewn above, we have to reckon with a compact uniform chronological system, checked and counter-checked by careful calculations (Hist. Aceph.), and transmitted by two independent channels; in agreement, moreover, as concerns the prior and posterior limits, with the reckoning adopted by the successors of Athanasius in the see.
N.B.—The translation of the Index and Festal Letters is revised by Miss Payne Smith from that contained in the Oxford ‘Library of the Fathers.’ A German translation by Larsow was published at Berlin 1852. The Latin Version (from an Italian translation) of Card. Mai is in Migne, xxvi. 1351 sqq.
The following Tables bear specially on the Festal Index.
Table C. The Egyptian Year.
After the final settlement of Egypt by Augustus as a province of the Roman Empire, the use of the Julian form of computation was established in Alexandria, the first day of the new Calendar being fixed to the 28th of August, the 1st of Thot of the year in which the innovation took place; from which period, six, instead of five, supplementary days were added at the end of every fourth year; so that the form of the Alexandrian year was as follows. The months from Phamenoth 5 (Mar. 1) onwards are unaffected by leap-year.
Thot
29 August
Pharmuthi
27 March
Paophi
28 September
Pachon
26 April
Athyr
28 October
Paoni (Payni)
26 May
Choiak
27 November
Epiphi
25 June
Tybi
27 December
Mesori
25 July
Mechir
26 January
Epagomena
24 August
Phamenoth
25 February
N.B.—In leap-years, the Diocletian year (see p. 503, note 4) began on the previous Aug. 30, which was accordingly the First of Thot, owing to the additional ‘epagomenon’ which preceded it. Accordingly all the months to Phamenoth inclusive begin a day late. Then, the Julian intercalary day coming in as Feb. 29, Pharmuthi and the succeeding months begin as shewn above. (See Ideler, vol. I, pp. 161, 164, also 140, 142.)
Table D. Of the Chronological Information Given in the Index to the Paschal Letters.
————————————
N.B.—The Year of our Lord, the Golden Numbers, and Dominical Letter, and the date of Easter according to the Modern Reckoning, are added. The age of the Moon on Easter-day is apparently given from observations or reckoned by some lost system (see Index x. xxii.); in about one case out of three it varies from the modern reckoning, perhaps once or twice from corruption of text. The Epact is a day too little for 342, 344, 361, 362, 363 (see Galle in Larsow;. F.B. 48, sqq.).
Easter Day.
Number of Letter.
Year of Diocl.
Year of our Lord.
Egyptian Calendar.
Roman Calendar.
Modern Reckon-ing.
Day of Lunar Month.
Epact (age of Moon on Mar. 22).
Sunday Letter and Concur-rentes.
Indictn.
Golden Num-bers.
…
44
328
19 Pharm.
XVIII Kal. Mai
14 April
18
25
1 F
1
6
I
45
329
11 Pharm.
VIII Id. April
6 April
22
6
2 E
2
7
II
46
330
24 Pharm.
XIII Kal. Mai
19 April
15
17
3 D
3
8
III
47
331
16 Pharm.
III Id. April
11 April
18
28
4 C
4
9
IV
48
332
7 Pharm.
IV Non. April
2 April
20
9
6 A
5
10
V
49
333
20 Pharm.
XVI I Kal. Mai
3819 15 April
15
20
7 G
6
11
VI
50
334
12 Pharm.
VII Id. April
7 April
17
1
1 F
7
12
VII
51
335
4 Pharm.
III Kal. April
30 March
20
12
2 E
8
13
VIII
52
336
23 Pharm.
XIV Kal. Mai
18 April
20
23
4 C
9
14
IX
53
337
8 Pharm.
III Non. April
3 April
16
4
5 B
10
15
X
54
338
30 Phamth.
VII Kal. April
26 March
18½
15
6 A
11
16
XI
55
339
20 Pharm.
XVII Kal. Mai
15 April
20
26
7 G
12
17
XII
56
340
4 Pharm.
III Kal. April
30 March
15
7
2 E
13
18
XIII
57
341
24 Pharm.
XIII Kal. Mai
19 April
16
18
3 D
14
19
XIV
58
342
16 Pharm.
III Id. April
11 April
16
29
4 C
15
1
XV
59
343
1 Pharm.
VI Kal. April
27 March
15
11
5 B
1
2
XVI
60
344
20 Pharm.
XVII Kal. Mai
15 April
19
21
7 G
2
3
XVII
61
345
12 Pharm.
VII Id. April
7 April
19
3
1 F
3
4
XVIII
62
346
4 Pharm.
III Kal. April
3820 30 March
21
14
2 E
4
5
XIX
63
347
17 Pharm.
Prid. Id. April
12 April
15
25
3 D
5
6
XX
64
348
8 Pharm.
III Non. April
3 April
18
6
5 B
6
7
XXI
65
349
30 Phamth.
VII Kal. April
3821 26 March
19
17
6 A
7
8
XXII
66
350
13 Pharm.
VI Id. April
8 April
19
28
7 G
8
9
XXIII
67
351
5 Pharm.
Prid. Kal. April
31 March
18
9
1 F
9
10
XXIV
68
352
24 Pharm.
XIII Kal. Mai
19 April
18
20
3 D
10
11
XXV
69
353
16 Pharm.
III Id April
11 April
21
1
4 C
11
12
XXVI
70
354
1 Pharm.
VI Kal. April
27 March
17
12
5 B
12
13
XXVII
71
355
21 Pharm.
XVI Kal. Mai
16 April
18
23
6 A
13
14
XXVIII
72
356
12 Pharm.
VII Id. April
7 April
17
4
1 F
14
15
XXIX
73
357
27 Phamth.
X Kal. April
23 March
17
15
2 E
15
16
XXX
74
358
17 Pharm.
Prid Id. April
12 April
17
26
3 D
1
17
XXXI
75
359
9 Pharm.
Prid. Non. April
4 April
20
7
4 C
2
18
XXXII
76
360
28 Pharm.
IX Kal. Mai
23 April
21
18
6 A
3
19
XXXIII
77
361
13 Pharm.
VI Id. April
8 April
17
29
7 G
4
1
XXXIV
78
362
5 Pharm.
Prid. Kal. April
31 March
25
3822 10
1 F
5
2
XXXV
79
363
25 Pharm.
XII Kal. Mai
20 April
20
21
2 E
6
3
XXXVI
80
364
9 Pharm.
Prid. Non. April
4 April
16
3
4 C
7
4
XXXVII
81
365
1 Pharm.
VI Kal. April
27 March
19
14
5 B
8
5
XXXVIII
82
366
21 Pharm.
XVI Kal. Mai
16 April
20
25
6 A
9
6
XXXIX
83
367
6 Pharm.
Kal. April
1 April
16
6
7 G
10
7
XL
84
368
25 Pharm.
XII Kal. Mai
20 April
16
17
2 E
11
8
XLI
85
369
17 Pharm.
Prid. Id. April
12 April
15
28
3 D
12
9
XLII
86
370
2 Pharm.
V Kal. April
28 March
15
9
4 C
13
10
XLIII
87
371
22 Pharm.
XV Kal. Mai
17 April
16
20
5 B
14
11
XLIV
88
372
13 Pharm.
VI Id. April
8 April
19
1
7 G
15
12
XLV
89
373
5 Pharm.
Prid. Kal. April
31 March
21
12
1 F
1
13
Footnotes
500:3812So Leo Magnus (Ep. ad Marcian. Imp.) ‘apud Ægyptios huius supputationis antiquitus tradita peritia.’
500:3813We trace differences of opinion in spite of the authority of the Alexandrian Pope in ‘Index’ xii, xv, xxi, and Ep. 18.
500:3814Further details in Migne, P.G. xxvi. 1339 sqq. and Preface (by Williams?) to Oxford Transl. of Fest. Epp. (Parker, 1854.)
500:3815The very late Arabic Life of Ath. alone gives 47 (Migne xxv. p. ccli.), a statement which we may safely ignore in view of the general character of the document which is ‘crowded with incredible trivialities and follies’ (Montf.), outbidding by far the ‘unparalleled rubbish’ (id.) of the worst of the Greek biographies (see Migne xxv. p. liv. sq.).
500:3816The italics are ours. Cf. Rufin. H. E. ii. 3, ‘xlvi anno sacerdotii sui.’
501:3817Some phenomena might suggest (Hefele, ii. 88, note) that the Index was originally prefixed to another collection of the letters, and was copied by a collector or transcriber of our present corpus; cf. Index xiii., note 17b, and p. 527, note 1.
501:3818Misunderstood by Hefele, vol. ii. p. 88 (E. Tra.).
502:3819According to the usual Antegregorian rule, Easter would fall on April 22.
502:3820According to the usual rule, Easter would fall on March 23; see Letter 18, note 3.
502:3821According to rule, Easter would fall on April 23, which perhaps was the day really observed, as it agrees with the age of the moon; but see note on Index No. xxi.
502:3822Read Moon 20, Epact 11.
Index.
An Index of the months of each year, and of the days, and of the Indictions, and of the Consulates, and of the Governors in Alexandria, and of all the Epacts, and of those [days] which are named ‘of the Gods 3823 ,’ and the reason [any Letter] was not sent, and the returns from exile 3824 —from the Festal Letters of Pope Athanasius.
The Festal Letters of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, which he sent year by year, to the several cities and all the provinces subject to him; that is, from Pentapolis, and on to Libya, Ammoniaca, the greater and the lesser Oasis, Egypt, and Augustamnica, with the Heptanomis of 3825 the upper and middle Thebais; [commencing] from the 44th 3826 year of the Diocletian Era, in which the Paschal Festival was on xvi 3827 Pharmuthi; xviii Kal. Mai; xviii Moon; when Alexander, his predecessor, having departed this life on xxii Pharmuthi 3828 , he [Athan.] succeeded him after the Paschal festival on xiv Pauni, Indict. i, Januarius and Justus being Consuls, the governor Zenius of Italy being the Præfect of Egypt, Epact xxv; Gods, i.
I. (Aug. 29, 328, to Aug. 28, a.d. 329.) In this year, Easter-day was on xi Pharmuthi; viii. Id. Ap.; xxii Moon; Coss. Constantinus Aug. viii, Constantinus Cæs. IV; the same governor Zenius being Præfect of Egypt; Indict. ii; Epact vi; Gods, ii. This was the first Letter he [Athan.] sent; for he was ordained Bishop in the preceding year after the Paschal feast, Alexander, as is known, having despatched one for that year, before he was released from life. This was in the 45th of the Diocletian era.
II. (329–330.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxiv Pharmuthi; xiii Kal. Mai; xv Moon; Coss. Gallicianus, Symmachus; the governor Magninianus the Cappadocian being Præfect of Egypt; Indict. iii; Epact xvii; Gods, iii. In this year he went through the Thebais.
III. (330–331.) In this year, Easter-day was on xvi Pharmuthi; xviii Moon; iii Id. Ap.; Coss. Annius Bassus, Ablavius; the governor Hyginus 3829 of Italy, Præfect of Egypt; Epact xxviii; Indict. iv. He sent this Letter while journeying on his return from the Imperial Court. For in this year he went to the Imperial Court to the Emperor Constantine the Great, having been summoned before him, on account of an accusation his enemies made, that he had been appointed when too young. He appeared, was thought worthy of favour and honour, and returned 3830 when the fast was half finished.
IV. (331–332.) In this year, Easter-day was on xvii 3831 Pharmuthi; xx Moon; iv Non. Apr.; Epact ix; Gods, vi; Coss. Pacatianus, Hilarianus; the same governor Hyginus, Præfect of Egypt; Indict. v. In this year he went through Pentapolis, and was in Ammoniaca.
V. (332–333.) In this year, Easter-day was on xx Pharmuthi; xv Moon; xvii Kal. Mai; Epact xx; Gods, vii; Coss. Dalmatius, Zenophilus; the governor Paternus 3832 , Præfect of Egypt; Indict. vi.
VI. (333–334.) In this year, Easter-day was on xii Pharmuthi; xvii Moon; vii Id. Apr.; Indict. vii; Epact i; Gods, i; Coss. Optatus, Paulinus; the same governor Paternus 3833 Præfect of Egypt. In this year he went through the lower country. In it he was summoned to a Synod, his enemies having previously devised mischief against him in Cæsarea of Palestine; but becoming aware of the conspiracy, he excused himself from attending.
VII. (334–335.) In this year, Easter-day was on xiv 3834 Pharmuthi; xx Moon; iii Kal. Ap.; Indict. viii; Epact xii; Gods, ii; Coss. Constantius 3835 , Albinus; the same governor Paternus, Præfect of Egypt.
VIII. (335–336.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxiii Pharmuthi, xx Moon; xiv Kal. Mai; Indict. ix; Epact xxiii; Gods, iv; Coss. Nepotianus, Facundus; the governor Philagrius, the Cappadocian, Præfect of Egypt. In this year he went to that Synod of his enemies which was assembled at Tyre. Now he journeyed from this place on xvii Epiphi 3836 , but when a discovery was made of the plot against him, he removed thence and fled in an open boat to Constantinople. Arriving there on ii Athyr 3837 , after eight days he presented himself before the Emperor Constantine, and spoke plainly. But his enemies, by various secret devices, influenced the Emperor, who suddenly condemned him to exile, and he set out on the tenth of Athyr 3838 to Gaul, to Constans Cæsar, the son of Augustus. On this account he wrote no Festal Letter.
IX. (336–7.) In this year, Easter-day was on viii Pharmuthi; xvi Moon; iv 3839 Non. Ap.; Indict. x; Epact iv; Gods, v; Coss. Felicianus, Titianus; the governor Philagrius, the Cappadocian, Præfect of Egypt. He was in Treviri of Gaul, and on this account was unable to write a Festal Letter.
X. (337–8.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxx Phamenoth; vii Kal. Ap.; xix 3840 Moon, Indict. xi; Epact xv; Gods, vi; Coss. Ursus, Polemius; the governor Theodorus 3841 , of Heliopolis, Præfect of Egypt. In this year, Constantine having died on xxvii Pachon 3842 , Athanasius, now liberated, returned from Gaul triumphantly on xxvii 3843 Athyr. In this year, too, there were many events. Antony, the great leader, came to Alexandria, and though he remained there only two days, shewed himself wonderful in many things, and healed many. He went away on the third of Messori. 3844
XI. (338–9.) In this year, Easter-day was on xx Pharmuthi; xx Moon; xvii Kal. Mai; Epact xxvi; Gods, vii; Indict. xii; Coss. Constantius II, Constans I 3845 ; the governor Philagrius, the Cappadocian, Præfect of Egypt. In this year, again, there were many tumults. On the xxii Phamenoth 3846 he was pursued in the night, and the next day he fled from the Church of Theonas, after he had baptized many. Then, four days after, Gregorius the Cappadocian entered the city as Bishop.
XII. (339–340.) In this year, Easter-day was on xiv 3847 Pharmuthi; xv Moon; iii Kal. Ap.; Epact vii; Gods, ii; Indict. xiii; Coss. Acyndinus, Proclus; the same governor Philagrius, Præfect of Egypt. Gregorius continued his acts of violence, and therefore [Ath.] wrote no Festal Letter. The Arians proclaimed [Easter] on xxvii Phamenoth, and were much ridiculed on account of this error. Then altering it in the middle of the fast, they kept it with us on iv 3848 Pharmuthi, as above. He [Athanasius] gave notice of it to the presbyters of Alexandria in a short note, not being able to send a letter as usual, on account of his flight and the treachery.
XIII. (340–341.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxiv Pharmuthi; xvi Moon; xiii. Kal. Mai; Epact xviii; Gods, iii; Indict. xiv; Coss. Marcellinus, Probinus; the governor Longinus, of Nicæa, Præfect of Egypt. Augustamnica was separated. 3849 On account of Gregorius continuing in the city, and exercising violence, although this illness commenced, the Pope did not write a Festal Letter even this time 3850 .
XIV. (341–2.) In this year, Easter-day was on xvi Pharmuthi; xx 3851 Moon; iii Id. Ap.; Epact xxix; Gods, iv; Indict. xv; Coss. Constantius III, Constans II; the governor Longinus of Nicæa, Præfect of Egypt. Because Gregorius was in the city, [though] severely ill, the Pope was unable to send [any Letter].
XV. (342–3.) In this year, Easter-day was on i Pharmuthi; xv Moon; vi Kal. Ap.; Epact xi; Gods, v; Indict. i; Coss. Placidus, Romulus; the same governor Longinus, of Nicæa, Præfect of Egypt. In this year the Synod of Sardica was held 3852 ; and when the Arians had arrived, they returned to Philippopolis, for Philagrius gave them this advice there. In truth, they were blamed everywhere, and were even anathematised by the Church of Rome, and having written a recantation to Pope Athanasius, Ursacius and Valens were put to shame. There was an agreement made at Sardica respecting Easter, and a decree was issued to be binding for fifty years, which the Romans and Alexandrians everywhere announced in the usual manner. Again he [Athan.] wrote a Festal Letter.
XVI. (343–4.) In this year, Easter-day was on xx Pharmuthi; xix Moon; xvii Kal. Mai; Epact xxi; Gods, vi[i], Coss. Leontius, Sallustius; the governor Palladius, of Italy, Præfect of Egypt; Indict. ii. Being at Naissus on his return from the Synod, he there celebrated Easter 3853 . Of this Easter-day he gave notice in few words to the presbyters of Alexandria, but he was unable to do so to the country.
XVII. (344–5.) In this year, Easter-day was on xii Pharmuthi; xviii Moon; vii. Id. Ap.; Epact ii; Gods, i; Indict. iii; Coss. Amantius, Albinus; the governor Nestorius of Gaza, Præfect of Egypt. Having travelled to Aquileia, he kept Easter there. Of this Easter-day, he gave notice in few words to the presbyters of Alexandria, but not to the country.
XVIII. (345–6.) In this year, Easter-day was on iv Pharmuthi; xxi 3854 Moon; iii Kal. Ap.; Epact xiv; Gods, ii; Indict. iv; Coss. Constantius 3855 Aug. IV, Constans Aug. III; the same governor Nestorius of Gaza, Præfect of Egypt. Gregorius having died on the second of Epiphi 3856 , he returned from Rome and Italy, and entered the city and the Church. Moreover he was thought worthy of a grand reception, for on the xxiv Paophi 3857 , the people and all those in authority met him a hundred miles distant, and he continued in honour. He had already sent the Festal Letter for this year, in few words, to the presbyters.
XIX. (346–7.) In this year, Easter-day was on xvii Pharmuthi xv. Moon; Prid. Id. Apr.; Epact xxv; Gods, iii; Indict. v; Coss. Rufinus, Eusebius; the same governor Nestorius of Gaza, Præfect of Egypt. He wrote this Letter while residing here in Alexandria, giving notice of some things which he had not been able to do before.
XX. (347–8.) In this year, Easter-day was on vii Pharmuthi; xviii Moon; iii Non. Ap.; Epact vi; Gods, v 3858 Indict. vi; Coss. Philippus, Salia; the same governor Nestorius of Gaza, Præfect of Egypt. This Letter also he sent while residing in Alexandria.
XXI. (348–9.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxx Phamenoth;…xix Moon,…vii Kal. Ap.; Epact xvii; Gods, vi; Indict. vii. But because the Romans refused, for they said they held a tradition from the Apostle Peter not to pass the twenty-sixth day of Pharmuthi, nor..the thirtieth of Phamenoth, xxi Moon,……………… 3859 , vii Kal. Ap.; Coss. Limenius, Catullinus; the same governor Nestorius of Gaza, Præfect of Egypt. He sent this also while residing in Alexandria.
XXII. (349–50.) In this year, Easter-day was on xiii Pharmuthi; xix Moon, the second hour; vi Id. Ap.; Epact xxviii; Gods, vii; Indict. viii; Coss. Sergius, Nigrianus; the same governor Nestorius of Gaza, Præfect of Egypt. In this year, Constans was slain by Magnentius, and Constantius held the empire alone; then he wrote to the Pope [Athan.], telling him to fear nothing because of the death of Constans, but to confide in him as he had done in Constans while living.
XXIII. (350–1.) In this year, Easter day was on v Pharmuthi; Moon xviii; Prid. Kal. Ap.; Epact ix; Gods, i; Indict. ix; the Consulship after that of Sergius and Nigrianus; the same governor Nestorius of Gaza, again Præfect of Egypt.
XXIV. (351–2.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxiv Pharmuthi; xviii Moon; xiii Kal. Mai, Epact xx; Gods, iii; Indict. x, Coss. Constantius Aug. V, Constantius Cæsar I; the same governor Nestorius of Gaza, Præfect of Egypt. Gallus was proclaimed Cæsar 3860 , and his name changed into Constantius.
XXV. (352–3.) In this year, Easter-day was on xvi Pharmuthi; xxi Moon; iii Id. Ap.; Epact i; Gods, iv; Indict. xi; Coss. Constantius Aug. VI, Constantius Cæsar II; the governor Sebastianus of Thrace, præfect of Egypt. In this year, Serapion 3861 , Bishop of Thmuis, and Triadelphus of Nicion, and the presbyters Petrus and Astricius, with others, were sent to the emperor Constantius, through fear of mischief from the Arians. They returned, having effected nothing. In this year, Montanus, Silentiarius of the Palace, [was sent]…against [the] 3862 Bishop, but, a tumult having been excited, he retired, having failed to effect anything.
XXVI. (353–4.) In this year, Easter-day was on i 3863 Pharmuthi; xvii Moon; vi Kal. Ap.; Epact xii; Gods, v; Indict. xii; Coss. Constantius Aug. VII, Constantius Cæsar III.; the same governor Sebastianus of Thrace, Præfect of Egypt.
XXVII. (354–5.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxi Pharmuthi; xviii Moon; xvi Kal. Mai; Epact xxiii; Gods, vi; Indict. xiii; Coss. Arbetion, Lollianus; the governor Maximus the Elder of Nicæa, Prefect of Egypt. In this year, Diogenes, the Secretary of the Emperor, entered with the design of seizing the Bishop. But he, too, having raged in vain, went away quietly.
XXVIII. (355–6.) In this year, Easter-day was on xii Pharmuthi; xvii Moon; vii Id. Ap.; Epact iv; Gods, i; Indict. xiv, Coss. Constantius Aug. VIII, Julianus Cæsar I; the same governor Maximus the Elder of Nicæa, Præfect of Egypt, who was succeeded by Cataphronius of Byblus. In this year, Syrianus Dux, having excited a tumult in the Church on the thirteenth of Mechir, on the fourteenth 3864 at night entered Theonas with his soldiers; but he was unable to capture [Athanasius], for he escaped in a miraculous manner.
XXIX (356–7.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxvii Phamenoth; xvii Moon; x Kal. Ap., Epact xv; Gods, ii; Indict. xv; Coss. Constantius Aug. IX, Julianus Cæsar II; the same governor Cataphronius, of Byblus, Præfect of Egypt, to whom succeeded Parnassius. Then Georgius entered on the thirtieth of Mechir, and acted with excessive violence. But Athanasius, the Bishop, had fled, and was sought for in the city with much oppression, many being in danger on this account. Therefore no Festal Letter was written 3865 .
XXX. (357–8.) In this year, Easter-day was on xvii Pharmuthi; Prid. Id. Ap.; xvii Moon; Epact xxvi; Gods, iii; Indict. i; Coss. Tatianus, Cerealis; the governor Parius of Corinth, Præfect of Egypt. Athanasius, the Bishop, lay concealed in the city of Alexandria. But Georgius left on the fifth of Paophi 3866 being driven away by the multitude. On this account, neither this year was the Pope able to send a Festal Letter.
XXXI. (358–9.) In this year, Easter-day was on ix 3867 Pharmuthi; Prid. Non. Ap.; xx Moon; Epact vii; Gods, iv; Indict. ii; Coss. Eusebius, Hypatius; the same governor Parius, who was succeeded by Italicianus of Italy for three months; after him Faustinus, of Chalcedon. Neither this year did the Pope write [any Letter].
XXXII. (359–60.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxviii Pharmuthi; ix Kal. Mai; xxi Moon; Epact xviii; Gods, vi; Indict. iii; Coss. Constantius Aug. X, Julianus Cæsar III; the governor Faustinus, of Chalcedon, Præfect of Egypt. This Præfect and Artemius Dux, having entered a private house and a small cell, in search of Athanasius the Bishop, bitterly tortured Eudæmonis, a perpetual virgin. On this account no [Letter] was written this year.
XXXIII. (360–1.) In this year, Easter-day was on xiii Pharmuthi, vi Id. Ap.; xvii Moon; Epact xxix; Gods, vii; Indict. iv; Coss. Taurus, Florentius; the same governor Faustinus 3868 , Præfect of Egypt, who was succeeded by Gerontius the Armenian. He was unable to send [a Letter]. In this year, Constantius died 3869 , and Julianus holding the empire alone, there was a cessation of the persecution against the Orthodox. For commands were issued everywhere from the emperor Julianus, that the Orthodox ecclesiastics who had been persecuted in the time of Constantius should be let alone.
XXXIV. (361–2.) In this year, Easter-day was on v 3870 Pharmuthi; Prid. Kal. Ap.; xxv Moon; Epact x; Gods, i; Indict. v; Coss. Mamertinus, Nevitta; the same governor Gerontius, who was succeeded by Olympus of Tarsus. In this year, in Mechir, Athanasius the Bishop returned to the Church, after his flight, by the command of Julianus Augustus, who pardoned all the Bishops and Clergy in exile, as was before said. This year, then, he wrote [a Letter].
XXXV. (362–3.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxv Pharmuthi; xii Kal. Mai; xx Moon; Epact xxi; Gods, ii; Indict. vi; Coss. Julianus Augustus IV, Sallustius; the same governor Olympus, Præfect of Egypt. Pythiodorus Trico of Thebes, a Philosopher, brought a decree of Julianus on the twenty-seventh of Paophi, and set it in action against the Bishop first, and uttered many threats. So he [Athan.] left the city at once, and went up to the Thebais. And when after eight months Julianus died, and his death was announced, Athanasius returned secretly by night to Alexandria. Then on the eighth of Thoth, he embarked 3871 at the Eastern Hierapolis, and met the emperor Jovian, by whom he was dismissed with honour. He sent this festal Letter to all the country, while being driven by persecution from Memphis to the Thebais, and it was delivered as usual.
XXXVI. (363–4). In this year, Easter-day was on ix Pharmuthi; Prid. Non. Ap.; xvi Moon; Epact iii; Gods, iv; Indict. vii; Coss. Jovianus Aug., Varronianus; the governor Aerius, of Damascus, Præfect; who was succeeded by Maximus of Rapheotis, and he again by Flavianus the Illyrian. In this year, the Pope returned to Alexandria and the Church on the twenty-fifth of Mechir. He sent the Festal Letter, according to custom, from Antioch to all the Bishops in all the province.
XXXVII. (364–5.) In this year, Easter-day was on i Pharmuthi; v[i] Kal. Ap.; xix Moon; Epact xiv; Gods, v; Indict. viii; Coss. Valentinianus Aug. I, Valens Aug.; the same Flavianus, the Illyrian, being governor. We received the Cæsareum; but again, the Pope being persecuted 3872 with accusations, withdrew 3873 to the garden of the new river. But a few days 3874 after, Barasides, the notary, came to him with the Præfect and obtained an entrance for him into the Church. Then, an earthquake happening on the twenty-seventh of Epiphi 3875 , the sea returned from the East, and destroyed many persons, and much damage was caused.
XXXVIII. (365–6.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxi Pharmuthi; xvi Kal. Mai; xx Moon; Epact xxv; Gods, vi; Indict. ix; in the first year of the Consulship of Gratianus, the son of Augustus, and Daglaiphus; the same governor Flavianus, Præfect. On the twenty-seventh of Epiphi, the heathen made an attack, and the Cæsareum was burnt and consequently many of the citizens suffered great distress, while the authors of the calamity were condemned and exiled. After this, Proclianus the Macedonian, became chief.
XXXIX. (366–7.) In this year, Easter-day was on vi 3876 Pharmuthi; Kal. Ap.; xvi Moon; Epact vi; Gods, vii; Indict. x; Coss. Lupicinus, Jovinus; the same Proclianus being governor, who was succeeded by Tatianus of Lycia. In this year, when Lucius had attempted an entrance on the twenty-sixth of Thoth 3877 , and lay concealed by night in a house on the side of the enclosure of the Church; and when Tatianus the Præfect and Trajanus Dux brought him out, he left the city, and was rescued in a wonderful manner, while the multitude sought to kill him. In this year he [Ath.] wrote, forming a Canon of the Holy Scriptures.
XL. (367–8.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxv Pharmuthi; xii Kal. Mai; xvi Moon; Epact xvii; Gods, ii; Indict. xi; Coss. Valentinianus Aug. II, Valens Aug. II; the same governor Tatianus, Præfect. He [Athan.] began to build anew the Cæsareum, on the 6th of Pachon, having been honoured with an imperial command by Trajanus Dux. He also discovered the incendiaries, and immediately cleared away the rubbish of the burnt ruins, and restored the edifice in the month Pachon.
XLI. (368–9.) In this year, Easter-day was on xvii 3878 Pharmuthi; Prid. Id. Ap.; xv Moon; Epact xxviii; Gods, iii; Indict. xii; Coss. Valentinianus (son of Augustus) I, Victor; the same Tatianus being governor. The Pope began to build that Church in Mendidium which bears his name, on the twenty-fifth 3879 of the month Thoth, at the beginning of the eighty-fifth year of the Diocletian Era.
XLII. (369–70.) In this year, Easter-day was on ii Pharmuthi; v 3880 Kal. Ap.; xv Moon; Epact ix; Gods, iv; Indict. xiii; Coss. Valentinianus Aug. III, Valens Aug. III; the same Tatianus being governor, who was succeeded by Olympius Palladius, of Samosata. The Pope finished the Church, called after his name, at the close of the eighty-sixth year of the Diocletian Era; in which also he celebrated the dedication, on the fourteenth 3881 of Mesori.
XLIII. (370–1.) In this year, Easter-day was on xxii Pharmuthi; xv Kal. Mai; xvi Moon; Epact xx; Gods, v; Indict. xiv; Coss. Gratianus Aug. II, Probus; the same Palladius being governor; who was succeeded as Præfect of Egypt by Ælius Palladius, of Palestine, who was called Cyrus.
XLIV. (371–2.) In this year, Easter-day was on xiii Pharmuthi; vi Id. Ap.; xix Moon; Epact i; Gods, vii 3882 , Indict. xv; Coss. Modestus, Arintheus; the same Ælius Palladius the governor, called Cyrus, Præfect of Egypt.
XLV. (372–3.) In this year, Easter-day was on v Pharmuthi; Prid. Kal. Ap.; xxi Moon; Epact xii; Gods, i; Indict. i; Coss. Valentinianus IV, Valens IV; the same governor Ælius Palladius, Præfect of Egypt. At the close of this year, on the seventh of Pachon 3883 , he [Athan.] departed this life in a wonderful manner.
The end of the heads of the Festal Letters of holy Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria.
Footnotes
503:3823The ‘Gods’ correspond to the Concurrentes,’ i.e. to the days of the week upon which Mar. 24 occurs in the year in question. (See Table, and Ideler, 2. 261), and so to the ‘Sunday letters,’ which follow the ‘gods’ in inverse order, ‘a’ corresponding to years when there were 6 ‘gods,’ b to 5, &c., f to 1, g to 7.
503:3824The meaning of these words is doubtful. Larslow renders them ‘the answers from abroad.’
503:3825Read ‘and.’
503:3826i.e. the year beginning Aug. 30, 327 (328 being leap-year). The ‘Diocletian’ era, or era ‘of the martyrs,’ was that used by the Egyptian Christians. It is incorrectly described in D.C.A. s.v. Era; see Ideler, ut supr.
503:3827Read xix (April 14). The corruption is easy in Syriac.
503:3828April 17.
503:3829The heading to Ep. 3 gives Florentius.
503:3830This ought to have been placed under iv; but see p. 512, note 7.
503:3831Read vii.
503:3832Vid. Ep. Fest. v. n. 2.
503:3833The headings of Letters 6, 7, give Philagrius.
503:3834Read iv, as below, No. xii.
503:3835i.e. Julius C.; the Syr. has Constantinus, by an error.
503:3836July 11, 335.
503:3837Oct. 30, 335.
503:3838Read ‘Mechir,’ Feb. 5, 336 (Gwatkin, p. 137, the correction is due to Sievers).
503:3839Read iii.
503:3840‘xviii½,’ heading of Letter 10.
503:3841Superseded by Philagrius (see heading, and Prolegg. ch. ii. §6 (1) note).
503:3842May 22, 337.
503:3843Nov. 23, 337.
503:3844July 27, 338, supr. p. 214.
503:3845The Syriac has erroneously Constantius I., Constans II.
503:3846Mark 18:0, Mark 339:0.
503:3847Read iv. as above, No. vii.
503:3848Read iv. as above, No. vii.
504:3849i.e. ‘made a separate province.’ This had been known (Gothofr. in Cod. Th. xii. i. 34) to fall between 325 and 342; and Augustamnica is not mentioned as a province in 338–9, supr. p. 101.
504:3850This and the similar notice at the end of xiv are incorrect. The Index may have been written for a collection which lacked Letters 13, 14.
504:3851The Syriac has xvi, which is an error.
504:3852The summons for the Council was issued ‘in this year,’ i.e. before August, 343, but the proceedings fall in the autumn and winter, i.e. in the next Egyptian year, and the sequel (about Ursac. and Valens) refers to what took place about 347.
504:3853Easter, i.e. Apr. 15, 344, at Nish, or Nissa, in Servia.
504:3854The Syriac in this place has xxiv. But we find xxi in the heading to the Letter itself.
504:3855The Syriac has Constantinus.
504:3856June 26 of the previous year (345).
504:3857Oct. 21, 346.
504:3858Text ‘iv.’
504:3859The text is imperfect and apparently very corrupt; ‘xix Moon’ fits Pharm. 28 (Apr. 23), which was the true Easter, and probably observed at Alexandria, while the Romans, refusing to go beyond Apr. 21, kept Easter on Pham. 30 (Mar. 26), on which day the Moon was really xxi days old. See Table D, and Letter 18. Letter 21 is lost.
504:3860In the previous year, Mark 15:0, Mark 351:0.
504:3861Cf. Letters 49, 54.
504:3862Text corrupt.
504:3863Text ‘iv.’
505:3864Feb. 8–9, 356.
505:3865But see Letter 29, note 1.
505:3866Oct. 2, 358.
505:3867Text ‘xix.’
505:3868Or Pausanias. This name is written vaguely in the Syriac, varying in all the three places in which it occurs.
505:3869Nov. 23, 361.
505:3870Text ‘xv.’
505:3871Prolegg. ch. v. §3, h.
505:3872May 5, 365.
505:3873Oct. 5, 365.
505:3874Feb. i. 366.
505:3875July 21, 365; so also Chron. Pasch. and Amm. Marc. xxvi. 10, specially mentioning Alexandria.
505:3876Text ‘xvi.’
505:3877Sep. 24, 367; cf. Hist. Aceph.
505:3878Text ‘xxvii.’
506:3879Sept. 22, 368.
506:3880Text ‘iv.’
506:3881Aug. 7, 370.
506:3882The Syr. has ‘and not one,’ which must be incorrect.
506:3883[May 2, 373.]
I. Festal Letters.
Letter I.—For 329. Easter-day xi Pharmuthi; viii Id. April; Ær. Dioclet. 45; Coss. Constantinus Aug. VIII. Constantinus Cæs. IV; Præfect. Septimius Zenius; Indict. II.
Of Fasting, and Trumpets, and Feasts.
Come, my beloved, the season calls us to keep the feast. Again, ‘the Sun of Righteousness 3884 , causing His divine beams to rise upon us, proclaims beforehand the time of the feast, in which, obeying Him, we ought to celebrate it, lest when the time has passed by, gladness likewise may pass us by. For discerning the time is one of the duties most urgent on us, for the practice of virtue; so that the blessed Paul, when instructing his disciple, teaches him to observe the time, saying, ‘Stand (ready) in season, and out of season 3885 ’—that knowing both the one and the other, he might do things befitting the season, and avoid the blame of unseasonableness. For thus the God of all, after the manner of wise Solomon 3886 , distributes everything in time and season, to the end that, in due time, the salvation of men should be everywhere spread abroad. Thus the ‘Wisdom of God 3887 ,’ our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, not out of season, but in season, ‘passed upon holy souls, fashioning the friends of God and the prophets 3888 ;’ so that although very many were praying for Him, and saying, ‘O that the salvation of God were come out of Sion 3889 !’—the Spouse also, as it is written in the Song of Songs, was praying and saying, ‘O that Thou wert my sister’s son, that sucked the breasts of my mother 3890 !’ that Thou wert like the children of men, and wouldest take upon Thee human passions for our sake!—nevertheless, the God of all, the Maker of times and seasons, Who knows our affairs better than we do, while, as a good physician, He exhorts to obedience in season—the only one in which we may be healed—so also does He send Him not unseasonably, but seasonably, saying, ‘In an acceptable time have I heard Thee, and in the day of salvation I have helped Thee 3891 .’
2. And, on this account, the blessed Paul, urging us to note this season, wrote, saying, ‘Behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation 3892 .’ At set seasons also He called the children of Israel to the Levitical feasts by Moses, saying, ‘Three times in a year ye shall keep a feast to Me 3893 ’ (one of which, my beloved, is that now at hand), the trumpets of the priests sounding and urging its observance; as the holy Psalmist commanded, saying, ‘Blow with the trumpet in the new moon, on the [solemn] day of your feast 3894 .’ Since this sentence enjoins upon us to blow both on the new moons, and on the solemn 3895 days, He hath made a solemn day of that in which the light of the moon is perfected in the full; which was then a type, as is this of the trumpets. At one time, as has been said, they called to the feasts; at another time to fasting and to war. And this was not done without solemnity, nor by chance, but this sound of the trumpets was appointed, so that every man should come to that which was proclaimed. And this ought to be learned not merely from me, but from the divine Scriptures, when God was revealed to Moses, and said, as it is written in the book of Numbers; ‘And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, Make to thee two trumpets; of silver shalt thou make them, and they shall be for thee to call the congregation 3896 ;’—very properly for those who here love Him. So that we may know that these things had reference to the time of Moses—yea, were to be observed so long as the shadow lasted, the whole being appointed for use, ‘till the time of reformation 3897 .’ ‘For’ (said He) ‘if ye shall go out to battle in your land against your enemies that rise up against you 3898 ’ (for such things as these refer to the land, and no further), ‘then ye shall proclaim with the trumpets, and shall be remembered before the Lord, and be delivered from your enemies.’ Not only in wars did they blow the trumpet, but under the law, there was a festal trumpet also. Hear him again, going on to say, ‘And in the day of your gladness, and in your feasts, and your new moons, ye shall blow with the trumpets 3899 .’ And let no man think it a light and contemptible matter, if he hear the law command respecting trumpets; it is a wonderful and fearful thing. For beyond any other voice or instrument, the trumpet is awakening and terrible; so Israel received instruction by these means, because he was then but a child. But in order that the proclamation should not be thought merely human, being superhuman, its sounds resembled those which were uttered when they trembled before the mount 3900 ; and they were reminded of the law that was then given them, and kept it.
3. For the law was admirable, and the shadow was excellent, otherwise, it would not have wrought fear, and induced reverence in those who heard; especially in those who at that time not only heard but saw these things. Now these things were typical, and done as in a shadow. But let us pass on to the meaning, and henceforth leaving the figure at a distance, come to the truth, and look upon the priestly trumpets of our Saviour, which cry out, and call us, at one time to war, as the blessed Paul saith; ‘We wrestle not with flesh and blood, but with principalities, with powers, with the rulers of this dark world, with wicked spirits in heaven 3901 .’ At another time the call is made to virginity, and self-denial, and conjugal harmony, saying, To virgins, the things of virgins; and to those who love the way of abstinence, the things of abstinence; and to those who are married 3902 , the things of an honourable marriage; thus assigning to each its own virtues and an honourable recompense. Sometimes the call is made to fasting, and sometimes to a feast. Hear again the same [Apostle] blowing the trumpet, and proclaiming, ‘Christ our Passover is sacrificed; therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness 3903 .’ If thou wouldest listen to a trumpet much greater than all these, hear our Saviour saying; ‘In that last and great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto Me and drink 3904 .’ For it became the Saviour not simply to call us to a feast, but to ‘the great feast;’ if only we will be prepared to hear, and to conform to the proclamation of every trumpet.
4. For since, as I before said, there are divers proclamations, listen, as in a figure, to the prophet blowing the trumpet; and further, having turned to the truth, be ready for the announcement of the trumpet, for he saith, ‘Blow ye the trumpet in Sion: sanctify a fast 3905 .’ This is a warning trumpet, and commands with great earnestness, that when we fast, we should hallow the fast. For not all those who call upon God, hallow God, since there are some who defile Him; yet not Him—that is impossible—but their own mind concerning Him; for He is holy, and has pleasure in the saints 3906 . And therefore the blessed Paul accuses those who dishonour God; ‘Transgressors of the law dishonour God 3907 .’ So then, to make a separation from those who pollute the fast, he saith here, ‘sanctify a fast.’ For many, crowding to the fast, pollute themselves in the thoughts of their hearts, sometimes by doing evil against their brethren, sometimes by daring to defraud. And, to mention nothing else, there are many who exalt themselves above their neighbours, thereby causing great mischief. For the boast of fasting did no good to the Pharisee, although he fasted twice in the week 3908 , only because he exalted himself against the publican. In the same manner the Word blamed the children of Israel on account of such a fast as this, exhorting them by Isaiah the Prophet, and saying, ‘This is not the fast and the day that I have chosen, that a man should humble his soul; not even if thou shouldest bow down thy neck like a hook, and shouldest strew sackcloth and ashes under thee; neither thus shall ye call the fast acceptable 3909 .’ That we may be able to shew what kind of persons we should be when we fast, and of what character the fast should be, listen again to God commanding Moses, and saying, as it is written in Leviticus 3910 , ‘And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, In the tenth day of this seventh month, there shall be a day of atonement; a convocation, and a holy day shall it be to you; and ye shall humble your souls, and offer whole burnt-offerings unto the Lord.’ And afterwards, that the law might be defined on this point, He proceeds to say; ‘Every soul that shall not humble itself, shall be cut off from the people 3911 .’
5. Behold, my brethren, how much a fast can do, and in what manner the law commands us to fast. It is required that not only with the body should we fast, but with the soul. Now the soul is humbled when it does not follow wicked opinions, but feeds on becoming virtues. For virtues and vices are the food of the soul, and it can eat either of these two meats, and incline to either of the two, according to its own will. If it is bent toward virtue, it will be nourished by virtues, by righteousness, by temperance, by meekness, by fortitude, as Paul saith; ‘Being nourished by the word of truth 3912 .’ Such was the case with our Lord, who said, ‘My meat is to do the will of My Father which is in heaven 3913 .’ But if it is not thus with the soul, and it inclines downwards, it is then nourished by nothing but sin. For thus the Holy Ghost, describing sinners and their food, referred to the devil when He said, ‘I have given him to be meat to the people of Æthiopia 3914 .’ For this is the food of sinners. And as our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, being heavenly bread, is the food of the saints, according to this; ‘Except ye eat My flesh, and drink My blood 3915 ;’ so is the devil the food of the impure, and of those who do nothing which is of the light, but work the deeds of darkness. Therefore, in order to withdraw and turn them from vices, He commands them to be nourished with the food of virtue; namely, humbleness of mind, lowliness to endure humiliations, the acknowledgment of God. For not only does such a fast as this obtain pardon for souls, but being kept holy, it prepares the saints, and raises them above the earth.
6. And indeed that which I am about to say is wonderful, yea it is of those things which are very miraculous; yet not far from the truth, as ye may be able to learn from the sacred 3916 writings. That great man Moses, when fasting, conversed with God, and received the law. The great and holy Elijah, when fasting, was thought worthy of divine visions, and at last was taken up like Him who ascended into heaven. And Daniel, when fasting, although a very young man, was entrusted with the mystery, and he alone understood the secret things of the king, and was thought worthy of divine visions. But because the length of the fast of these men was wonderful, and the days prolonged, let no man lightly fall into unbelief; but rather let him believe and know, that the contemplation of God, and the word which is from Him, suffice to nourish those who hear, and stand to them in place of all food. For the angels are no otherwise sustained than by beholding at all times the face of the Father, and of the Saviour who is in heaven. And thus Moses, as long as he talked with God, fasted indeed bodily, but was nourished by divine words. When he descended among men, and God was gone up from him, he suffered hunger like other men. For it is not said that he fasted longer than forty days—those in which he was conversing with God. And, generally, each one of the saints has been thought worthy of similar transcendent nourishment.
7. Wherefore, my beloved, having our souls nourished with divine food, with the Word, and according to the will of God, and fasting bodily in things external, let us keep this great and saving feast as becomes us. Even the ignorant Jews received this divine food, through the type, when they ate a lamb in the passover. But not understanding the type, even to this day they eat the lamb, erring in that they are without the city and the truth. As long as Judæa and the city existed, there were a type, and a lamb, and a shadow, since the law thus commanded 3917 : These things shall not be done in another city; but in the land of Judæa, and in no place without [the land of Judæa]. And besides this, the law commanded them to offer whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices, there being no other altar than that in Jerusalem. For on this account, in that city alone was there an altar and temple built, and in no other city were they permitted to perform these rites, so that when that city should come to an end, then those things that were figurative might also be done away.
8. Now observe; that city, since the coming of our Savior, has had an end, and all the land of the Jews has been laid waste; so that from the testimony of these things (and we need no further proof, being assured by our own eyes of the fact) there must, of necessity, be an end of the shadow. And not from me should these things be learned, but the sacred voice of the prophet foretold, crying; ‘Behold upon the mountains the feet of Him that bringeth good tidings, and publisheth peace 3918 ;’ and what is the message he published, but that which he goes on to say to them, ‘Keep thy feasts, O Judah; pay to the Lord thy vows. For they shall no more go to that which is old; it is finished; it is taken away: He is gone up who breathed upon the face, and delivered thee from affliction 3919 .’ Now who is he that went up? a man may say to the Jews, in order that even the boast of the shadow may be done away; neither is it an idle thing to listen to the expression, ‘It is finished; he is gone up who breathed.’ For nothing was finished before he went up who breathed. But as soon as he went up, it was finished. Who was he then, O Jews, as I said before? If Moses, the assertion would be false; for the people were not yet come to the land in which alone they were commanded to perform these rites. But if Samuel, or any other of the prophets, even in that case there would be a perversion of the truth; for hitherto these things were done in Judæa, and the city was standing. For it was necessary that while that stood, these things should be performed. So that it was none of these, my beloved, who went up. But if thou wouldest hear the true matter, and be kept from Jewish fables, behold our Saviour who went up, and ‘breathed upon the face, and said to His disciples, Receive ye the Holy Ghost 3920 .’ For as soon as these things were done, everything was finished, for the altar was broken, and the veil of the temple was rent; and although the city was not yet laid waste, the abomination was ready to sit in the midst of the temple, and the city and those ancient ordinances to receive their final consummation.
9. Since then we have passed beyond that time of shadows, and no longer perform rites under it, but have turned, as it were, unto the Lord; ‘for the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty 3921 ;’—as we hear the sacred trumpet, no longer slaying a material lamb, but that true Lamb that was slain, even our Lord Jesus Christ; ‘Who was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and was dumb as a lamb before her shearers 3922 ;’ being purified by His precious blood, which speaketh better things than that of Abel, having our feet shod with the preparation of the Gospel, holding in our hands the rod and staff of the Lord, by which that saint was comforted, who said 3923 , ‘Thy rod and Thy staff they comfort me;’ and to sum up, being in all respects prepared, and careful for nothing, because, as the blessed Paul saith, ‘The Lord is at hand 3924 ;’ and as our Saviour saith, ‘In an hour when we think not, the Lord cometh;—Let us keep the Feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. Putting off the old man and his deeds, let us put on the new man 3925 , which is created in God,’ in humbleness of mind, and a pure conscience; in meditation of the law by night and by day. And casting away all hypocrisy and fraud, putting far from us all pride and deceit, let us take upon us love towards God and towards our neighbour, that being new [creatures], and receiving the new wine, even the Holy Spirit, we may properly keep the feast, even the month of these new [fruits] 3926 .
10. We 3927 begin the holy fast on the fifth day of Pharmuthi (March 31), and adding to it according to the number of those six holy and great days, which are the symbol of the creation of this world, let us rest and cease (from fasting) on the tenth day of the same Pharmuthi (April 5), on the holy sabbath of the week. And when the first day of the holy week dawns and rises upon us, on the eleventh day of the same month (April 6), from which again we count all the seven weeks one by one, let us keep feast on the holy day of Pentecost—on that which was at one time to the Jews, typically, the feast of weeks, in which they granted forgiveness and settlement of debts; and indeed that day was one of deliverance in every respect. Let us keep the feast on the first day of the great week, as a symbol of the world to come, in which we here receive a pledge that we shall have everlasting life hereafter. Then having passed hence, we shall keep a perfect feast with Christ, while we cry out and say, like the saints, ‘I will pass to the place of the wondrous tabernacle, to the house of God; with the voice of gladness and thanksgiving, the shouting of those who rejoice 3928 ;’ whence pain and sorrow and sighing have fled, and upon our heads gladness and joy shall have come to us! May we be judged worthy to be partakers in these things.
11. Let us remember the poor, and not forget kindness to strangers; above all, let us love God with all our soul, and might, and strength, and our neighbour as ourselves. So may we receive those things which the eye hath not seen, nor the ear heard, and which have not entered into the heart of man, which God hath prepared for those that love Him 3929 , through His only Son, our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ; through Whom, to the Father alone, by the Holy Ghost, be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
Salute one another with a kiss. All the brethren who are with me salute you.
Here endeth the first Festal Letter of holy Athanasius.
Footnotes
506:3884Mal. iv. 2.
506:38852 Tim. iv. 2. The due celebration of the feast is spoken of as producing a permanent beneficial effect on the Christian. Cf. Letter 4.
506:3886Eccl. iii. 7. Cf. S. Cyril. Homil. Pasch. V.
506:38871 Cor. i. 24.
506:3888Wisd. vii. 27.
506:3889Ps. xiv. 7.
506:3890Song of Sol. 8.1.
506:3891Isa. xlix. 8.
506:38922 Cor. vi. 2.
506:3893Exod. xxiii. 14.
506:3894Ps. 81:3, Num. 10:8Ps. lxxxi. 3, cf. Num. x. 8.
506:3895Or appointed, and so passim.
507:3896Num. 10:1, 2.
507:3897Heb. ix. 10.
507:3898Numb. x. 9.
507:3899Num. 10.10.
507:3900Exod. xix. 16.
507:3901Eph. vi. 12.
507:3902Cf. 1 Cor. 7:2, 5.
507:39031 Cor. 5:7, 8.
507:3904John vii. 37.
507:3905Joel ii. 15.
507:3906Ps. xvi. 3.
507:3907Rom. ii. 23.
507:3908Luke xviii. 12.
508:3909Is. lviii. 5.
508:3910Levit. xxiii. 26, sq.
508:3911Lev. 23.29.
508:39121 Tim. iv. 6.
508:3913John iv. 34.
508:3914Ps. lxxiv. 14, LXX.
508:3915John vi. 53.
508:3916The word in the Syriac is ‘priestly.’ But in this and in other places, it appears to be for the Greek ῾Ιερός. Cf. τὰ ἱερὰ γράμματα. 2 Tim. iii. 15.
508:3917Deut. 12:11, 13, 14.
509:3918Nah. i. 15.
509:3919Nah. i. 15; ii. 1, LXX.
509:3920John xx. 22.
509:39212 Cor. iii. 17.
509:3922Is. liii. 7.
509:3923Ps. xxiii. 4.
509:3924Phil. iv. 5.
509:3925Luke xii. 40; 1 Cor. v. 8; Ephes. iv. 22-24.
509:3926Alluding to Deut. xvi. 1, LXX.
509:3927We should not have much difficulty in fixing upon many of the phrases and expressions used by S. Athan. towards the close of his Epistles, by referring to the concluding sentences in the Paschal Letters of S. Cyril, who seems herein to have closely imitated his illustrious predecessor in the Patriarchate. The Syriac translator must frequently have had before him the following expressions: ἀρχόμενοι τῆς ἁγίας τεσσαρακοστῆς—ἐπισυνάπτοντες—συνάπτοντες ἐξῆς—περιλύοντες τὰς νηστείας—καταπαύοντες τὰς νηστείας—ἑσπέρᾳ βαθεί& 139· σαββάτου—τῇ ἐπιφωσκούσῃ κυριακῇ.
510:3928Ps. xlii. 4.
510:39291 Cor. ii. 9; Is. lxiv. 4.
Letter II.—For 330. Easter-day xxiv Pharmuthi; xiii Kal. Mai; Æra Dioclet. 46; Coss. Gallicianus, Valerius Symmachus; Præfect, Magninianus; Indict. iii.
Again, my brethren, is Easter come and gladness; again the Lord hath brought us to this season; so that when, according to custom, we have been nourished with His words, we may duly keep the feast. Let us celebrate it then, even heavenly joy, with those saints who formerly proclaimed a like feast, and were ensamples to us of conversation in Christ. For not only were they entrusted with the charge of preaching the Gospel, but, if we enquire, we shall see, as it is written, that its power was displayed in them. ‘Be ye therefore followers of me 3930 ,’ he wrote to the Corinthians. Now the apostolic precept exhorts us all, for those commands which he sent to individuals, he at the same time enjoined upon every man in every place, for he was ‘a teacher of all nations in faith and truth 3931 .’ And, generally, the commands of all the saints urge us on similarly, as Solomon makes use of proverbs, saying, ‘Hear, my children, the instruction of a father, and attend to know understanding; for I give you a good gift, forsake ye not my word: for I was an obedient son to my father, and beloved in the sight of my mother 3932 .’ For a just father brings up [his children] well, when he is diligent in teaching others in accordance with his own upright conduct, so that when he meets with opposition, he may not be ashamed on hearing it said, ‘Thou therefore that teachest others, teachest thou not thyself 3933 ?’ but rather, like the good servant, may both save himself and gain others; and thus, when the grace committed to him has been doubled, he may hear, ‘Thou good and faithful servant, thou hast been faithful in a little, I will set thee over much: enter into the joy of thy Lord 3934 .’
2. Let us 3935 then, as is becoming, as at all times, yet especially in the days of the feast, be not hearers only, but doers of the commandments of our Saviour; that having imitated the behaviour of the saints, we may enter together into the joy of our Lord which is in heaven, which is not transitory, but truly abides; of which evil doers having deprived themselves, there remains to them as the fruit of their ways, sorrow and affliction, and groaning with torments. Let a man see what these become like, that they bear not the likeness 3936 of the conversation of the saints, nor of that right understanding, by which man at the beginning was rational, and in the image of God. But they are compared to their disgrace to beasts without understanding, and becoming like them in unlawful pleasures, they are spoken of as wanton horses 3937 ; also, for their craftiness, and errors, and sin laden with death, they are called a ‘generation of vipers,’ as John saith 3938 . Now having thus fallen, and grovelling in the dust like the serpent 3939 , having their minds set on nothing beyond visible things, they esteem these things good, and rejoicing in them, serve their own lusts and not God.
3. Yet even in this state, the man-loving Word, who came for this very reason, that He might seek and find that which was lost, sought to restrain them from such folly, crying and saying, ‘Be ye not as the horse and the mule which have no understanding, whose cheeks ye hold in with bit and bridle 3940 .’ Because they were careless and imitated the wicked, the prophet prays in spirit and says, ‘Ye are to me like merchant-men of Phœnicia 3941 .’ And the avenging Spirit protests against them in these words, ‘Lord, in Thy city Thou wilt despise their image 3942 .’ Thus, being changed into the likeness of fools, they fell so low in their understanding, that by their excessive reasoning, they even likened the Divine Wisdom to themselves, thinking it to be like their own arts. Therefore, ‘professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the corruptible image of man, and birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient 3943 .’ For they did not listen to the prophetic voice that reproved them (saying), ‘To what have ye likened the Lord, and with what have ye compared Him 3944 ?’ neither to David, who prayed concerning such as these, and sang, ‘All those that make them are like unto them, and all those who put their trust in them 3945 .’ Being blind to the truth, they looked upon a stone as God, and hence, like senseless creatures, they walked in darkness, and, as the prophet cried, ‘They hear indeed, but they do not understand; they see indeed, but they do not perceive; for their heart is waxen fat, and with their ears they hear heavily 3946 .’
4. Now those who do not observe the feast, continue such as these even to the present day, feigning indeed and devising names of feasts 3947 , but rather introducing days of mourning than of gladness; ‘For there is no peace to the wicked, saith the Lord 3948 .’ And as Wisdom saith, ‘Gladness and joy are taken from their mouth 3949 .’ Such are the feasts of the wicked. But the wise servants of the Lord, who have truly put on the man which is created in God 3950 , have received gospel words, and reckon as a general commandment that given to Timothy, which saith, ‘Be thou an example to the believers in word, in conversation, in love, in faith, in purity 3951 .’ So well do they keep the Feast, that even the unbelievers, seeing their order 3952 , may say, ‘God is with them of a truth 3953 .’ For as he who receives an apostle receives Him who sent him 3954 , so he who is a follower of the saints, makes the Lord in every respect his end and aim, even as Paul, being a follower of Him, goes on to say, ‘As I also of Christ 3955 .’ For there were first our Saviour’s own words, who from the height of His divinity, when conversing with His disciples, said, ‘Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest to your souls 3956 .’ Then too when He poured water into a basin, and girded Himself with a towel, and washed His disciples’ feet, He said to them, ‘Know what I have done. Ye call Me Master and Lord, and ye say well, for so I am. If therefore I, your Lord and Master, have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet: for I have given you an example, that as I have done to you, ye also should do 3957 .’
5. Oh! my brethren, how shall we admire the loving-kindness of the Saviour? With what power, and with what a trumpet should a man cry out, exalting these His benefits! That not only should we bear His image, but should receive from Him an example and pattern of heavenly conversation; that as He hath begun, we should go on, that suffering, we should not threaten, being reviled, we should not revile again, but should bless them that curse, and in everything commit ourselves to God who judgeth righteously 3958 . For those who are thus disposed, and fashion themselves according to the Gospel, will be partakers of Christ, and imitators of apostolic conversation, on account of which they shall be deemed worthy of that praise from him, with which he praised the Corinthians, when he said, ‘I praise you that in everything ye are mindful of me 3959 .’ Afterwards, because there were men who used his words, but chose to hear them as suited their lusts, and dared to pervert them, as the followers of Hymenæus and Alexander, and before them the Sadducees, who as he said, ‘having made shipwreck of faith,’ scoffed at the mystery of the resurrection, he immediately proceeded to say, ‘And as I have delivered to you traditions, hold them fast 3960 .’ That means, indeed, that we should think not otherwise than as the teacher has delivered.
6. For not only in outward form did those wicked men dissemble, putting on as the Lord says sheep’s clothing, and appearing like unto whited sepulchres; but they took those divine words in their mouth, while they inwardly cherished evil intentions. And the first to put on this appearance was the serpent, the inventor of wickedness from the beginning—the devil,—who, in disguise, conversed with Eve, and forthwith deceived her. But after him and with him are all inventors of unlawful heresies, who indeed refer to the Scriptures, but do not hold such opinions as the saints have handed down, and receiving them as the traditions of men, err, because they do not rightly know them nor their 3961 power. Therefore Paul justly praises the Corinthians 3962 , because their opinions were in accordance with his traditions. And the Lord most righteously reproved the Jews, saying, ‘Wherefore do ye also transgress the commandments of God on account of your traditions 3963 .’ For they changed the commandments they received from God after their own understanding, preferring to observe the traditions of men. And about these, a little after, the blessed Paul again gave directions to the Galatians who were in danger thereof, writing to them, ‘If any man preach to you aught else than that ye have received, let him be accursed 3964 .’
7. For there is no fellowship whatever between the words of the saints and the fancies of human invention; for the saints are the ministers of the truth, preaching the kingdom of heaven, but those who are borne in the opposite direction have nothing better than to eat, and think their end is that they shall cease to be, and they say, ‘Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die 3965 .’ Therefore blessed Luke reproves the inventions of men, and hands down the narrations of the saints, saying in the beginning of the Gospel, ‘Since many have presumed to write narrations of those events of which we are assured, as those who from the beginning were witnesses and ministers of the Word have delivered to us; it hath seemed good to me also, who have adhered to them all from the first, to write correctly in order to thee, O excellent Theophilus, that thou mayest know the truth concerning the things in which thou hast been instructed 3966 .’ For as each of the saints has received, that they impart without alteration, for the confirmation of the doctrine of the mysteries. Of these the (divine) word would have us disciples, and these should of right be our teachers, and to them only is it necessary to give heed, for of them only is ‘the word faithful and worthy of all acceptation 3967 ;’ these not being disciples because they heard from others, but being eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word, that which they had heard from Him have they handed down.
Now some have related the wonderful signs performed by our Saviour, and preached His eternal Godhead. And others have written of His being born in the flesh of the Virgin, and have proclaimed the festival of the holy passover, saying, ‘Christ our Passover is sacrificed 3968 ;’ so that we, individually and collectively, and all the churches in the world may remember, as it is written, ‘That Christ rose from the dead, of the seed of David, according to the Gospel 3969 .’ And let us not forget that which Paul delivered, declaring it to the Corinthians; I mean His resurrection, whereby ‘He destroyed him that had the power of death, that is, the devil 3970 ;’ and raised us up together with Him, having loosed the bands of death, and vouchsafed a blessing instead of a curse, joy instead of grief, a feast instead of mourning, in this holy joy of Easter, which being continually in our hearts, we always rejoice, as Paul commanded; ‘We pray without ceasing; in everything we give thanks 3971 .’ So we are not remiss in giving notice of its seasons, as we have received from the Fathers. Again we write, again keeping to the apostolic traditions, we remind each other when we come together for prayer; and keeping the feast in common, with one mouth we truly give thanks to the Lord. Thus giving thanks unto Him, and being followers of the saints, ‘we shall make our praise in the Lord all the day 3972 ,’ as the Psalmist says. So, when we rightly keep the feast, we shall be counted worthy of that joy which is in heaven.
8. We begin the fast of forty days on the 13th of the month Phamenoth (Mar. 9). After we have given ourselves to fasting in continued succession, let us begin the holy Paschal 3973 week on the 18th of the month Pharmuthi (April 13). Then resting on the 23rd of the same month Pharmuthi (April 18), and keeping the feast afterwards on the first of the week, on the 24th (April 19), let us add to these the seven weeks of the great Pentecost, wholly rejoicing and exulting in Christ Jesus our Lord, through Whom to the Father be glory and dominion in the Holy Ghost, for ever and ever. Amen.
The brethren which are with me salute you. Salute one another with a holy kiss 3974 .
Here endeth the second Festal Letter of the holy lord Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria.
Footnotes
510:39301 Cor. iv. 16.
510:39311 Tim. ii. 7. Cf. Letter iii.
510:3932Prov. iv. 1.
510:3933Rom. ii. 21.
510:3934Mat. xxv. 21.
510:3935We have here the first fragment extant of the original Greek text. It is to be found in Cosmas Indicopleustes. p. 316.
510:3936Syr. εἰκών.
510:3937Jer. v. 8.
510:3938i.e. the Baptist, Matt. iii. 7; Luke iii. 7.
510:3939Cf. Vit. Anton. supr. p. 202.
510:3940Ps. xxxii. 9. Cf. Orat. iii. 18.
510:3941Is. xxiii. 2, LXX.
510:3942Ps. lxxiii. 20.
511:3943Rom. 1:22, 28, and cf. c. Gent. 19. 2.
511:3944Is. xl. 18.
511:3945Ps. cxv. 8.
511:3946Is. vi. 9.
511:3947Syr. σχηματισάμενος. The allusion in this sentence is evidently to the conduct of Jeroboam, as recorded 1 Kings 12:32, 33. The phraseology of the Syriac resembles that of the Syr. version in v. 33.
511:3948Is. xlviii. 22.
511:3949Vid. Letter iii. note.
511:3950Eph. iv. 24.
511:39511 Tim. iv. 12.
511:3952τάξις, Syr. Cf. Col. ii. 5, βλέπων ὑμῶν τὴν τάξιν.
511:39531 Cor. xiv. 25.
511:3954Matt. x. 40.
511:39551 Cor. xi. 1.
511:3956Matt. xi. 29.
511:3957John xiii. 12.
511:39581 Pet. ii. 21-23
511:39591 Cor. xi. 2.
511:39601 Tim. i. 19; 2 Tim. ii. 18; 1 Cor. xi. 2
511:3961Matt. xxii. 29.
511:39621 Cor. xi. 2.
512:3963Matt. xv. 3.
512:3964Gal. i. 9.
512:3965Is. xxii. 13.
512:3966Luke i. 1.
512:39671 Tim. i. 15.
512:39681 Cor. v. 7.
512:39692 Tim. ii. 8.
512:3970Heb. ii. 14.
512:39711 Thess. v. 17.
512:3972Ps. xxxv. 28.
512:3973In Syriac there is but one word ‘pescha’ to express the Passover and Easter feasts, it is therefore sometimes rendered Easter, and sometimes Passover, in the following pages.
512:3974The twenty-fifth Paschal Letter of S. Cyril ends with the same words. This is the usual form in which our author concludes his Paschal Letters. S. Cyril employs it but once, as above.
Letter III.—For 331. Easter-day xvi Pharmuthi; iii Id. April; Æra Dioclet. 47; Coss. Annius Bassus, Ablabius; Præfect, Florentius; Indict. iv.
Again, my beloved brethren, the day of the feast draws near to us, which, above all others, should be devoted to prayer, which the law commands to be observed, and which it would be an unholy thing for us to pass over in silence. For although we have been held under restraint by those who afflict us, that, because of them, we should not announce to you this season; yet thanks be to ‘God, who comforteth the afflicted 3975 ,’ that we have not been overcome by the wickedness of our accusers and silenced; but obeying the voice of truth, we together with you cry aloud in the day of the feast. For the God of all hath commanded, saying, ‘Speak 3976 , and the children of Israel shall keep the Passover.’ And the Spirit exhorts in the Psalm; ‘Blow the trumpet in the new moons 3977 , in the solemn day of your feast.’ And the prophet cries; ‘Keep thy feasts, O Judah 3978 .’ I do not send word to you as though you were ignorant; but I publish it to those who know it, that ye may perceive that although men have separated us, yet God having made us companions, we approach the same feast, and worship the same Lord continually. And we do not keep the festival as observers of days, knowing that the Apostle reproves those who do so, in those words which he spake; ‘Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years 3979 .’ But rather do we consider the day solemn because of the feast; so that all of us, who serve God in every place, may together in our prayers be well-pleasing to God. For the blessed Paul, announcing the nearness of gladness like this, did not announce days, but the Lord, for whose sake we keep the feast, saying, ‘Christ, our Passover, is sacrificed 3980 ;’ so that we all, contemplating the eternity of the Word, may draw near to do Him service.
2. For what else is the feast, but the service of the soul? And what is that service, but prolonged prayer to God, and unceasing thanksgiving 3981 ? The unthankful departing far from these are rightly deprived of the joy springing therefrom: for ‘joy and gladness are taken from their mouth 3982 .’ Therefore, the [divine] word doth not allow them to have peace; ‘For there is no peace to the wicked, saith the Lord 3983 ,’ they labour in pain and grief. So, not even to him who owed ten thousand talents did the Gospel grant forgiveness in the sight of the Lord 3984 . For even he, having received forgiveness of great things, was forgetful of kindness in little ones, so that he paid the penalty also of those former things. And justly indeed, for having himself experienced kindness, he was required to be merciful to his fellow servant. He too that received the one talent, and bound it up in a napkin, and hid it in the earth, was in consequence cast out for unthankfulness, hearing the words, ‘Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed; thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and on my return, I should have received mine own. Take therefore the talent from him, and give it to him that hath ten talents 3985 .’ For, of course, when he was required to deliver up to his lord that which belonged to him, he should have acknowledged the kindness of him who gave it, and the value of that which was given. For he who gave was not a hard man, had he been so, he would not have given even in the first instance; neither was that which was given unprofitable and vain, for then he had not found fault. But both he who gave was good, and that which was given was capable of bearing fruit. As therefore ‘he who withholdeth corn in seed-time is cursed 3986 ,’ according to the divine proverb, so he who neglects grace, and hides it without culture, is properly cast out as a wicked and unthankful person. On this account, he praises those who increased [their talents], saying, ‘Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful in a little, I will place thee over much; enter into the joy of thy Lord 3987 .’
3. This was right and reasonable; for, as the Scripture declares, they had gained as much as they had received. Now, my beloved, our will ought to keep pace with the grace of God, and not fall short; lest while our will remains idle, the grace given us should begin to depart, and the enemy finding us empty and naked, should enter [into us], as was the case with him spoken of in the Gospel, from whom the devil went out; ‘for having gone through dry places, he took seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and returning and finding the house empty, he dwelt there, and the last state of that man was worse than the first 3988 .’ For the departure from virtue gives place for the entrance of the unclean spirit. There is, moreover, the apostolic injunction, that the grace given us should not be unprofitable; for those things which he wrote particularly to his disciple, he enforces on us through him 3989 , saying, ‘Neglect not the gift that is in thee. For he who tilleth his land shall be satisfied with bread; but the paths of the slothful are strewn with thorns;’ so that the Spirit forewarns a man not to fall into them, saying, ‘Break up your fallow ground, sow not among thorns 3990 .’ For when a man despises the grace given him; and forthwith falls into the cares of the world, he delivers himself over to his lusts; and thus in the time of persecution he is offended 3991 , and becomes altogether unfruitful. Now the prophet points out the end of such negligence, saying, ‘Cursed is he who doeth the work of the Lord carelessly 3992 .’ For a servant of the Lord should be diligent and careful, yea, moreover, burning like a flame, so that when, by an ardent spirit, he has destroyed all carnal sin, he may be able to draw near to God who, according to the expression of the saints, is called ‘a consuming fire 3993 .’
4. Therefore, the God of all, ‘Who maketh His angels [spirits],’ is a spirit, ‘and His ministers a flame of fire 3994 .’ Wherefore, in the departure from Egypt, He forbade the multitude to touch the mountain, where God was appointing them the law, because they were not of this character. But He called blessed Moses to it, as being fervent in spirit, and possessing unquenchable grace, saying, ‘Let Moses alone draw near 3995 .’ He entered into the cloud also, and when the mountain was smoking, he was not injured; but rather, through ‘the words of the Lord, which are choice silver purified in the earth 3996 ,’ he descended purified. Therefore the blessed Paul, when desirous that the grace of the Spirit given to us should not grow cold, exhorts, saying, ‘Quench not the Spirit 3997 .’ For so shall we remain partakers of Christ 3998 , if we hold fast to the end the Spirit given at the beginning. For he said, ‘Quench not;’ not because the Spirit is placed in the power of men, and is able to suffer anything from them; but because bad and unthankful men are such as manifestly wish to quench it, since they, like the impure, persecute the Spirit with unholy deeds. ‘For the holy Spirit of discipline will flee deceit, nor dwell in a body that is subject unto sin; but will remove from thoughts that are without understanding 3999 .’ Now they being without understanding, and deceitful, and lovers of sin, walk still as in darkness, not having that ‘Light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world 4000 .’ Now a fire such as this laid hold of Jeremiah the prophet, when the word was in him as a fire, and he said, ‘I pass away from every place, and am not able to endure it 4001 .’ And our Lord Jesus Christ, being good and a lover of men, came that He might cast this upon earth, and said, ‘And what? would that it were already kindled 4002 !’ For He desired, as He testified in Ezekiel 4003 , the repentance of a man rather than his death; so that evil should be entirely consumed in all men, that the soul, being purified, might be able to bring forth fruit; for the word which is sown by Him will be productive, some thirty, some sixty, some an hundred 4004 . Thus, for instance, those who were with Cleopas 4005 , although infirm at first from lack of knowledge, yet afterwards were inflamed with the words of the Saviour, and brought forth the fruits of the knowledge of Him. The blessed Paul also, when seized by this fire, revealed it not to flesh and blood, but having experienced the grace, he became a preacher of the Word. But not such were those nine lepers who were cleansed from their leprosy, and yet were unthankful to the Lord who healed them; nor Judas, who obtained the lot of an apostle, and was named a disciple of the Lord, but at last, ‘while eating bread with the Saviour, lifted up his heel against Him, and became a traitor 4006 .’ But such men have the due reward of their folly, since their expectation will be vain through their ingratitude; for there is no hope for the ungrateful, the last fire, prepared for the devil and his angels, awaits those who have neglected divine light. Such then is the end of the unthankful.
5. But the faithful and true servants of the Lord, knowing that the Lord loves the thankful, never cease to praise Him, ever giving thanks unto the Lord. And whether the time is one of ease or of affliction, they offer up praise to God with thanksgiving, not reckoning these things of time, but worshipping the Lord, the God of times 4007 . Thus of old time, Job, who possessed fortitude above all men, thought of these things when in prosperity; and when in adversity, he patiently endured, and when he suffered, gave thanks. As also the humble David, in the very time of affliction sang praises and said, ‘I will bless the Lord at all times 4008 .’ And the blessed Paul, in all his Epistles, so to say, ceased not to thank God. In times of ease, he failed not, and in afflictions he gloried, knowing that ‘tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and experience hope, and that hope maketh not ashamed 4009 .’ Let us, being followers of such men, pass no season without thanksgiving, but especially now, when the time is one of tribulation, which the heretics excite against us, will we praise the Lord, uttering the words of the saints; ‘All these things have come upon us, yet have we not forgotten Thee 4010 .’ For as the Jews at that time, although suffering an assault from the tabernacles 4011 of the Edomites, and oppressed by the enemies of Jerusalem, did not give themselves up, but all the more sang praises to God; so we, my beloved brethren, though hindered from speaking the word of the Lord, will the more proclaim it, and being afflicted, we will sing Psalms 4012 , in that we are accounted worthy to be despised, and to labour anxiously for the truth. Yea, moreover, being grievously vexed, we will give thanks. For the blessed Apostle, who gave thanks at all times, urges us in the same manner to draw near to God saying, ‘Let your requests, with thanksgiving, be made known unto God 4013 .’ And being desirous that we should always continue in this resolution, he says, ‘At all times give thanks; pray without ceasing 4014 .’ For he knew that believers are strong while employed in thanksgiving, and that rejoicing they pass over the walls of the enemy, like those saints who said, ‘Through Thee will we pierce through our enemies, and by my God I will leap over a wall 4015 .’ At all times let us stand firm, but especially now, although many afflictions overtake us, and many heretics are furious against us. Let us then, my beloved brethren, celebrate with thanksgiving the holy feast which now draws near to us, ‘girding up the loins of our minds 4016 ,’ like our Saviour Jesus Christ, of Whom it is written, ‘Righteousness shall be the girdle of His loins, and faithfulness the girdle of His reins 4017 .’ Each one of us having in his hand the staff which came out of the root of Jesse, and our feet shod with the preparation of the Gospel 4018 , let us keep the feast as Paul saith, ‘Not with the old leaven, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth 4019 ;’ reverently trusting that we are reconciled through Christ, and not departing from faith in Him, nor do we defile ourselves together with heretics, and strangers to the truth, whose conversation and whose will degrade them. But rejoicing in afflictions, we break through the furnace of iron and darkness, and pass, unharmed, over that terrible Red Sea. Thus also, when we look upon the confusion of heretics, we shall, with Moses, sing that great song of praise, and say, ‘We will sing unto the Lord, for He is to be gloriously praised 4020 .’ Thus, singing praises, and seeing that the sin which is in us has been cast into the sea, we pass over to the wilderness. And being first purified by the fast of forty days, by prayers, and fastings, and discipline, and good works, we shall be able to eat the holy Passover in Jerusalem.
6. The beginning of the fast of forty days is on the fifth of Phamenoth (Mar. 1); and when, as I have said, we have first been purified and prepared by those days, we begin the holy week of the great Easter on the tenth of Pharmuthi (Apr. 5), in which, my beloved brethren, we should use more prolonged prayers, and fastings, and watchings, that we may be enabled to anoint our lintels with precious blood, and to escape the destroyer 4021 . Let us rest then, on the fifteenth of the month Pharmuthi (Apr. 10), for on the evening of that Saturday we hear the angels’ message, ‘Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is risen 4022 .’ Immediately afterwards that great Sunday receives us, I mean on the sixteenth of the same month Pharmuthi (April 11), on which our Lord having risen, gave us peace towards our neighbours. When then we have kept the feast according to His will, let us add from that first day in the holy week, the seven weeks of Pentecost, and as we then receive the grace of the Spirit, let us at all times give thanks to the Lord; through Whom to the Father be glory and dominion, in the Holy Ghost, for ever and ever. Amen.
Salute one another with a holy kiss. The brethren who are with me salute you. I pray, brethren beloved and longed for, that ye may have health, and that ye may be mindful of us in the Lord.
Here endeth the third Festal Letter of holy Athanasius.
Footnotes
512:39752 Cor. vii. 6. The historical reference is not quite certain, but the Index iii. is clearly right in its statement that Ath. was absent at this time, as well as in 332.
513:3976‘Εἶπον, καὶ,’ as LXX. not Peshito.
513:3977Cf. S. Cyril. Hom. Pasch. xxx. near the beginning.
513:3978Numb. ix. 2; Ps. lxxxi. 3; Nah. i. 15
513:3979Gal. iv. 10.
513:39801 Cor. v. 7.
513:3981Cf. Clemens Alex. Strom. 7. 1. ἀδιάλειπτος ἀγάπη. Also 1 Thess. 5:16, 17, both in the Greek and in the Syriac vers. and Letter 11.
513:3982Apparently a quotation from Scripture, perhaps from Jer. 7:28, 34. the phraseology of v. 28. being transferred to the sentiment of v. 34. The expression has already occurred, Letter 2. 4.
513:3983Is. xlviii. 22.
513:3984Matt. xviii. 24.
513:3985Matt. xxv. 26.
513:3986Prov. xi. 26.
513:3987Matt. xxv. 23.
513:3988Matt. 12.43-45.
513:3989Cf. Letter 2, near beginning.
513:39901 Tim. 4:14, Prov. 12:11, Prov. 15:19, Jer. 4:31 Tim. iv. 14; Prov. xii. 11; Ib. xv. 19; Jer. iv. 3.
514:3991σκανδαλίζεται, Matt. xiii. 21.
514:3992Jer. xlviii. 10.
514:3993Deut. 4:24, Deut. 9:3, Heb. 12:29Deut. iv. 24; ix. 3; and Heb. xii. 29.
514:3994Ps. civ. 4.
514:3995Exod. xxiv. 2.
514:3996Ps. xii. 6.
514:39971 Thess. v. 19.
514:3998Conf. S. Athan. Expos. in Psalmos, t. i. p, 863. πῦρ ὥσπερ νοητόν, τὴν τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος μέθεξιν ἐμβαλών.
514:3999Wisd. i. 5.
514:4000John i. 9.
514:4001Jer. xx. 9, cf. Letter 49. 5.
514:4002Luke xii. 49.
514:4003Ezek. 18:23, 32.
514:4004Mark iv. 20.
514:4005Luke xxiv.
514:4006Ps. xli. 9; John xiii. 18.
514:4007Cf. Letter 1. 1, note 12.
514:4008Ps. xxxiv. 1.
514:4009Rom. v. 3.
515:4010Ps. xliv. 17.
515:4011Compare Ps. lxxxiii. 6.
515:4012Cf. James v. 13
515:4013Phil. iv. 6.
515:40141 Thess. v. 17.
515:4015Ps. xviii. 29.
515:40161 Pet. i. 13.
515:4017Is. xi. 5.
515:4018Isa. 11:1, Eph. 6:15Eph. vi. 15.
515:40191 Cor. v. 8.
515:4020Exod. xv. 1.
515:4021Exod. 12:7, 23.
515:4022Luke xxiv. 5.
Letter IV.—For 332. Easter-day vii Pharmuthi 4023 , iv Non. Apr.; Æra Dioclet. 48; Coss. Fabius Pacatianus, Mæcilius Hilarianus; Præfect, Hyginus 4024 ; Indict. v.
He sent this Letter from the Emperor’s Court by a soldier 4025 .
I send unto you, my beloved, late and beyond the accustomed time 4026 ; yet I trust you will forgive the delay, on account of my protracted journey, and because I have been tried with illness. Being hindered by these two causes, and unusually severe storms having occurred, I have deferred writing to you. But notwithstanding my long journeys, and my grievous sickness, I have not forgotten to give you the festal notification, and, in discharge of my duty, I now announce to you the feast. For although the date of this letter is later 4027 than that usual for this announcement, it should still be considered well-timed, since our enemies having been put to shame and reproved by the Church, because they persecuted us without a cause 4028 , we may now sing a festal song of praise, uttering the triumphant hymn against Pharaoh; ‘We will sing unto the Lord, for He is to be gloriously praised; the horse and his rider He hath cast into the sea 4029 .’
2. It is well, my beloved, to proceed from feast to feast; again festal meetings, again holy vigils arouse our minds, and compel our intellect to keep vigil unto contemplation of good things. Let us not fulfil these days like those that mourn, but, by enjoying spiritual food, let us seek to silence our fleshly lusts 4030 . For by these means we shall have strength to overcome our adversaries, like blessed Judith 4031 , when having first exercised herself in fastings and prayers, she overcame the enemies, and killed Olophernes. And blessed Esther, when destruction was about to come on all her race, and the nation of Israel was ready to perish, defeated the fury of the tyrant by no other means than by fasting and prayer to God, and changed the ruin of her people into safety 4032 . Now as those days are considered feasts for Israel, so also in old time feasts were appointed when an enemy was slain, or a conspiracy against the people broken up, and Israel delivered. Therefore blessed Moses of old time ordained the great feast of the Passover, and our celebration of it, because, namely, Pharaoh was killed, and the people were delivered from bondage. For in those times it was especially, when those who tyrannized over the people had been slain, that temporal feasts and holidays were observed in Judæa 4033 .
3. Now, however, that the devil, that tyrant against the whole world, is slain, we do not approach a temporal feast, my beloved, but an eternal and heavenly. Not in shadows do we shew it forth, but we come to it in truth. For they being filled with the flesh of a dumb lamb, accomplished the feast, and having anointed their door-posts with the blood, implored aid against the destroyer 4034 . But now we, eating of the Word of the Father, and having the lintels of our hearts sealed with the blood of the New Testament 4035 , acknowledge the grace given us from the Saviour, who said, ‘Behold, I have given unto you to tread upon serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy 4036 .’ For no more does death reign; but instead of death henceforth is life, since our Lord said, ‘I am the life 4037 ;’ so that everything is filled with joy and gladness; as it is written, ‘The Lord reigneth, let the earth rejoice.’ For when death reigned, ‘sitting down by the rivers of Babylon, we wept 4038 ,’ and mourned, because we felt the bitterness of captivity; but now that death and the kingdom of the devil is abolished, everything is entirely filled with joy and gladness. And God is no longer known only in Judæa, but in all the earth, ‘their voice hath gone forth, and the knowledge of Him hath filled all the earth 4039 .’ What follows, my beloved, is obvious; that we should approach such a feast, not with filthy raiment, but having clothed our minds with pure garments. For we need in this to put on our Lord Jesus 4040 , that we may be able to celebrate the feast with Him. Now we are clothed with Him when we love virtue, and are enemies to wickedness, when we exercise ourselves in temperance and mortify lasciviousness, when we love righteousness before iniquity, when we honour sufficiency, and have strength of mind, when we do not forget the poor, but open our doors to all men, when we assist humble-mindedness, but hate pride.
4. By these things Israel of old, having first, as in a figure, striven for the victory, came to the feast, for these things were then foreshadowed and typified. But we, my beloved, the shadow having received its fulfilment, and the types being accomplished, should no longer consider the feast typical, neither should we go up to Jerusalem which is here below, to sacrifice the Passover, according to the unseasonable observance of the Jews, lest, while the season passes away, we should be regarded as acting unseasonably 4041 ; but, in accordance with the injunction of the Apostles, let us go beyond the types, and sing the new song of praise. For perceiving this, and being assembled together with the Truth 4042 , they drew near, and said unto our Saviour, ‘Where wilt Thou that we should make ready for Thee the Passover 4043 ?’ For no longer were these things to be done which belonged to Jerusalem which is beneath; neither there alone was the feast to be celebrated, but wherever God willed it to be. Now He willed it to be in every place, so that ‘in every place incense and a sacrifice might be offered to Him 4044 .’ For although, as in the historical account, in no other place might the feast of the Passover be kept save only in Jerusalem, yet when the things pertaining to that time were fulfilled, and those which belonged to shadows had passed away, and the preaching of the Gospel was about to extend everywhere; when indeed the disciples were spreading the feast in all places, they asked the Saviour, ‘Where wilt Thou that we shall make ready?’ The Saviour also, since He was changing the typical for the spiritual, promised them that they should no longer eat the flesh of a lamb, but His own, saying, ‘Take, eat and drink; this is My body, and My blood 4045 .’ When we are thus nourished by these things, we also, my beloved, shall truly keep the feast of the Passover.
5. We begin on the first of Pharmuthi (Mar. 27), and rest on the sixth of the same month (Apr. 1), on the evening of the seventh day; and the holy first day of the week having risen upon us on the seventh of the same Pharmuthi (Apr. 2), celebrate we too the days of holy Pentecost following thereon, shewing forth through them the world to come 4046 , so that henceforth we may be with Christ for ever, praising God over all in Christ Jesus, and through Him, with all saints, we say unto the Lord, Amen. Salute one another with a holy kiss. All the brethren who are with me salute you. We have sent this letter from the Court, by the hand of an attendant officer 4047 , to whom it was given by Ablavius 4048 , the Præfect of the Prætorium, who fears God in truth. For I am at the Court, having been summoned by the emperor Constantine to see him. But the Meletians, who were present there, being envious, sought our ruin before the Emperor. But they were put to shame and driven away thence as calumniators, being confuted by many things. Those who were driven away were Callinicus, Ision, Eudæmon, and Gelœus 4049 Hieracammon, who, on account of the shame of his name, calls himself Eulogius.
Here endeth the fourth Festal Letter of holy Athanasius.
Footnotes
515:4023The Syriac text has 17th instead of 7th. There is the same error in the index. The correct day is given towards the end of the Letter.
515:4024There is sometimes a difficulty, in the absence of independent testimony, in ascertaining the exact orthography of the proper names, from the loose manner in which they are written in the Syriac. Here, however, it is clearly Hyginus, as in Sozomen, lib. ii. c. 25, Larsow writes it Eugenius. He has also the 46th instead of the 48th of the Diocletian Æra. The word ‘Fabius’ is not clear. In Baronii Annal. Eccles, however, we find it Ovinius.
515:4025See note 6 at the end of the Letter.
515:4026In the index it is stated that the third, but not that the fourth, Letter was sent late, but see Letter 3, note 1.
516:4027i.e. too late to give notice of the beginning of Lent, infr. §5, and Letter 5, §6.
516:4028Constantine, in his letter, supr. p. 133, speaks of the envy of the accusers of Athan. and of their unsuccessful efforts to criminate him.
516:4029Exod. xv. 1.
516:4030τοῖς τῆς σαρκὸς ἐπιτιμῶντες πάθεσιν. S. Cyril. Hom. Pasch. xx.
516:4031Judith xiii. 8.
516:4032Esther iv. 16.
516:4033Cf. Esth. 9:20, Jdt. 9:0, Jdt. 15:0.
516:4034Conf. S. Cyril. Hom. Pasch. xxiv. p. 293. Ed. Paris, 1638.
516:4035Matt. xxvi. 28.
516:4036Luke x. 19, Vit. Ant. 30.
516:4037John xiv. 6.
516:4038Ps. xcvii. 1; cxxxvii. 1.
516:4039Ps. 76:1, Ps. 19:4.
516:4040Cf. Rom. xiii. 14.
516:4041Cf. Letter i. (beginning)
516:4042σὺν τῇ ἀληθεί& 139·. I understand this as referring to Christ. Vid. John xiv. 6.
516:4043Matt. xxvi. 17.
517:4044Mal. i. 11.
517:4045Matt. xxvi. 26-28
517:4046Cf. Bingham, xx. ch. 6; Cass. Coll. xxi. 11; Cyril uses the same comparison towards the end of his 26th Paschal discourse.
517:4047‘Officilius.’ Cureton considers this may be an error for the Latin Officialis.
517:4048Ablavius, Præfect of the East, the minister and favourite of Constantine the Great, was murdered after the death of the latter. He was consul in the preceding year. Zozimus ii. 40. (Smith’s Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Biography.)
517:4049The name means ‘Laughable.’
Letter V.—For 333. Easter-day 4050 , Coss. Dalmatius and Zenophilus; Præfect, Paternus 4051 ; vi Indict.; xvii Kal. Maii, xx Pharmuthi; xv Moon; vii Gods; Æra Dioclet. 49.
We duly proceed, my brethren, from feasts to feasts, duly from prayers to prayers, we advance from fasts to fasts, and join holy-days to holy-days. Again the time has arrived which brings to us a new beginning 4052 , even the announcement of the blessed Passover, in which the Lord was sacrificed. We eat, as it were, the food of life, and constantly thirsting we delight our souls at all times, as from a fountain, in His precious blood. For we continually and ardently desire; He stands ready for those who thirst; and for those who thirst there is the word of our Saviour, which, in His loving-kindness, He uttered on the day of the feast; ‘If any man thirst, let him come to Me and drink 4053 .’ Nor was it then alone when any one drew near to Him, that He cured his thirst; but whenever any one seeks, there is free access for him to the Saviour. For the grace of the feast is not limited to one time, nor does its splendid brilliancy decline; but it is always near, enlightening the minds of those who earnestly desire it 4054 . For therein is constant virtue, for those who are illuminated in their minds, and meditate on the divine Scriptures day and night, like the man to whom a blessing is given, as it is written in the sacred Psalms; ‘Blessed is the man who hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of corrupters. But his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law doth he meditate day and night 4055 .’ For it is not the sun, or the moon, or the host of those other stars which illumines him, but he glitters with the high effulgence of God over all.
2. For it is God, my beloved, even the God Who at first established the feast for us, Who vouchsafes the celebration of it year by year. He both brought about the slaying of His Son for salvation, and gave us this reason for the holy feast, to which every year bears witness, as often as at this season the feast is proclaimed. This also leads us on from the cross through this world to that which is before us, and God produces even now from it the joy of glorious salvation, bringing us to the same assembly, and in every place uniting all of us in spirit; appointing us common prayers, and a common grace proceeding from the feast. For this is the marvel of His loving-kindness, that He should gather together in the same place those who are at a distance; and make those who appear to be far off in the body, to be near together in unity of spirit.
3. Wherefore then, my beloved, do we not acknowledge the grace as becometh the feast? Wherefore do we not make a return to our Benefactor? It is indeed impossible to make an adequate return to God; still, it is a wicked thing for us who receive the gracious gift, not to acknowledge it. Nature itself manifests our inability; but our own will reproves our unthankfulness. Therefore the blessed Paul, when admiring the greatness of the gift of God, said, ‘And who is sufficient for these things 4056 ?’ For He made the world free by the blood of the Saviour; then, again, He has caused the grave to be trodden down by the Saviour’s death, and furnished a way to the heavenly gates free from obstacles to those who are going up 4057 . Wherefore, one of the saints, while he acknowledged the grace, but was insufficient to repay it, said, ‘What shall I render unto the Lord for all He has done unto me 4058 ?’ For instead of death he had received life, instead of bondage 4059 , freedom, and instead of the grave, the kingdom of heaven. For of old time, ‘death reigned from Adam to Moses;’ but now the divine voice hath said, ‘To-day shalt thou be with Me in Paradise.’ And the saints, being sensible of this, said, ‘Except the Lord had helped me, my soul had almost dwelt in hell. 4060 .’ Besides all this, being powerless to make a return, he yet acknowledged the gift, and wrote finally, saying, ‘I will take the cup of salvation, and call on the name of the Lord; precious in His sight is the death of His saints 4061 .’
With regard to the cup, the Lord said, ‘Are ye able to drink of that cup which I am about to drink of?’ And when the disciples assented, the Lord said, ‘Ye shall indeed drink of My cup; but that ye should sit on My right hand, and on My left, is not Mine to give; but to those for whom it is prepared 4062 .’ Therefore, my beloved, let us be sensible of the gift, though we are found insufficient to repay it. As we have ability, let us meet the occasion. For although nature is not able, with things unworthy of the Word, to return a recompense for such benefits, yet let us render Him thanks while we persevere in piety. And how can we more abide in piety than when we acknowledge God, Who in His love to mankind has bestowed on us such benefits? (For thus we shall obediently keep the law, and observe its commandments. And, further, we shall not, as unthankful persons, be accounted transgressors of the law, or do those things which ought to be hated, for the Lord loveth the thankful); when too we offer ourselves to the Lord, like the saints, when we subscribe ourselves entirely [as] living henceforth not to ourselves, but to the Lord Who died for us, as also the blessed Paul did, when he said, ‘I am crucified with Christ, yet I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me 4063 .’
4. Now our life, my brethren, truly consists in our denying all bodily things, and continuing stedfast in those only of our Saviour. Therefore the present season requires of us, that we should not only utter such words, but should also imitate the deeds of the saints. But we imitate them, when we acknowledge Him who died, and no longer live unto ourselves, but Christ henceforth lives in us; when we render a recompense to the Lord to the utmost of our power, though when we make a return we give nothing of our own, but those things which we have before received from Him, this being especially of His grace, that He should require, as from us, His own gifts. He bears witness to this when He says, ‘My offerings are My own gifts 4064 .’ That is, those things which you give Me are yours, as having received them from Me, but they are the gifts of God. And let us offer to the Lord every virtue, and that true holiness which is in Him, and in piety let us keep the feast to Him with those things which He has hallowed for us. Let us thus engage in the holy fasts, as having been prescribed by Him, and by means of which we find the way to God. But let us not be like the heathen, or the ignorant Jews, or as the heretics and schismatics of the present time. For the heathen think the accomplishment of the feast is in the abundance of food; the Jews, erring in the type and shadow, think it still such; the schismatics keep it in separate places, and with vain imaginations. But let us, my brethren, be superior to the heathen, in keeping the feast with sincerity of soul, and purity of body; to the Jews, in no longer receiving the type and the shadow, but as having been gloriously illumined with the light of truth, and as looking upon the Sun of Righteousness 4065 ; to the schismatics, in not rending the coat of Christ, but in one house, even in the Catholic Church, let us eat the Passover of the Lord, Who, by ordaining His holy laws, guided us towards virtue, and counselled the abstinence of this feast. For the Passover is indeed abstinence from evil for exercise of virtue, and a departure from death unto life. This may be learnt even from the type of old time. For then they toiled earnestly to pass from Egypt to Jerusalem, but now we depart from death to life; they then passed from Pharaoh to Moses, but now we rise from the devil to the Saviour. And as, at that time, the type of deliverance bore witness every year, so now we commemorate our salvation. We fast meditating on death, that we may be able to live; and we watch, not as mourners, but as they that wait for the Lord, when He shall have returned from the wedding, so that we may vie with each other in the triumph, hastening to announce the sign of victory over death.
5. Would therefore, O my beloved, that as the word requires, we might here so govern ourselves at all times and entirely, and so live, as never to forget the noble acts of God, nor to depart from the practice of virtue! As also the Apostolic voice exhorts; ‘Remember Jesus Christ, that He rose from the dead 4066 .’ Not that any limited season of remembrance was appointed, for at all times He should be in our thoughts. But because of the slothfulness of many, we delay from day to day. Let us then begin in these days. To this end a time of remembrance is permitted, that it may show forth to the saints the reward of their calling, and may exhort the careless while reproving them 4067 . Therefore in all the remaining days, let us persevere in virtuous conduct, repenting as is our duty, of all that we have neglected, whatever it may be; for there is no one free from defilement, though his course may have been but one hour on the earth, as Job, that man of surpassing fortitude, testifies. But, ‘stretching forth to those things that are to come 4068 ,’ let us pray that we may not eat the Passover unworthily, lest we be exposed to dangers. For to those who keep the feast in purity, the Passover is heavenly food; but to those who observe it profanely and contemptuously, it is a danger and reproach. For it is written, ‘Whosoever shall eat and drink unworthily, is guilty of the death of our Lord 4069 .’ Wherefore, let us not merely proceed to perform the festal rites, but let us be prepared to draw near to the divine Lamb, and to touch heavenly food. Let us cleanse our hands, let us purify the body. Let us keep our whole mind from guile; not giving up ourselves to excess, and to lusts, but occupying ourselves entirely with our Lord, and with divine doctrines; so that, being altogether pure, we may be able to partake of the Word. 4070
6. We begin the holy fast on the fourteenth of Pharmuthi (Apr. 9), on the [first] evening of the week 4071 ; and having ceased on the nineteenth of the same month Pharmuthi (Apr. 14), the first day of the holy week dawns upon us on the twentieth of the same month Pharmuthi (Apr. 15), to which we join the seven weeks of Pentecost; with prayers, and fellowship with our neighbour, and love towards one another, and that peaceable will which is above all. For so shall we be heirs of the kingdom of heaven, through our Lord Jesus Christ, through Whom to the Father be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. All the brethren who are with me salute you. Salute one another with a holy kiss.
Here endeth the fifth Festal Letter of holy Athanasius.
Footnotes
517:4050See supr. Table D, and note. The full moon (‘Moon xiv’) was really on Pharm. 20, but seems to have been calculated to fall on the previous day.
517:4051The Syriac seems to represent ‘Paterius,’ not ‘Paternus’ as Larsow writes it. A former præfect of Egypt was called Paterius, according to Gelas. Cyz. in Hard. Conc. i. 459.
517:4052Cf. Rev. iii. 14, c. Apoll. i. 20.
517:4053John vii. 37. The Syriac is rather obscure here.
517:4054Vid. note 2, to Letter 1.
517:4055Ps. 1:1, 2.
518:40562 Cor. ii. 17.
518:4057This sentence is preserved in the original Greek in Cosmas, Topogr. Christ. p. 316.
518:4058Ps. cxvi. 12.
518:4059Pseudo-Ath. in Matt. xxi. 9. (Migne xxviii. 1025), after quoting the same passage from the Epistle to the Romans, says, ἀλλ᾽ ἐπεδήμησεν ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν ᾽Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς λυτρούμενος τοὺς αἰχμαλώτους, καὶ ζωοποιῶν τοὺς τεθανατωμένους
518:4060Rom. v. 14; Luke xxiii. 43; Ps. xciv. 17
518:4061Ps. 16:13, 15.
518:4062Matt. 20:22, 23.
518:4063Gal. ii. 20.
518:4064Num. xxviii. 2, LXX.
519:4065Mal. iv. 2.
519:40662 Tim. ii. 8.
519:4067The reasoning of Athan. is to this effect. The due observance of such festival will have its effect in quickening our habitual meditation on the resurrection. The same mode of reasoning might be applied to all the other Christian festivals.
519:4068Job 14:4, Phil. 3:13Job xiv. 4 (LXX.); Phil. iii. 13.
519:40691 Cor. xi. 27.
519:4070Cf. 2 Pet. i. 4
519:4071Syr. ‘sabbath.’
Letter VI.—For 334. Easter-day, xii Pharmuthi, vii Id. April; xvii Moon; Æra Dioclet. 50; Coss. Optatus Patricius, Anicius Paulinus; Præfect, Philagrius 4072 , the Cappadocian; vii Indict.
Now again, my beloved, has God brought us to the season of the feast, and through His loving-kindness we have reached the period of assembly for it. For that God who brought Israel out of Egypt, even He at this time calls us to the feast, saying by Moses, ‘Observe the month of new fruits 4073 , and keep the Passover to the Lord thy God 4074 :’ and by the prophet, ‘Keep thy feasts, O Judah; pay to the Lord thy vows 4075 .’ If then God Himself loves the feast, and calls us to it, it is not right, my brethren, that it should be delayed, or observed carelessly; but with alacrity and zeal we should come to it, so that having begun joyfully here, we may also receive an earnest of that heavenly feast. For if we diligently celebrate the feast here, we shall doubtless receive the perfect joy which is in heaven, as the Lord says; ‘With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer. For I say unto you, that I will not eat it, until it is fulfilled with you in the kingdom of God 4076 .’ Now we eat it if, understanding the reason of the feast, and acknowledging the Deliverer, we conduct ourselves in accordance with His grace, as Paul saith; ‘So that we may keep the Feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth 4077 .’ For the Lord died in those days, that we should no longer do the deeds of death. He gave His life, that we might preserve our own from the snares of the devil. And, what is most wonderful, the Word became flesh, that we should no longer live in the flesh, but in spirit should worship God, who is Spirit. He who is not so disposed, abuses the days, and does not keep the feast, but like an unthankful person finds fault with the grace, and honours the days overmuch, while he does not supplicate the Lord who in those days redeemed him. Let him by all means hear, though fancying that he keeps the feast, the Apostolic voice reproving him; ‘Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years: I fear lest I have laboured among you in vain 4078 .’
2. For the feast is not on account of the days; but for the Lord’s sake, who then suffered for us, we celebrate it, for ‘our Passover Christ, is sacrificed 4079 .’ Even as Moses, when teaching Israel not to consider the feast as pertaining to the days, but to the Lord, said, ‘It is the Lord’s Passover 4080 .’ To the Jews, when they thought they were keeping the Passover, because they persecuted the Lord, the feast was useless; since it no longer bore the name of the Lord, even according to their own testimony. It was not the Passover of the Lord, but that of the Jews 4081 . The Passover was named after the Jews, my brethren, because they denied the Lord of the Passover. On this account, the Lord, turning away His face from such a doctrine of theirs, saith, ‘Your new moons and your sabbaths My soul hateth 4082 .’
3. So now, those who keep the Passover in like manner, the Lord again reproves, as He did those lepers who were cleansed, when He loved the one as thankful, but was angry with the others as ungrateful, because they did not acknowledge their Deliverer, but thought more of the cure of the leprosy than of Him who healed them. ‘But one of them when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, and fell on his face at the feet of Jesus giving Him thanks; and he was a Samaritan. And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed? but those nine—whence are there none found who returned to give glory to God, but this stranger 4083 ?’ And there was more given to him than to the rest; for being cleansed from his leprosy, he heard from the Lord, ‘Arise, go thy way, thy faith hath saved thee 4084 .’ For he who gives thanks, and he who glorifies, have kindred feelings, in that they bless their Helper for the benefits they have received. So the Apostle exhorts all men to this, saying, ‘Glorify God with your body;’ and the prophet commands, saying, ‘Give glory to God.’ Although testimony was borne by Caiaphas 4085 against our Redeemer, and He was set at nought by the Jews, and was condemned by Pilate in those days, yet exalted exceedingly and most mighty was the voice of the Father which came to Him; ‘I have glorified, and will glorify again 4086 .’ For those things which He suffered for our sake have passed away; but those which belong to Him as the Saviour remain for ever.
4. But in our commemoration of these things, my brethren, let us not be occupied with meats, but let us glorify the Lord, let us become fools for Him who died for us, even as Paul said; ‘For if we are foolish, it is to God; or if we are sober-minded, it is to you; since because one died for all men, therefore all were dead to Him; and He died for all, that we who live should not henceforth live to ourselves, but to Him who died for us, and rose again 4087 .’ No longer then ought we to live to ourselves, but, as servants to the Lord. And not in vain should we receive the grace, as the time is especially an acceptable one 4088 , and the day of salvation hath dawned, even the death of our Redeemer 4089 . For even for our sakes the Word came down, and being incorruptible, put on a corruptible body for the salvation of all of us. Of which Paul was confident, saying, ‘This corruptible must put on incorruption 4090 .’ The Lord too was sacrificed, that by His blood He might abolish death. Full well did He once, in a certain place, blame those who participated vainly in the shedding of His blood, while they did not delight themselves in the flesh of the Word, saying, ‘What profit is there in my blood, that I go down to corruption 4091 ?’ This does not mean that the descent of the Lord was without profit, for it gained the whole world; but rather that after He had thus suffered, sinners would prefer to suffer loss than to profit by it. For He regarded our salvation as a delight and a peculiar gain; while on the contrary He looked upon our destruction as loss.
5. Also in the Gospel, He praises those who increased the grace twofold, both him who made ten talents of five, and him who made four talents of two, as those who had profited, and turned them to good account; but him who hid the talent He cast out as wanting, saying to him, ‘Thou wicked servant! oughtest thou not to have put My money to the exchangers? then at My coming I should have received Mine own with interest. Take, therefore, from him the talent, and give it to him that hath ten talents. For to every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have more abundantly; but from him that hath not, shall be taken away even that which he hath. And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth 4092 .’ For it is not His will that the grace we have received should be unprofitable; but He requires us to take pains to render Him His own fruits, as the blessed Paul saith; ‘The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, and peace 4093 .’ Having therefore this right resolution, and owing no man anything, but rather giving everything to every man, he was a teacher of the like rightness of principle, saying, ‘Render to all their dues 4094 .’ He was like those sent by the householder to receive the fruits of the vineyard from the husbandmen 4095 ; for he exhorted all men to render a return. But Israel despised and would not render, for their will was not right, nay moreover they killed those that were sent, and not even before the Lord of the vineyard were they ashamed, but even He was slain by them. Verily, when He came and found no fruit in them, He cursed them through the fig-tree, saying, ‘Let there be henceforth no fruit from thee 4096 ;’ and the fig-tree was dead and fruitless so that even the disciples wondered when it withered away.
6. Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the prophet; ‘I will take away from them the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the scent of myrrh, and the light of a lamp, and the whole land shall be destroyed 4097 .’ For the whole service of the law has been abolished from them, and henceforth and for ever they remain without a feast. And they observe not the Passover; for how can they? They have no abiding place, but they wander everywhere. And they eat unleavened bread contrary to the law, since they are unable first to sacrifice the lamb, as they were commanded to do when eating unleavened bread. But in every place they transgress the law, and as the judgments of God require, they keep days of grief instead of gladness. Now the cause of this to them was the slaying of the Lord, and that they did not reverence the Only-Begotten. At this time the altogether wicked heretics and ignorant schismatics are in the same case; the one in that they slay the Word, the other in that they rend the coat. They too remain expelled from the feast, because they live without godliness and knowledge, and emulate the conduct shewn in the matter of Bar-Abbas the robber, whom the Jews desired instead of the Saviour. Therefore the Lord cursed them under the figure of the fig-tree. Yet even thus He spared them in His loving-kindness, not destroying them root and all. For He did not curse the root, but [said], that no man should eat fruit of it thenceforth. When He did this, He abolished the shadow, causing it to wither; but preserved the root, so that we might [not] 4098 be grafted upon it; ‘they too, if they abide not in unbelief, may attain to be grafted into their own olive tree 4099 .’ Now when the Lord had cursed them because of their negligence, He removed from them the new moons, the true lamb, and that which is truly the Passover.
7. But to us it came: there came too the solemn day, in which we ought to call to the feast with a trumpet 4100 , and separate ourselves to the Lord with thanksgiving, considering it as our own festival 4101 . For we are bound to celebrate it, not to ourselves but to the Lord; and to rejoice, not in ourselves but in the Lord, who bore our griefs and said, ‘My soul is sorrowful unto death 4102 .’ For the heathen, and all those who are strangers to our faith, keep feasts according to their own wills, and have no peace, since they commit evil against God. But the saints, as they live to the Lord also keep the feast to Him, saying, ‘I will rejoice in Thy salvation,’ and, ‘my soul shall be joyful in the Lord.’ The commandment is common to them, ‘Rejoice, ye righteous, in the Lord 4103 ’—so that they also may be gathered together, to sing that common and festal Psalm, ‘Come, let us rejoice 4104 ,’ not in ourselves, but, ‘in the Lord.’
8. For thus the patriarch Abraham rejoiced not to see his own day, but that of the Lord; and thus looking forward ‘he saw it, and was glad 4105 .’ And when he was tried, by faith he offered up Isaac, and sacrificed his only-begotten son—he who had received the promises. And, in offering his son, he worshipped the Son of God. And, being restrained from sacrificing Isaac, he saw the Messiah in the ram 4106 , which was offered up instead as a sacrifice to God. The patriarch was tried, through Isaac, not however that he was sacrificed, but He who was pointed out in Isaiah; ‘He shall be led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers he shall be speechless 4107 ;’ but He took away the sin of the world. And on this account [Abraham] was restrained from laying his hand on the lad, lest the Jews, taking occasion from the sacrifice of Isaac, should reject the prophetic declarations concerning our Saviour, even all of them, but more especially those uttered by the Psalmist; ‘Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not; a body Thou hast prepared Me 4108 ;’ and should refer all such things as these to the son of Abraham.
9. For the sacrifice was not properly the setting to rights 4109 of Isaac, but of Abraham who also offered, and by that was tried. Thus God accepted the will of the offerer, but prevented that which was offered from being sacrificed. For the death of Isaac did not procure freedom to the world, but that of our Saviour alone, by whose stripes we all are healed 4110 . For He raised up the falling, healed the sick, satisfied those who were hungry, and filled the poor, and, what is more wonderful, raised us all from the dead; having abolished death, He has brought us from affliction and sighing to the rest and gladness of this feast, a joy which reacheth even to heaven. For not we alone are affected by this, but because of it, even the heavens rejoice with us, and the whole church of the firstborn, written in heaven 4111 , is made glad together, as the prophet proclaims, saying, ‘Rejoice, ye heavens, for the Lord hath had mercy upon Israel. Shout, ye foundations of the earth. Cry out with joy, ye mountains, ye high places, and all the trees which are in them, for the Lord hath redeemed Jacob, and Israel hath been glorified 4112 .’ And again; ‘Rejoice, and be glad, ye heavens; let the hills melt into gladness, for the Lord hath had mercy on His people, and comforted the oppressed of the people 4113 .’
10. The whole creation keeps a feast, my brethren, and everything that hath breath praises the Lord 4114 , as the Psalmist [says], on account of the destruction of the enemies, and our salvation. And justly indeed; for if there is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth 4115 , what should there not be over the abolition of sin, and the resurrection of the dead? Oh what a feast and how great the gladness in heaven! how must all its hosts joy and exult, as they rejoice and watch in our assemblies, those that are held continually, and especially those at Easter? For they look on sinners while they repent; on those who have turned away their faces, when they become converted; on those who formerly persisted in lusts and excess, but who now humble themselves by fastings and temperance; and, finally, on the enemy who lies weakened, lifeless, bound hand and foot, so that we may mock at him; ‘Where is thy victory, O Death? where is thy sting, O Grave 4116 ?’ Let us then sing unto the Lord a song of victory.
11. Who then will lead us to such a company of angels as this? Who, coming with a desire for the heavenly feast, and the angelic holiday, will say like the prophet, ‘I will pass to the place of the wondrous tabernacle, unto the house of God; with the voice of joy and praise, with the shouting of those who keep festival 4117 ?’ To this course the saints also encourage us, saying, ‘Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God of Jacob 4118 .’ But not for the impure is this feast, nor is the ascent thereto for sinners; but it is for the virtuous and diligent; and for those who live according to the aim of the saints; for, ‘Who shall ascend to the hill of the Lord? or who shall stand in His holy place, but he that hath clean hands, and a pure heart; who hath not devoted his soul to vanity, nor sworn deceitfully to his neighbour. For he,’ as the Psalmist adds, when he goes up, ‘shall receive a blessing from the Lord 4119 .’ Now this clearly also refers to what the Lord gives to them at the right hand, saying, ‘Come, ye blessed, inherit the kingdom prepared for you 4120 .’ But the deceitful, and he that is not pure of heart, and possesses nothing that is pure (as the Proverb saith, ‘To a deceitful man there is nothing good 4121 ’), shall assuredly, being a stranger, and of a different race from the saints, be accounted unworthy to eat the Passover, for ‘a foreigner shall not eat of it 4122 .’ Thus Judas, when he thought he kept the Passover, because he plotted deceit against the Saviour, was estranged from the city which is above, and from the apostolic company. For the law commanded the Passover to be eaten with due observance; but he, while eating it, was sifted of the devil 4123 , who had entered his soul.
12. Wherefore let us not celebrate the feast after an earthly manner, but as keeping festival in heaven with the angels. Let us glorify the Lord, by chastity, by righteousness, and other virtues. And let us rejoice, not in ourselves, but in the Lord, that we may be inheritors with the saints. Let us keep the feast then, as Moses. Let us watch like David who rose seven times, and in the middle of the night gave thanks for the righteous judgments of God. Let us be early, as he said, ‘In the morning I will stand before Thee, and Thou wilt look upon me: in the morning Thou wilt hear my voice 4124 .’ Let us fast like Daniel; let us pray without ceasing, as Paul commanded; all of us recognising the season of prayer, but especially those who are honourably married; so that having borne witness to these things, and thus having kept the feast, we may be able to enter into the joy of Christ in the kingdom of heaven 4125 . But as Israel, when going up to Jerusalem, was first purified in the wilderness, being trained to forget the customs of Egypt, the Word by this typifying to us the holy fast of forty days, let us first be purified and freed from defilement 4126 , so that when we depart hence, having been careful of fasting, we may be able to ascend to the upper chamber 4127 with the Lord, to sup with Him; and may be partakers of the joy which is in heaven. In no other manner is it possible to go up to Jerusalem, and to eat the Passover, except by observing the fast of forty days.
13. We begin the fast of forty days on the first day of the month Phamenoth (Feb. 25); and having prolonged it till the fifth of Pharmuthi (Mar. 31), suspending it upon the Sundays and the Saturdays 4128 preceding them, we then begin again on the holy days of Easter, on the sixth of Pharmuthi (Apr, 1), and cease on the eleventh of the same month (Apr. 6), late in the evening 4129 of the Saturday, whence dawns on us the holy Sunday, on the twelfth of Pharmuthi (Apr. 7), which extends its beams, with unobscured grace, to all the seven weeks of the holy Pentecost. Resting on that day, let us ever keep Easter joy in Christ Jesus our Lord, through Whom, to the Father, be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. All the brethren who are with me salute you. Salute one another with a holy kiss.
Here endeth the sixth Festal Letter of the holy and God-clad Athanasius.
Footnotes
519:4072The index gives still Paternus for Letters 6 and 7. On Philagrius, see p. 93, note 2.
519:4073Cf. i. 9, n. 12.
519:4074Deut. xvi. 1.
519:4075Nahum i. 15.
520:4076Luke 22:15, 16.
520:40771 Cor. v. 8.
520:4078Gal. 4:10, 11.
520:40791 Cor. v. 7.
520:4080Exod. xii. 11.
520:4081Cf. John vi. 4. ‘And the passover, a feast of the Jews, was nigh.’ Cf. Origenis Comment. in Joannem, tom. x. §11. p. 172. ed. 1759.
520:4082Is. i. 14.
520:4083Luke xvii. 15, &c.
520:4084Luke 17.19
520:40851 Cor. vi. 20; Is. xlii. 12; Matt. xxvi. 65.
520:4086John xii. 28.
520:40872 Cor. v. 13-15
520:40882 Cor. 6:1, 2.
520:4089Cf. S. Cyril. Hom. Pasch. xxiv. sub init.
520:40901 Cor. xv. 53.
520:4091Ps. xxx. 9.
521:4092Matt. xxv. 26-30
521:4093Gal. v. 22.
521:4094Rom. xiii. 7.
521:4095Matt. xxi. 33.
521:4096Matt. 21.19
521:4097Jer. xxv. 10.
521:4098The negative (which is here placed within brackets) is found in the Syriac text; but there is little doubt that it is an error.
521:4099Rom. xi. 23.
521:4100Cf. Letter i. S. Cyril, Hom. i. de Festis Pasch. vol. v. pt. 2, p. 6.
521:4101The Passover is no longer to be a feast of the Jews: it is to be celebrated by Christians as a festival of the Lord. Vid. §2. n. 10.
521:4102Matt. xxvi. 38.
521:4103Ps. 9:14, Ps. 35:9, Ps. 33:1Ps. ix. 14, xxxv. 9; Ib. xxxiii. 1.
521:4104Ps. xcv. 1.
522:4105John viii. 56; Heb. xi. 17.
522:4106Gen. xxii. 15. The Syriac, here rendered by ‘ram,’ is the usual word for sheep, common gender. It is the same word that is used directly after in the quotation from Isaiah, and rendered ‘lamb.’
522:4107Is. liii. 7.
522:4108Ps. xl. 6.
522:4109The phrase ‘setting to rights’ is used for want of one that would better express the meaning. The Syriac noun is that used to render διόρθωσις in Heb. ix. 10, from a verb ‘to make straight, set upright, or right.’
522:4110Is. liii. 5.
522:4111Heb. xii. 23.
522:4112Is. xliv. 23.
522:4113Is. xlix. 13.
522:4114Ps. cl. 6.
522:4115Luke xv. 7.
522:41161 Cor. xv. 55. Cf. Incarn. 27.
522:4117Ps. xlii. 4.
522:4118Is. ii. 3.
522:4119Ps. xxiv. 3.
522:4120Matt. xxv. 34.
522:4121Prov. xiii. 13, LXX.
523:4122Exod. xii. 43.
523:4123Cf. Luke xxii. 31.
523:4124Ps. v. 3.
523:4125A line or two is preserved here in the original Greek in Cosmas Topog. Christ. p. 316.
523:4126Gregory Nazianzen speaks of the Lenten fast as κάθαρσις προεόρτιος, vol. i. p. 715. §30. ed. Ben. fol. Par. 1778.
523:4127Cf. Luke xiv. 15
523:4128The Saturdays and Sundays during Lent were not observed as fasts, with the exception of the day before Easter-day. S. Ambrose says, Quadragesima tot’s præter Sabbatum et Dominicam jejunatur diebus. vol. i. p. 545, §34. ed. Par. 1686–90.
523:4129Cf. Dionys Alex. ad Basilid. in Routh Rell. Sac. iii. 226.
Letter VII.—For 335. Easter-day iv Pharmuthi, iii Kal. April; xx Moon; Ær. Dioclet. 51; Coss. Julius Constantius, the brother of Augustus, Rufinus Albinus; Præfect, the same Philagrius; viii Indict.
The blessed Paul 4130 wrote to the Corinthians 4131 that he always bore in his body the dying of Jesus, not as though he alone should make that boast, but also they and we too, and in this let us be followers of him, my brethren. And let this be the customary boast of all of us at all times. In this David participated, saying in the Psalms, ‘For thy sake we die all the day; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter 4132 .’ Now this is becoming in us, especially in the days of the feast, when a commemoration of the death of our Saviour is held. For he who is made like Him in His death, is also diligent in virtuous practices, having mortified his members which are upon the earth 4133 , and crucifying the flesh with the affections and lusts, he lives in the Spirit, and is conformed to the Spirit 4134 . He is always mindful of God, and forgets Him not, and never does the deeds of death. Now, in order that we may bear in our body the dying of Jesus, he immediately adds the way of such fellowship, saying, ‘we having the same spirit of faith, as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak 4135 .’ He adds also, speaking of the grace that arises from knowledge; ‘For He that raised up Jesus, will also raise us up with Jesus, and will present us before Him with you 4136 .’
2. When by such faith and knowledge the saints have embraced this true life, they receive, doubtless, the joy which is in heaven; for which the wicked not caring, are deservedly deprived of the blessedness arising from it. For, ‘let the wicked be taken away, so that he shall not see the glory of the Lord 4137 .’ For although, when they shall hear the universal proclamation of the promise, ‘Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead 4138 ,’ they shall rise and shall come even to heaven, knocking and saying, ‘Open to us 4139 ;’ nevertheless the Lord will reprove them, as those who put the knowledge of Himself far from them, saying, ‘I know you not.’ But the holy Spirit cries against them, ‘The wicked shall be turned into hell, even all the nations that forget God. 4140 .’ Now we say that the wicked are dead, but not in an ascetic life opposed to sin; nor do they, like the saints, bear about dying in their bodies. But it is the soul which they bury in sins and follies, drawing near to the dead, and satisfying it with dead nourishment; like young eagles which, from high places, fly upon the carcases of the dead, and which the law prohibited, commanding figuratively, ‘Thou shalt not eat the eagle, nor any other bird that feedeth on a dead carcase 4141 ;’ and it pronounced unclean whatsoever eateth the dead. But these kill the soul with lusts, and say nothing but, ‘let us eat and drink, for to morrow we die 4142 .’ And the kind of fruit those have who thus love pleasures, he immediately describes, adding, ‘And these things are revealed in the ears of the Lord of Hosts, that this sin shall not be forgiven you until ye die 4143 .’ Yea, even while they live they shall be ashamed, because they consider their belly their lord; and when dead, they shall be tormented, because they have made a boast of such a death. To this effect also Paul bears witness, saying, ‘Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats; but God shall destroy both it and them 4144 .’ And the divine word declared before concerning them; ‘The death of sinners is evil, and those who hate the righteous commit sin 4145 .’ For bitter is the worm, and grievous the darkness, which wicked men inherit.
3. But the saints, and they who truly practise virtue, ‘mortify their members which are upon the earth, fornication, uncleanness passions, evil concupiscence 4146 ;’ and, as the result of this, are pure and without spot, confiding in the promise of our Saviour, who said, ‘Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God 4147 .’ These, having become dead to the world, and renounced the merchandise of the world, gain an honourable death; for, ‘precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His saints 4148 .’ They are also able, preserving the Apostolic likeness, to say, ‘I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me 4149 .’ For that is the true life, which a man lives in Christ; for although they are dead to the world, yet they dwell as it were in heaven, minding those things which are above, as he who was a lover of such a habitation said, ‘While we walk on earth, our dwelling is in heaven 4150 .’ Now those who thus live, and are partakers in such virtue, are alone able to give glory to God, and this it is which essentially constitutes a feast and a holiday 4151 . For the feast does not consist in pleasant intercourse at meals, nor splendour 4152 of clothing, nor days of leisure, but in the acknowledgment of God, and the offering of thanksgiving and of praise to Him 4153 . Now this belongs to the saints alone, who live in Christ; for it is written, ‘The dead shall not praise Thee, O Lord, neither all those who go down into silence; but we who live will bless the Lord, from henceforth even for ever 4154 .’ So was it with Hezekiah, who was delivered from death, and therefore praised God, saying, ‘Those who are in hades cannot praise Thee; the dead cannot bless Thee; but the living shall bless Thee, as I also do 4155 .’ For to praise and bless God belongs to those only who live in Christ, and by means of this they go up to the feast; for the Passover is not of the Gentiles, nor of those who are yet Jews in the flesh; but of those who acknowledge the truth in Christ 4156 , as he declares who was sent to proclaim such a feast; ‘Our Passover, Christ, is sacrificed 4157 .’
4. Therefore, although wicked men press forward to keep the feast, and as at a feast praise God, and intrude into the Church of the saints, yet God expostulates, saying to the sinner, ‘Why dost thou talk of My ordinances?’ And the gentle Spirit rebukes them, saying, ‘Praise is not comely in the mouth of a sinner 4158 .’ Neither hath sin any place in common with the praise of God; for the sinner has a mouth speaking perverse things, as the Proverb saith, ‘The mouth of the wicked answereth evil things 4159 .’ For how is it possible for us to praise God with an impure mouth? since things which are contrary to each other cannot coexist. For what communion has righteousness with iniquity? or, what fellowship is there between light and darkness? So exclaims Paul, a minister of the Gospel 4160 .
Thus it is that sinners, and all those who are aliens from the Catholic Church, heretics, and schismatics, since they are excluded from glorifying (God) with the saints, cannot properly even continue observers of the feast. But the righteous man, although he appears dying to the world, uses boldness of speech, saying, ‘I shall not die, but live, and narrate all Thy marvelous deeds 4161 .’ For even God is not ashamed to be called the God 4162 of those who truly mortify their members which are upon the earth 4163 , but live in Christ; for He is the God of the living, not of the dead. And He by His living Word quickeneth all men, and gives Him to be food and life to the saints; as the Lord declares, ‘I am the bread of life 4164 .’ The Jews, because they were weak in perception, and had not exercised the senses of the soul in virtue, and did not comprehend this discourse about bread, murmured against Him, because He said, ‘I am the bread which came down from heaven, and giveth life unto men 4165 .’
5. For sin has her own special bread, of her death, and calling to those who are lovers of pleasure and lack understanding, she saith, ‘Touch with delight secret bread, and sweet waters which are stolen 4166 ;’ for he who merely touches them knows not that that which is born from the earth perishes with her. For even when the sinner thinks to find pleasure, the end of that food is not pleasant, as the Wisdom of God saith again, ‘Bread of deceit is pleasant to a man; but afterwards his mouth shall be filled with gravel 4167 .’ And, ‘Honey droppeth from the lips of a whorish woman, which for a time is sweet to thy palate; but at the last thou shalt find it more bitter than gall, and sharper than a two-edged sword 4168 .’ Thus then he eats and rejoices for a little time; afterwards he spurneth it when he hath removed his soul afar. For the fool knoweth not that those who depart far from God shall perish. And besides, there is the restraint of the prophetic admonition which says, ‘What hast thou to do in the way of Egypt, to drink the waters of Gihon? And what hast thou to do in the way of Asshur, to drink the waters of the rivers 4169 ?’ And the Wisdom of God which loves mankind forbids these things, crying, ‘But depart quickly, tarry not in the place, neither fix thine eye upon it; for thus thou shalt pass over strange waters, and depart quickly from the strange river 4170 .’ She also calls them to herself, ‘For wisdom hath builded her house, and supported it on seven pillars; she hath killed her sacrifices, and mingled her wine in the goblets, and prepared her table; she hath sent forth her servants, inviting to the goblet with a loud proclamation, and saying, Whoso is foolish, let him turn in to me; and to them that lack understanding she saith, Come, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine I have mingled for you 4171 .’ And what hope is there instead of these things? ‘Forsake folly that ye may live, and seek understanding that ye may abide 4172 .’ For the bread of Wisdom is living fruit, as the Lord said; ‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever 4173 .’ For when Israel ate of the manna, which was indeed pleasant and wonderful, yet he died, and he who ate it did not in consequence live for ever, but all that multitude died in the wilderness. The Lord teaches, saying, ‘I am the bread of life: your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead. This is the bread which came down from heaven, that a man should eat thereof, and not die 4174 .’
6. Now wicked men hunger for bread like this, for effeminate souls will hunger; but the righteous alone, being prepared, shall be satisfied, saying, ‘I shall behold Thy face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied when Thy glory is seen by me 4175 .’ For he who partakes of divine bread always hungers with desire; and he who thus hungers has a never-failing gift, as Wisdom promises, saying, ‘The Lord will not slay the righteous soul with famine.’ He promises too in the Psalms, ‘I will abundantly bless her provision; I will satisfy her poor with bread.’ We may also hear our Saviour saying, ‘Blessed are they who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled 4176 .’ Well then do the saints and those who love the life which is in Christ raise themselves to a longing after this food. And one earnestly implores, saying, ‘As the hart panteth after the fountains of waters, so panteth my soul after Thee, O God! My soul thirsteth for the living God, when shall I come and see the face of God?’ And another; ‘My God, my God, I seek Thee early; my soul thirsteth for Thee; often does my flesh, in a dry and pathless land, and without water. So did I appear before Thee in holiness to see Thy power and Thy glory 4177 .’
7. Since these things are so, my brethren, let us mortify our members which are on the earth 4178 , and be nourished with living bread, by faith and love to God, knowing that without faith it is impossible to be partakers of such bread as this. For our Saviour, when He called all men to him, and said, ‘If any man thirst, let him [come] to Me and drink 4179 ,’ immediately spoke of the faith without which a man cannot receive such food; ‘He that believeth on Me, as the Scripture saith, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water 4180 .’ To this end He continually nourished His believing disciples with His words, and gave them life by the nearness of His divinity, but to the Canaanitish woman, because she was not yet a believer, He deigned not even a reply, although she stood greatly in need of food from Him. He did this not from scorn, far from it (for the Lord is loving to men and good, and on that account He went into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon); but because of her unbelief, and because she was of those who had not the word. And He did it righteously, my brethren; for there would have been nothing gained by her offering her supplication before believing, but by her faith she would support her petition; ‘For He that cometh to God, must first believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that seek Him;’ and that ‘without faith it is impossible for a man to please Him 4181 .’ This Paul teaches. Now that she was hitherto an unbeliever, one of the profane, He shews, saying, ‘It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and to cast it to dogs 4182 .’ She then, being convinced by the power of the word, and having changed her ways, also gained faith; for the Lord no longer spoke to her as a dog, but conversed with her as a human being, saying, ‘O woman, great is thy faith 4183 !’ As therefore she believed, He forthwith granted to her the fruit of faith, and said, ‘Be it to thee as thou desirest. And her daughter was healed in the self-same hour.’
8. For the righteous man, being nurtured in faith and knowledge, and the observance of divine precepts, has his soul always in health. Wherefore it is commanded to ‘receive to ourselves him who is weak in the faith 4184 ,’ and to nourish him, even if he is not yet able to eat bread, but herbs, ‘for he that is weak eateth herbs.’ For even the Corinthians were not able to partake of such bread, being yet babes, and like babes they drank milk. ‘For every one that partaketh of milk is unskilful in the word of righteousness 4185 ,’ according to the words of that divine man. The Apostle exhorts his beloved son Timothy, in his first Epistle, ‘to be nourished with the word of faith, and the good doctrine whereto he had attained.’ And in the second, ‘Preserve thou the form of sound words which thou hast heard of me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus 4186 .’ And not only here, my brethren, is this bread the food of the righteous, neither are the saints on earth alone nourished by such bread and such blood; but we also eat them in heaven, for the Lord is the food even of the exalted spirits, and the angels, and He is the joy of all the heavenly host 4187 . And to all He is everything, and He has pity upon all according to His loving-kindness. Already hath the Lord given us angels’ food 4188 , and He promises to those who continue with Him in His trials, saying, ‘And I promise to you a kingdom, as My Father hath promised to Me; that ye shall eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel 4189 .’ O what a banquet is this, my brethren, and how great is the harmony and gladness of those who eat at this heavenly table! For they delight themselves not with that food which is cast out, but with that which produces life everlasting. Who then shall be deemed worthy of that assembly? Who is so blessed as to be called, and accounted worthy of that divine feast? Truly, ‘blessed is he who shall eat bread in Thy kingdom 4190 .’
9. Now he who has been counted worthy of the heavenly calling, and by this calling has been sanctified, if he grow negligent in it, although washed becomes defiled: ‘counting the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a profane thing, and despising the Spirit of grace,’ he hears the words, ‘Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having wedding garments?’ For the banquet of the saints is spotless and pure; ‘for many are called, but few chosen 4191 .’ Judas to wit, though he came to the supper, because he despised it went out from the presence of the Lord, and having abandoned his Life 4192 , hanged himself. But the disciples who continued with the Redeemer shared in the happiness of the feast. And that young man who went into a far country, and there wasted his substance, living in dissipation, if he receive a desire for this divine feast, and, coming to himself, shall say, ‘How many hired servants of my father have bread to spare, while I perish here with hunger!’ and shall next arise and come to his father, and confess to him, saying, ‘I have sinned against heaven and before thee, and am not worthy to be called thy son; make me as one of thy hired servants 4193 ;’—when he shall thus confess, then he shall be counted worthy of more than he prayed for. For the father does not receive him as a hired servant, neither does he look upon him as a stranger, but he kisses him as a son, he brings him back to life as from the dead, and counts him worthy of the divine feast, and gives him his former and precious robe. So that, on this account, there is singing and gladness in the paternal home.
10. For this is the work of the Father’s loving-kindness and goodness, that not only should He make him alive from the dead, but that He should render His grace illustrious through the Spirit. Therefore, instead of corruption, He clothes him with an incorruptible garment; instead of hunger, He kills the fatted calf; instead of far journeys, [the Father] watched for his return, providing shoes for his feet; and, what is most wonderful, placed a divine signet-ring upon his hand; whilst by all these things He begot him afresh in the image of the glory of Christ. These are the gracious gifts of the Father, by which the Lord honours and nourishes those who abide with Him, and also those who return to Him and repent. For He promises, saying, ‘I am the bread of life; he that cometh unto Me shall not hunger, and he that believeth on Me shall never thirst 4194 .’ We too shall be counted worthy of these things, if at all times we cleave to our Saviour, and if we are pure, not only in these six days of Easter 4195 , but consider the whole course of our life as a feast 4196 , and continue near and do not go far off, saying to Him, ‘Thou hast the words of eternal life, and whither shall we go 4197 ?’ Let those of us who are far off return, confessing our iniquities, and having nothing against any man, but by the spirit mortifying the deeds of the body 4198 . For thus, having first nourished the soul here, we shall partake with angels at that heavenly and spiritual table; not knocking and being repulsed like those five foolish virgins 4199 , but entering with the Lord, like those who were wise and loved the bridegroom; and shewing the dying of Jesus in our bodies 4200 , we shall receive life and the kingdom from Him.
11. We begin the fast of forty days on the twenty-third of Mechir (Feb. 17), and the holy fast of the blessed feast on the twenty-eighth of Phamenoth (Mar. 24); and having joined to these six days after them, in fastings and watchings, as each one is able, let us rest on the third of the month Pharmuthi (Mar. 29), on the evening of the seventh day. Also that day which is holy and blessed in everything, which possesses the name of Christ, namely the Lord’s day 4201 , having risen upon us on the fourth of Pharmuthi (Mar. 30), let us afterwards keep the holy feast of Pentecost. Let us at all times worship the Father in Christ, through Whom to Him and with Him be glory and dominion by the Holy Ghost for ever and ever. Amen. All the brethren who are with me salute you: salute one another with a holy kiss.
There is no eighth or ninth, for he did not send them, for the reason before mentioned 4202 .
Here endeth the seventh Festal Letter of holy Athanasius the Patriarch.
Footnotes
523:4130The twentieth Letter, as far as it is extant, bears a great resemblance with this. In both, the comparison between natural and spiritual food is enlarged upon, and several of the same quotations are adduced in them, to illustrate the character of sinners and their food, as contrasted with righteous, and the nourishment they derive from God.
523:41312 Cor. iv. 10.
523:4132Ps. xliv. 22.
523:4133Col. iii. 5.
523:4134Gal. v. 25.
523:41352 Cor. iv. 13.
523:41362 Cor. 4.14, reading with R.V. marg. and Vulg. against Text. Rec. and Pesh.
524:4137Is. xxvi. 10 (LXX.).
524:4138Eph. v. 14.
524:4139Matt. xxv. 11.
524:4140Luke xiii. 25; Ps. ix. 17.
524:4141Lev. xi. 13.
524:4142Is. xxii. 13.
524:4143Isa. 22.14
524:41441 Cor. vi. 13.
524:4145Ps. xxxiv. 21.
524:4146Col. iii. 5.
524:4147Matt. v. 8.
524:4148Ps. cxvi. 15.
524:4149Gal. ii. 20.
524:4150The quotation is uncertain, but see ad Diognet. v. 9; cf. also Phil. iii. 20, with which the passage in the text is coupled, and ascribed to ‘the Apostle,’ in the probably spurious Homily on Matt. xxi. 2 (Migne xxviii. p. 177).
524:4151Cf. Letter iii. ‘What else is the feast, but the service of God?’
524:4152Cf. 1 Tim. ii. 9 sub fin.
524:4153Cf. Letter vi. 3, note 14.
524:4154Ps. 15:17, 18.
524:4155Is. xxxviii. 18.
524:4156Vid. Letter vi. 2, note 10.
524:41571 Cor. v. 7.
524:4158Ps. 50:16, Sir. 15:9Ps. l. 16; Ecclus. xv. 9. These two texts are also quoted in juxta-position, supr. p. 224.
524:4159Prov. xv. 28.
524:41602 Cor. vi. 14.
525:4161Ps. cxviii. 17.
525:4162Cf. Heb. xi. 16
525:4163Cf. Col. iii. 5
525:4164John vi. 48.
525:4165John 6.51
525:4166Prov. ix. 17.
525:4167Prov. 20.17.
525:4168Prov. 5.3.
525:4169Jer. ii. 18.
525:4170Prov. ix. 18, LXX.
525:4171Prov. ix. 1-5.
525:4172Prov. 9.6
525:4173John vi. 51.
525:4174John 6.48-51.
525:4175Ps. xvii. 15.
525:4176Prov. x. 3; Matt. v. 6; Ps. cxxxii. 15, he notices the various reading of the LXX, on the latter, Exp. in Ps. in loc.
525:4177Ps. xlii. 1; lxiii. 1, 2.
525:4178Col. iii. 5.
526:4179John vii. 37.
526:4180John 7.38
526:4181Heb. xi. 6.
526:4182Matt. xv. 26.
526:4183Matt. 15.28
526:4184Rom. xiv. 1.
526:41851 Cor. iii. 1; Heb. v. 13.
526:41861 Tim. iv. 6; 2 Tim. i. 13.
526:4187Cf. Letter i. 6.
526:4188Cf. Ps. lxxviii. 25.
526:4189Luke 22:29, 30.
526:4190Luke 14.15.
526:4191Heb. 10:29, Matt. 22:12, 14Heb. x. 29; Matt. xxii. 12; Ib. 14.
526:4192Cf. Col. iii. 4
526:4193Luke xv. 17.
527:4194John vi. 35.
527:4195Vid. Suicer. Thes. in. voc. ἀποκρέως, and the notes of Valesius on Euseb. Orat. in laud. Constant. ch. ix. With us, Easter-week includes the six days following Easter-Sunday; with the Greeks, the ἐβδομὰς τῶν πασχῶν was applied to the preceding six days, as here.
527:4196Vid. supr. Letters 5. 1, 7, 3. init.
527:4197John vi. 68.
527:4198Rom. viii. 13.
527:4199Matt. xxv. 1-12.
527:42002 Cor. iv. 10.
527:4201κυριώνυμος—κυριακὴ L. Vid. Suicer Thes. sub. voc. κυριακὴ. Expos. in Psalm. cxvii. 24.
527:4202See the Index. This notice suggests that the present collection of letters has undergone a recension since its union with the Index.
Letter X.—For 338. Coss. Ursus and Polemius; Præf. the same Theodorus, of Heliopolis, and of the Catholics 4203 . After him, for the second year, Philagrius; Indict. xi; Easter-day, vii Kal. Ap. 4204 xxx Phamenoth; Moon 18½; Æra Dioclet. 54.
4205 Although I have travelled all this distance from you, my brethren, I have not forgotten the custom which obtains among you, which has been delivered to us by the fathers 4206 , so as to be silent without notifying to you the time of the annual holy feast, and the day for its celebration. For although I have been hindered by those afflictions of which you have doubtless heard, and severe trials have been laid upon me, and a great distance has separated us; while the enemies of the truth have followed our tracks, laying snares to discover a letter from us, so that by their accusations, they might add to the pain of our wounds; yet the Lord, strengthening and comforting us in our afflictions, we have not feared, even when held fast in the midst of such machinations and conspiracies, to indicate and make known to you our saving Easter-feast, even from the ends of the earth. Also when I wrote to the presbyters of Alexandria, I urged that these letters might be sent to you through their instrumentality, although I knew the fear imposed on them by the adversaries. Still, I exhorted them to be mindful of the apostolic boldness of speech, and to say, ‘Nothing separates us from the love of Christ; neither affliction, nor distress, nor persecution, nor famine, nor nakedness, nor peril, nor sword 4207 .’ Thus, keeping the feast myself, I was desirous that you also, my beloved, should keep it; and being conscious that an announcement like this is due from me, I have not delayed to discharge this duty, fearing to be condemned by the Apostolic counsel; ‘Render to every man his due 4208 .’
2. While I then committed all my affairs to God, I was anxious to celebrate the feast with you, not taking into account the distance between us. For although place separate us, yet the Lord the Giver of the feast, and Who is Himself our feast 4209 , Who is also the Bestower of the Spirit 4210 , brings us together in mind, in harmony, and in the bond of peace 4211 . For when we mind and think the same things, and offer up the same prayers on behalf of each other, no place can separate us, but the Lord gathers and unites us together. For if He promises, that ‘when two or three are gathered together in His name, He is in the midst of them 4212 ,’ it is plain that being in the midst of those who in every place are gathered together, He unites them, and receives the prayers of all of them, as if they were near, and listens to all of them, as they cry out the same Amen 4213 . I have 4214 borne affliction like this, and all those trials which I mentioned, my brethren, when I wrote to you.
3. And that we may not distress you at all, I would now (only) briefly remind you of these things, because it is not becoming in a man to forget, when more at ease, the pains he experienced in tribulation; lest, like an unthankful and forgetful person, he should be excluded from the divine assembly. For at no time should a man freely praise God, more than when he has passed through afflictions; nor, again, should he at any time give thanks more than when he finds rest from toil and temptations. As Hezekiah, when the Assyrians perished, praised the Lord, and, gave thanks, saying, ‘The Lord is my salvation 4215 ; and I will not cease to bless Thee with harp all the days of my life, before the house of the Lord 4216 .’ And those valiant and blessed three who were tried in Babylon, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, when they were in safety and the fire became to them as dew, gave thanks, praising and ‘saying words of glory to God 4217 .’ I too like them have written, my brethren, having these things in mind; for even in our time, God hath made possible those things which are impossible to men. And those things which could not be accomplished by man, the Lord has shewn to be easy of accomplishment, by bringing us to you. For He does not give us as a prey to those who seek to swallow us up. For it is not so much us, as the Church, and the faith and godliness which they planned to overwhelm with wickedness.
4. But God, who is good, multiplied His loving-kindness towards us, not only when He granted the common salvation of us all through His Word, but now also, when enemies have persecuted us, and have sought to seize upon us. As the blessed Paul saith in a certain place, when describing the incomprehensible riches of Christ: ‘But God, being rich in mercy, for the great love wherewith He loved us, even when we were dead in follies and sins, quickened us with Christ 4218 .’ For the might of man and of all creatures, is weak and poor; but the Might which is above man, and uncreated, is rich and incomprehensible, and has no beginning, but is eternal. He does not then possess one method only of healing, but being rich, He works in divers manners for our salvation by means of His Word, Who is not restricted or hindered in His dealings towards us; but since He is rich and manifold, He varies Himself according to the individual capacity of each soul. For He is the Word and the Power and the Wisdom of God, as Solomon testifies concerning Wisdom, that ‘being one, it can do all things, and remaining in itself, it maketh all things new; and passing upon holy souls, fashioneth the friends of God and the prophets 4219 .’ To those then who have not yet attained to the perfect way He becomes like a sheep giving milk, and this was administered by Paul: ‘I have fed you with milk, not with meat 4220 .’ To those who have advanced beyond the full stature of childhood, but still are weak as regards perfection, He is their food, according to their capacity, being again administered by Paul 4221 , ‘Let him that is weak eat herbs.’ But as soon as ever a man begins to walk in the perfect way, he is no longer fed with the things before mentioned, but he has the Word for bread, and flesh for food, for it is written, ‘Strong meat is for those who are of full age, for those who, by reason of their capacity, have their senses exercised 4222 .’ And further, when the word is sown it does not yield a uniform produce of fruit in this human life, but one various and rich; for it bringeth forth, some an hundred, and some sixty, and some thirty 4223 , as the Saviour teaches—that Sower of grace, and Bestower of the Spirit 4224 . And this is no doubtful matter, nor one that admits no confirmation; but it is in our power to behold the field which is sown by Him; for in the Church the word is manifold and the produce 4225 rich. Not with virgins alone is such a field adorned; nor with monks alone, but also with honourable matrimony and the chastity of each one. For in sowing, He did not compel the will beyond the power. Nor is mercy confined to the perfect, but it is sent down also among those who occupy the middle and the third ranks, so that He might rescue all men generally to salvation. To this intent He hath prepared many mansions 4226 with the Father, so that although the dwelling-place is various in proportion to the advance in moral attainment, yet all of us are within the wall, and all of us enter within the same fence, the adversary being cast out, and all his host expelled thence. For apart from light there is darkness, and apart from blessing there is a curse, the devil also is apart from the saints, and sin far from virtue. Therefore the Gospel rebukes Satan, saying, ‘Get thee behind Me, Satan 4227 .’ But us it calls to itself, saying, ‘Enter ye in at the strait gate.’ And again, ‘Come, blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom which is prepared for you 4228 .’ So also the Spirit cried aforetime in the Psalms, saying, ‘Enter into His gates with psalms 4229 .’ For through virtue a man enters in unto God, as Moses did into the thick cloud where God was. But through vice a man goes out from the presence of the Lord; as Cain 4230 when he had slain his brother, went out, as far as his will was concerned, from before the face of God; and the Psalmist enters, saying, ‘And I will go in to the altar of God, even to the God that delighteth my youth 4231 .’ But of the devil the Scripture beareth witness, that the devil went out from before God, and smote Job 4232 with sore boils. For this is the characteristic of those who go out from before God—to smite and to injure the men of God. And this is the characteristic of those who fall away from the faith—to injure and persecute the faithful. The saints on the other hand, take such to themselves and look upon them as friends; as also the blessed David, using openness of speech, says, ‘Mine eyes are on the faithful of the earth, that they may dwell with me.’ But those that are weak in the faith 4233 , Paul urges that we should especially take to ourselves. For virtue is philanthropic 4234 , just as in men of an opposite character, sin is misanthropic. So Saul, being a sinner, persecuted David, whereas David, though he had a good opportunity, did not kill Saul. Esau too persecuted Jacob, while Jacob overcame his wickedness by meekness. And those eleven sold Joseph, but Joseph, in his loving-kindness, had pity on them.
5. But what need we many words? Our Lord and Saviour, when He was persecuted by the Pharisees, wept for their destruction. He was injured, but He threatened 4235 not; not when He was afflicted, not even when He was killed. But He grieved for those who dared to do such things. He, the Saviour, suffered for man, but they despised and cast from them life, and light, and grace. All these were theirs through that Saviour Who suffered in our stead. And verily for their darkness and blindness, He wept. For if they had understood the things which are written in the Psalms, they would not have been so vainly daring against the Saviour, the Spirit having said, ‘Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?’ And if they had considered the prophecy of Moses, they would not have hanged Him Who was their Life 4236 . And if they had examined with their understanding the things which were written, they would not have carefully fulfilled the prophecies which were against themselves, so as for their city to be now desolate, grace taken from them, and they themselves without the law, being no longer called children, but strangers. For thus in the Psalms was it before declared, saying, ‘The strange children have acted falsely by Me.’ And by Isaiah the prophet; ‘I have begotten and brought up children, and they have rejected Me. 4237 ’ And they are no longer named the people of God, and a holy nation, but rulers of Sodom, and people of Gomorrah; having exceeded in this even the iniquity of the Sodomites, as the prophet also saith, ‘Sodom is justified before thee 4238 .’ For the Sodomites raved against angels, but these against the Lord and God and King of all, and these dared to slay the Lord of angels, not knowing that Christ, who was slain by them, liveth. But those Jews who had conspired against the Lord died, having rejoiced a very little in these temporal things, and having fallen away from those which are eternal. They were ignorant of this—that the immortal promise has not respect to temporal enjoyment, but to the hope of those things which are everlasting. For through many tribulations, and labours, and sorrows, the saint enters into the kingdom of heaven; but when he arrives where sorrow, and distress, and sighing, shall flee away, he shall thenceforward enjoy rest; as Job, who, when tried here, was afterwards the familiar friend of the Lord. But the lover of pleasures, rejoicing for a little while, afterwards passes a sorrowful life; like Esau, who had temporal food, but afterwards was condemned thereby.
6. We may take as a type of this distinction, the departure of the children of Israel and the Egyptians from Egypt. For the Egyptians, rejoicing a little while in their injustice against Israel, when they went forth, were all drowned in the deep; but the people of God, being for a time smitten and injured, by the conduct of the taskmasters, when they came out of Egypt, passed through the sea unharmed, and walked in the wilderness as an inhabited place. For although the place was unfrequented by man and desolate, yet, through the gracious gift of the law, and through converse with angels, it was no longer desert, but far more than an inhabited country. As also Elisha 4239 , when he thought he was alone in the wilderness, was with companies of angels; so in this case, though the people were at first afflicted and in the wilderness, yet those who remained faithful afterwards entered the land of promise. In like manner those who suffer temporal afflictions here, finally having endured, attain comfort, while those who here persecute are trodden under foot, and have no good end. For even the rich man 4240 , as the Gospel affirms, having indulged in pleasure here for a little while, suffered hunger there, and having drunk largely here, he there thirsted exceedingly. But Lazarus, after being afflicted in worldly things, found rest in heaven, and having hungered for bread ground from corn, he was there satisfied with that which is better than manna, even the Lord who came down and said, ‘I am the bread which came down from heaven, and giveth life to mankind 4241 .’
7. Oh! my dearly beloved, if we shall gain comfort from afflictions, if rest from labours, if health after sickness, if from death immortality, it is not right to be distressed by the temporal ills that lay hold on mankind. It does not become us to be agitated because of the trials which befall us. It is not right to fear if the gang that contended with Christ, should conspire against godliness; but we should the more please God through these things, and should consider such matters as the probation and exercise of a virtuous life. For how shall patience be looked for, if there be not previously labours and sorrows? Or how can fortitude be tested with no assault from enemies? Or how shall magnanimity be exhibited, unless after contumely and injustice? Or how can long-suffering be proved, unless there has first been the calumny of Antichrist 4242 ? And, finally, how can a man behold virtue with his eyes, unless the iniquity of the very wicked has previously appeared? Thus even our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ comes before us, when He would shew men how to suffer, Who when He was smitten bore it patiently, being reviled He reviled not again, when He suffered He threatened not, but He gave His back to the smiters, and His cheeks to buffetings, and turned not His face from spitting 4243 ; and at last, was willingly led to death, that we might behold in Him the image of all that is virtuous and immortal, and that we, conducting ourselves after these examples, might truly tread on serpents and scorpions, and on all the power of the enemy 4244 .
8. Thus too Paul, while he conducted himself after the example of the Lord, exhorted us, saying, ‘Be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ 4245 .’ In this way he prevailed against all the divisions of the devil, writing, ‘I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Jesus Christ 4246 .’ For the enemy draws near to us in afflictions, and trials, and labours, using every endeavour to ruin us. But the man who is in Christ, combating those things that are contrary, and opposing wrath by long-suffering, contumely by meekness, and vice by virtue, obtains the victory, and exclaims, ‘I can do all things through Christ Who strengtheneth me;’ and, ‘In all these things we are conquerors through Christ Who loved us 4247 .’ This is the grace of the Lord, and these are the Lord’s means of restoration for the children of men. For He suffered to prepare freedom from suffering for those who suffer in Him, He descended that He might raise us up, He took on Him the trial of being born, that we might love Him Who is unbegotten, He went down to corruption, that corruption might put on immortality, He became weak for us, that we might rise with power, He descended to death, that He might bestow on us immortality, and give life to the dead. Finally, He became man, that we who die as men might live again, and that death should no more reign over us; for the Apostolic word proclaims, ‘Death shall not have the dominion over us 4248 .’
9. Now because they did not thus consider these matters, the Ario-maniacs 4249 , being opponents of Christ, and heretics, smite Him who is their Helper with their tongue, and blaspheme Him who set [them] free, and hold all manner of different opinions against the Saviour. Because of His coming down, which was on behalf of man, they have denied His essential Godhead; and seeing that He came forth from the Virgin, they doubt His being truly the Son of God, and considering Him as become incarnate in time, they deny His eternity; and, looking upon Him as having suffered for us, they do not believe in Him as the incorruptible Son from the incorruptible Father. And finally, because He endured for our sakes, they deny the things which concern His essential eternity; allowing the deed of the unthankful, these despise the Saviour, and offer Him insult instead of acknowledging His grace. To them may these words justly be addressed: Oh! unthankful opponent of Christ, altogether wicked, and the slayer of his Lord, mentally blind, and a Jew in his mind, hadst thou understood the Scriptures, and listened to the saints, who said, ‘Cause Thy face to shine, and we shall be saved;’ or again, ‘Send out Thy light and Thy truth 4250 ;’—then wouldest thou have known that the Lord did not descend for His own sake, but for ours; and for this reason, thou wouldest the more have admired His loving kindness. And hadst thou considered what the Father is, and what the Son, thou wouldest not have blasphemed the Son, as of a mutable nature 4251 . And hadst thou understood His work of loving-kindness towards us, thou wouldest not have alienated the Son from the Father, nor have looked upon Him as a stranger 4252 , Who reconciled us to His Father. I know these [words] are grievous, not only to those who dispute with Christ 4253 , but also to the schismatics; for they are united together, as men of kindred feelings. For they have learned to rend the seamless coat 4254 of God: they think it not strange to divide the indivisible Son from the Father 4255 .
10. I know indeed, that when these things are spoken, they will gnash their teeth upon us, with the devil who stirs them up, since they are troubled by the declaration of the true glory concerning the Redeemer. But the Lord, Who always has scoffed at the devil, does the same even now, saying, ‘I am in the Father, and the Father in Me 4256 .’ This is the Lord, Who is manifested in the Father, and in Whom also the Father is manifested; Who, being truly the Son of the Father, at last became incarnate for our sakes, that He might offer Himself to the Father in our stead, and redeem us through His oblation and sacrifice. This is He Who once brought the people of old time out of Egypt; but Who afterwards redeemed all of us, or rather the whole race of men, from death, and brought them up from the grave. This is He Who in old time was sacrificed as a lamb, He being signified in the lamb; but Who afterwards was slain for us, for ‘Christ our Passover is sacrificed 4257 .’ This is He Who delivered us from the snare of the hunters, from the opponents of Christ, I say, and from the schismatics, and again rescued us His Church. And because we were then victims of deceit, He has now delivered us by His own self.
11. What then is our duty, my brethren, for the sake of these things, but to praise and give thanks to God, the King of all? And let us first exclaim in the words of the Psalms, ‘Blessed be the Lord, Who hath not given us over as a prey to their teeth 4258 .’ Let us keep the feast in that way which He hath dedicated for us unto salvation—the holy day Easter—so that we may celebrate the feast which is in heaven with the angels. Thus anciently, the people of the Jews, when they came out of affliction into a state of ease, kept the feast, staging a song of praise for their victory. So also the people in the time of Esther, because they were delivered from the edict of death, kept a feast to the Lord 4259 , reckoning it a feast, returning thanks to the Lord, and praising Him for having changed their condition. Therefore let us, performing our vows to the Lord, and confessing our sins, keep the feast to the Lord, in conversation, moral conduct, and manner of life; praising our Lord, Who hath chastened us a little, but hath not utterly failed nor forsaken us, nor altogether kept silence from us. For if, having brought us out of the deceitful and famous Egypt of the opponents of Christ, He hath caused us to pass through many trials and afflictions, as it were in the wilderness, to His holy Church, so that from hence, according to custom, we can send to you, as well as receive letters from you; on this account especially I both give thanks to God myself, and exhort you to thank Him with me and on my behalf, this being the Apostolic custom, which these opponents of Christ, and the schismatics, wished to put an end to, and to break off. The Lord did not permit it, but both renewed and preserved that which was ordained by Him through the Apostle, so that we may keep the feast together, and together keep holy-day, according to the tradition and commandment of the fathers.
12. We begin the fast of forty days on the nineteenth of the month Mechir (Feb. 13); and the holy Easter-fast on the twenty-fourth of the month Phamenoth (Mar. 20). We cease from the fast on the twenty-ninth of the month Phamenoth (Mar. 25), late in the evening of the seventh day. And we thus keep the feast on the first day of the week which dawns on the thirtieth of the month Phamenoth (Mar. 26); from which, to Pentecost, we keep holy-day, through seven weeks, one after the other. For when we have first meditated properly on these things, we shall attain to be counted worthy of those which are eternal, through Christ Jesus our Lord, through Whom to the Father be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. Greet one another with a holy kiss, remembering us in your holy prayers. All the brethren who are with me salute you, at all times remembering you. And I pray that ye may have health in the Lord, my beloved brethren, whom we love above all.
Here endeth the tenth Letter of holy Athanasius.
Footnotes
527:4203The text is difficult; possibly the Syriac translator is responsible for the difficulty. But we know from Ath. (supr. p. 273) that the reappointment of Philagrius was in the express interest of the Arians: it is, therefore, probable that Theodorus was not unfavourable to Athanasius. See Prolegg. ch. ii. §6 (1), and Sievers, pp. 101, 102.
527:4204In the Chron. Pasch. tom. ii. p. 202, Easter-day is wrongly given as falling on viii. Kal. Ap.
527:4205See Prolegg. ch. v. §3 b. The letter may have been finished (see §§3, 11) after Ath. had returned home, but the language of §1 seems to be applicable only to his residence at Treveri, and §11 may be reconciled to this supposition. In this case (§1 sub. fin.) it was probably begun as early as the Easter of 337; cf. Letters 17 and 18.
527:4206See above, p. 500.
528:4207Rom. viii. 35.
528:4208Rom. xiii. 7; cf. Ep. iii. init.
528:4209Cf. 1 Cor. v. 7
528:4210Cf. Orat. i. 50; ii. 18; Luke xi. 13.
528:4211Cf. Eph. iv. 3
528:4212Matt. xviii. 20.
528:4213Cf. Apol. Const. 16.
528:4214Thus far Athan. has been referring to the circumstances attending his exile for the last two years. The principal subject of the remaining part consists of the duty incumbent on us to praise and thank God for deliverance from affliction, and to exercise forgiveness towards our enemies. He several times (e.g. §§3, 10) speaks of his restoration to the Church of Alexandria.
528:4215The Syriac translator must have found in the Greek copy the reading of the Codex Alex. Κύριε—the rendering of ‘Jehovah,’ not that of the Vatican text. Θεέ
528:4216Is. xxxviii. 20.
528:4217‘Song of Three Children,’ 25–28.
528:4218Eph. 2:4, 5.
528:4219Wisd. vii. 27; cf. Ep. i.
528:42201 Cor. iii. 2.
528:4221Rom. xiv. 2. The sense in the last few lines, and in those that follow, is clear, though the construction appears somewhat obscure. Milks, herbs, and meat are severally mentioned in connection with the different advances made in the Christian course. The translation of Larsow is less satisfactory.
529:4222Heb. v. 14.
529:4223Matt. xiii. 8. In the Syriac text, as published by Mr. Cureton, as well as in the German translation by Larsow, there is a hiatus, here, the next two or three pages, as far as the words ‘He wept,’ (§5 init.) being wanting. Two more leaves were afterwards discovered among the fragments in the British Museum by the learned Editor. One of them belongs to this part; the other to the eleventh Letter.
529:4224Vid. note 9, supr.
529:4225Syr. ‘virtue,’ a letter (rish) having been inserted by mistake.
529:4226John xiv. 2.
529:4227Matt. iv. 10.
529:4228Matt. vii. 13; xxv. 34.
529:4229Ps. c. 4.
529:4230Gen. iv. 16; Exod. xix. 9.
529:4231Ps. xliii. 4.
529:4232Job ii. 7. In the ms. Jesus is written by mistake for Job.
529:4233Ps. ci. 6; Rom. xiv. 1.
529:4234Cf. Letter xi. sub. init.
529:4235The Syriac is ‘was persecuted’—which supplies no good sense.
529:4236Ps. ii. 1; Deut. xxviii. 66.
529:4237Ps. xviii. 45; Is. i. 2.
530:4238Ezek. 16:48, Lam. 4:6Ezek. xvi. 48, cf. Lam. iv. 6.
530:4239The reference is to 2 Kings vi. 13-17, though ‘the wilderness’ agrees better with the history of Elijah, 1 Kings xix. 4-8.
530:4240Luke xvi. 19.
530:4241John vi. 51.
530:4242i.e. Arians. See Index to this vol. s.v.
530:42431 Pet. ii. 23; Isa. l. 6.
530:4244Cf. Pseudo-Ath. de Pass. et Cruc. 19.
530:42451 Cor. xi. 1.
530:4246Rom. 8:38, 39.
531:4247Phil. iv. 13; Rom. viii. 37.
531:4248Rom. 6:9, 14, cf. de Pass. et Cruc. 11.
531:4249The Syriac mistranslates Arius and Manetes.
531:4250Ps. xliii. 3, lxxx. 7.
531:4251Cf. Orat. i. 35; ii. 6, and notes there.
531:4252Cf. supr. p. 70.
531:4253i.e. the Arians.
531:4254Syr. χιτών. The words translated ‘rend’ and ‘seamless’ are cognate in the Syriac, and answer to σχίζειν and its derivatives.
531:4255The Arians were thence called Διατομῖται. Vid. Damascen. de hæresib. apud Cotel. eccles. Gr. monum. p. 298.
531:4256John xiv. 11.
531:42571 Cor. v. 7.
531:4258Ps. cxxiv. 6.
531:4259Cf. Esth. 3:9, Esth. 9:21; Letter iv. p. 32.
Letter XI.—For 339. Coss. Constantius Augustus II, Constans I; Præfect, Philagrius the Cappadocian, for the second time; Indict. xii; Easter-day xvii Kal. Mai, xx Pharmuthi; Æra Dioclet. 55.
The blessed Paul, being girt about with every virtue 4260 , and called faithful of the Lord—for he was conscious of nothing in himself but what was a virtue and a praise 4261 , or what was in harmony with love and godliness—clave to these things more and more, and was carried up even to heavenly places, and was borne to Paradise 4262 ; to the end that, as he surpassed the conversation of men, he should be exalted above men. And when he descended, he preached to every man; ‘We know in part, and we prophesy in part; here I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known 4263 .’ For, in truth, he was known to those saints who are in heaven, as their fellow-citizen 4264 . And in relation to all that is future and perfect, the things known by him here were in part; but with respect to those things which were committed and entrusted to him by the Lord, he was perfect; as he said, ‘We who are perfect, should be thus minded 4265 .’ For as the Gospel of Christ is the fulfilment and accomplishment of the ministration which was supplied by the law of Israel, so future things will be the accomplishment of such as now exist, the Gospel being then fulfilled, and the faithful receiving those things which, not seeing now, they yet hope for, as Paul saith; ‘For what a man seeth, why doth he also hope for? But if we hope for those things we see [not], we then by patience wait for them 4266 .’ Since then that blessed man was of such a character, and apostolic grace was committed to him, he wrote, wishing ‘that all men should be as he was 4267 .’ For virtue is philanthropic 4268 , and great is the company of the kingdom of heaven, for thousands of thousands and myriads of myriads there serve the Lord. And though a man enters it through a strait and narrow way, yet having entered, he beholds immeasurable space, and a place greater than any other, as they declare, who were eye-witnesses and heirs of these things. ‘Thou didst place afflictions before us.’ But afterwards, having related their afflictions, they say, ‘Thou broughtest us forth into a wide place;’ and again, ‘In affliction Thou hast enlarged us 4269 .’ For truly, my brethren, the course of the saints here is straitened; since they either toil painfully through longing for those things which are to come, as he who said, ‘Woe is me that my pilgrimage is prolonged 4270 ;’ or they are distressed and spent for the salvation of other men, as Paul wrote to the Corinthians, saying, ‘Lest, when I come to you, God should humble me, and I should bewail many of those who have sinned already, and not repented for the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed 4271 .’ As Samuel bewailed the destruction of Saul, and Jeremiah wept for the captivity of the people. But after this affliction, and sorrow, and sighing, when they depart from this world, a certain divine gladness, and pleasure, and exultation receives them, from which misery and sorrow, and sighing, flee away.
2. Since we are thus circumstanced, my brethren, let us never loiter in the path of virtue; for hereto he counsels us, saying, ‘Be ye followers of me, as I also am of Christ 4272 .’ For he gave this advice not to the Corinthians only, since he was not their Apostle only, but being ‘a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity 4273 ,’ he admonished us all through them; and in short, the things he wrote to each particular person are commandments common to all men 4274 . On this account in writing to different people, some he exhorted as, for instance, in the Epistles to the Romans, and the Ephesians, and Philemon. Some he reproved, and was indignant with them, as in the case of the Corinthians and Galatians. To some he gave advice, as to the Colossians and Thessalonians. The Philippians he approved of, and rejoiced in them. The Hebrews he taught that the law was a shadow to them 4275 . But to his elect sons, Timothy and Titus, when they were near, he gave instruction; when far away, he put them in remembrance. For he was all things to all men; and being himself a perfect man, he adapted his teaching to the need of every one, so that by all means he might rescue some of them. Therefore his word was not without fruit; but in every place it is planted and productive even to this day.
3. And wherefore, my beloved? For it is right that we should search into the apostolic mind. Not only in the beginning of the Epistles, but towards their close, and in the middle of them, he used persuasions and admonitions. I hope therefore that, by your prayers, I shall in no respect falsely represent the plan of that holy man. As he was well skilled in these divine matters, and knew the power of the divine teaching, he deemed it necessary, in the first place, to make known the word concerning Christ, and the mystery regarding Him; and then afterwards to point to the correction of habits, so that when they had learned to know the Lord, they might earnestly desire to do those things which He commanded. For when the Guide to the laws is unknown, one does not readily pass on to the observance of them. Faithful Moses, the minister of God, adopted this method; for when he promulgated the words of the divine dispensation of laws, he first proclaimed the matters relating to the knowledge of God: ‘Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one Lord 4276 .’ Afterwards, having shadowed Him forth to the people, and taught of Him in Whom they ought to believe, and informed their minds of Him Who is truly God, he proceeds to lay down the law relating to those things whereby a man may be well-pleasing to Him, saying, ‘Thou shalt not commit adultery; thou shalt not steal;’ together with the other commandments. For also, according to the Apostolic teaching, ‘He that draweth near to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that seek Him 4277 .’ Now He is sought by means of virtuous deeds, as the prophet saith; ‘Seek ye the Lord, and when ye have found Him, call upon Him; when He is near to you, let the wicked forsake his ways, and the lawless man his thoughts 4278 .’
4. It will also be well if a man is not offended at the testimony of the Shepherd, saying in the beginning of his book, ‘Before all things believe that there is one God, Who created and established all these things, and from non-existence called them into being 4279 .’ And, further, the blessed Evangelists—who recorded the words of the Lord—in the beginning of the Gospels, wrote the things concerning our Saviour; so that, having first made known the Lord, the Creator, they might be believed when narrating the events that took place. For how could they have been believed, when writing respecting him who [was blind] from his mother’s womb, and those other blind men who recovered their sight, and those who rose from the dead, and the changing of water into wine, and those lepers who were cleansed; if they had not taught of Him as the Creator, writing, ‘In the beginning was the Word 4280 ?’ Or, according to Matthew, that He Who was born of the seed of David, was Emmanuel, and the Son of the living God? He from Whom the Jews, with the Arians, turn away their faces, but Whom we acknowledge and worship. The Apostle therefore, as was meet, sent to different people, but his own son he especially reminded, ‘that he should not despise the things in which he had been instructed by him,’ and enjoined on him, ‘Remember Jesus Christ, who rose from the dead, of the seed of David, according to my Gospel 4281 .’ And speaking of these things being delivered to him, to be always had in remembrance, he immediately writes to him, saying, ‘Meditate on these things: be engaged in them. 4282 ’ For constant meditation, and the remembrance of divine words, strengthens piety towards God, and produces a love to Him inseparable and not merely formal 4283 ; as he, being of this mind, speaks about himself and others like-minded, saying boldly, ‘Who shall separate us from the love of God 4284 ?’ For 4285 such men, being confirmed in the Lord, and possessing an unshaken disposition towards Him, and being one in spirit (for 4286 ‘he who is joined to the Spirit is one spirit’), are sure ‘as the mount Sion;’ and although ten thousand trials may rage against them, they are founded upon a rock, which is Christ 4287 . In Him the careless take no delight; and having no continuous purpose of good, they are sullied by temporal attacks, and esteem nothing more highly than present things, being unstable and deserving reproof as regards the faith. For ‘either the care of this world, or the deceitfulness of riches, chokes them 4288 ;’ or, as Jesus said in that parable which had reference to them, since they have not established the faith that has been preached to them, but continue only for a time, immediately, in time of persecution, or when affliction ariseth through the word, they are offended. Now those who meditate evil we say, [think] not truth, but falsehood and not righteousness, but iniquity, for their tongue learns to speak lies. They have done evil, and have not ceased that they might repent. For, persevering with delight in wicked actions, they hasten thereto without turning back, even treading under foot the commandment with regard to neighbours, and, instead of loving them, devise evil against them, as the saint testifies, saying, ‘And those who seek me evil have spoken vanity, and imagined deceit all the day 4289 .’ But that the cause of such meditation is none other than the want of instruction, the divine proverb has already declared; ‘The son that forsaketh the commandment of his father meditateth evil words 4290 .’ But such meditation, because it is evil, the Holy Spirit blames in these words, and reproves too in other terms, saying, ‘Your hands are polluted with blood, your fingers with sins; your lips have spoken lawlessness, and your tongue imagineth iniquity: no man speaketh right things, nor is there true judgment 4291 .’ But what the end is of such perverse imagining, He immediately declares, saying, ‘They trust in vanities and speak falsehood; for they conceive mischief, and bring forth lawlessness. They have hatched the eggs of an asp, and woven a spider’s web; and he who is prepared to eat of their eggs, when he breaks them finds gall, and a basilisk therein 4292 .’ Again, what the hope of such is, He has already announced. ‘Because righteousness does not overtake them, when they waited for light, they had darkness; when they waited for brightness, they walked in a thick cloud. They shall grope for the wall like the blind, and as those who have no eyes shall they grope; they shall fall at noon-day as at midnight; when dead, they shall groan. They shall roar together as a bear, or as a dove 4293 .’
This is the fruit of wickedness, these rewards are given to its familiars, for perverseness does not deliver its own. But in truth, against them it sets itself, and it tears them first, and on them especially it summons ruin. Woe to them against whom these are brought; for ‘it is sharper than a two-edged sword 4294 ,’ slaying beforehand and very swiftly those who will lay hold of it. For their tongue, according to the testimony of the Psalmist, is a ‘sharp sword, and their teeth spears and arrows 4295 .’ But the wonderful part is that while often he against whom men imagine [harm] suffers nothing, they are pierced by their own spears: for they possess, even in themselves, before they reach others, anger, wrath, malice, guile, hatred, bitterness. Although they may not be able to bring these upon others, they forthwith return upon and against themselves, as he prays, saying, ‘Let their sword enter into their own heart.’ There is also such a proverb as this: ‘The wicked is held fast by the chain of his sins 4296 .’
5. The Jews in their imaginings, and in their agreeing to act unjustly against the Lord, forgot that they were bringing wrath upon themselves. Therefore does the Word lament for them, saying, ‘Why do the people exalt themselves, and the nations imagine vain things 4297 ?’ For vain indeed was the imagination of the Jews, meditating death against the Life 4298 , and devising unreasonable things against the ‘Word of the Father 4299 .’ For who that looks upon their dispersion, and the desolation of their city, may not aptly say, ‘Woe unto them, for they have imagined an evil imagination, saying against their own soul, let us bind the righteous man, because he is not pleasing to us 4300 .’ And full well is it so, my brethren; for when they erred concerning the Scriptures, they knew not that ‘he who diggeth a pit for his neighbour falleth therein; and he who destroyeth a hedge, a serpent shall bite him 4301 .’ And if they had not turned their faces from the Lord, they would have feared what was written before in the divine Psalms: ‘The heathen are caught in the pit which they made; in the snare which they hid is their own foot taken. The Lord is known when executing judgments: by the works of his hands is the sinner taken 4302 .’ Let them observe this, and how that ‘the snare they know not shall come upon them, and the net they hid take them 4303 .’ But they understood not these things, for had they done so, ‘they would not have crucified the Lord of glory 4304 .’
6. Therefore the righteous and faithful servants of the Lord, who ‘are made disciples for the kingdom of heaven, and bring forth from it things new and old;’ and who ‘meditate on the words of the Lord, when sitting in the house, when lying down or rising up, and when walking by the way 4305 ;’—since they are of good hope because of the promise of the Spirit which said, ‘Blessed is the man that hath not walked in the counsel of the ungodly, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of corrupters; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and in His law doth he meditate day and night 4306 ;’—being grounded in faith, rejoicing in hope, fervent in spirit, they have boldness to say, ‘My mouth shall speak wisdom, and the meditation of my heart shall be of understanding.’ And again, ‘I have meditated on all Thy works, and on the work of Thy hands has been my meditation.’ And, ‘If I have remembered Thee on my bed, and in the morning have meditated on Thee 4307 .’ Afterwards, advancing in boldness, they say, ‘The meditation of my heart is before Thee at all times 4308 .’ And what is the end of such an one? He cites immediately; ‘The Lord is my Helper and my Redeemer 4309 .’ For to those who thus examine themselves, and conform their hearts to the Lord, nothing adverse shall happen; for indeed, their heart is strengthened by confidence in the Lord, as it is written, ‘They who trust in the Lord are as mount Sion: he who dwelleth in Jerusalem shall not be moved for ever 4310 .’ For if at any time, the crafty one shall be presumptuously bold against them, chiefly that he may break the rank of the saints, and cause a division among brethren; even in this the Lord is with them, not only as an avenger on their behalf, but also when they have already been beaten, as a deliverer for them. For this is the divine promise; ‘The Lord shall fight for you 4311 .’ Henceforth, although afflictions and trials from without overtake them, yet, being fashioned after the apostolic words, and ‘being stedfast in tribulations, and persevering in prayers 4312 ’ and in meditation on the law, they stand against those things which befall them, are well-pleasing to God, and give utterance to the words which are written, ‘Afflictions and distresses are come upon me; but Thy commandments are my meditation 4313 .’
7. And whereas, not only in action, but also in the thoughts of the mind, men are moved to deeds of virtue, he afterwards adds, saying, ‘Mine eyes prevent the dawn, that I might meditate on Thy words 4314 .’ For it is meet that the spiritual meditations of those who are whole should precede their bodily actions. And does not our Saviour, when intending to teach this very thing begin with the thoughts of the mind? saying, ‘Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath already committed adultery:’ and, ‘Whosoever shall be angry with his brother, is guilty of murder 4315 .’ For where there is no wrath, murder is prevented; and where lust is first removed, there can be no accusation of adultery. Hence meditation on the law is necessary, my beloved, and uninterrupted converse with virtue, ‘that the saint may lack nothing, but be perfect to every good work 4316 .’ For by these things is the promise of eternal life, as Paul wrote to Timothy, calling constant meditation exercise, and saying, ‘Exercise thyself unto godliness; for bodily exercise profiteth little; but godliness is profitable for all things, since it has the promise of the present life, and of that which is eternal 4317 .’
8. Worthy of admiration is the virtue of that man, my brethren! for through Timothy he enjoins upon all 4318 , that they should have regard to nothing more than to godliness, but above everything to adjudge the chief place to faith in God. For what grace has the unrighteous man, though he may feign to keep the commandments? Nay rather, the unrighteous man is unable even to keep a portion of the law, for as is his mind, such of necessity must be his actions; as the Spirit says, reproving such; ‘The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God.’ After this the Word, shewing that actions correspond with thoughts, says, ‘They are corrupt; they are profane in their machinations 4319 .’ The unrighteous man then, in every respect corrupts his body; stealing, committing adultery, cursing, being drunken, and doing such like things. Even as Jeremiah, the prophet, convicts Israel of these things, crying out and saying, ‘Oh, that I had a lodge far off in the wilderness! then would I leave my people and depart from them: for they are all adulterers, an assembly of oppressors, who draw out their tongue as a bow; lying and not truth has prevailed upon the earth, and they proceed from iniquities to iniquities; but Me they have not known 4320 .’ Thus, for wickedness and falsehood, and for deeds, in which they [proceed] from iniquity to iniquity, he reproves their practices; but, because they knew not the Lord, and were faithless, he charges them with unrighteousness.
9. For faith and godliness are allied to each other, and sisters; and he who believes in Him is godly, and he also who is godly, believes the more 4321 . He therefore who is in a state of wickedness, undoubtedly also wanders from the faith; and he who falls from godliness, falls from the true faith. Paul, for instance, bearing testimony to the same point, advises his disciple, saying, ‘Avoid profane conversations; for they increase unto more ungodliness, and their word takes hold as doth a canker, of whom are Hymenæus and Philetus 4322 .’ In what their wickedness consisted he declares, saying, ‘Who have erred from the faith, saying that the resurrection is already past 4323 .’ But again, desirous of shewing that faith is yoked with godliness, the Apostle says, ‘And all those who will live godly in Jesus Christ shall suffer persecution 4324 .’ Afterwards, that no man should renounce godliness through persecution, he counsels them to preserve the faith, adding, ‘Thou, therefore, continue in the things thou hast learned, and hast been assured of 4325 .’ And as when brother is helped by brother, they become as a wall to each other; so faith and godliness, being of like growth, hang together, and he who is practised in the one, of necessity is strengthened by the other. Therefore, wishing the disciple to be exercised in godliness unto the end, and to contend for the faith, he counsels them, saying, ‘Fight the good fight of faith, and lay hold on eternal life 4326 .’ For if a man first put away the wickedness of idols, and rightly confesses Him Who is truly God, he next fights by faith with those who war against Him.
10. For of these two things we speak of—faith and godliness—the hope is the same, even everlasting life; for he saith, ‘Fight the good fight of faith; lay hold on eternal life.’ And, ‘exercise thyself unto godliness, for it hath the promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come 4327 .’ For this cause, the Ario-maniacs, who now have gone out from the Church, being opponents of Christ, have digged a pit of unbelief, into which they themselves have been thrust; and, since they have advanced in ungodliness, they ‘overthrow the faith of the simple 4328 ;’ blaspheming the Son of God, and saying that He is a creature, and has His being from things which are not. But as then against the adherents of Philetus and Hymenæus, so now the Apostle forewarns all men against ungodliness like theirs, saying, ‘The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are His; and, Let every one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity 4329 .’ For it is well that a man should depart from wickedness and deeds of iniquity, that he may be able properly to celebrate the feast; for he who is defiled with the pollutions of the wicked is not able to sacrifice the Passover to the Lord our God. Hence, the people who were then in Egypt said, ‘We cannot sacrifice the Passover in Egypt to the Lord our God 4330 .’ For God, Who is over all, willed that they should go far away from the servants of Pharaoh, and from the furnace of iron; so that being set free from wickedness, and having carefully put away from them all strange notions, they might receive the knowledge of God and of virtuous actions. For He saith, ‘Go far from them: depart from the midst of them, and touch not the unclean things 4331 .’ For a man will not otherwise depart from sin, and lay hold on virtuous deeds, than by meditation on his acts; and when he has been practised by exercise in godliness, he will lay hold on the confession of faith 4332 , which also Paul, after he had fought the fight, possessed, namely, the crown of righteousness which was laid up; which the righteous Judge will give, not to him alone, but to all who are like him.
11. For such meditation and exercise in godliness, being at all times the habit of the saints, is urgent on us at the present time, when the divine word desires us to keep the feast with them if we are in this disposition. For what else is the feast, but the constant worship of God, and the recognition of godliness, and unceasing prayers from the whole heart with agreement? So Paul wishing us to be ever in this disposition, commands, saying, ‘Rejoice evermore; pray without ceasing; in everything give thanks 4333 .’ Not therefore separately, but unitedly and collectively, let us all keep the feast together, as the prophet exhorts, saying, ‘O come, let us rejoice in the Lord; let us make a joyful noise unto God our Saviour 4334 .’ Who then is so negligent, or who so disobedient to the divine voice, as not to leave everything, and run to the general and common assembly of the feast? which is not in one place only, for not one place alone keeps the feast; but ‘into all the earth their song has gone forth, and to the ends of the world their words.’ And the sacrifice is not offered in one place, but ‘in every nation, incense and a pure sacrifice is offered unto God 4335 .’ So when in like manner from all in every place, praise and prayer shall ascend to the gracious and good Father, when the whole Catholic Church which is in every place, with gladness and rejoicing, celebrates together the same worship to God, when all men in common send up a song of praise and say, Amen 4336 ; how blessed will it not be, my brethren! who will not, at that time, be engaged, praying rightly? For the walls of every adverse power, yea even of Jericho especially, falling down, and the gift 4337 of the Holy Spirit being then richly poured upon all men, every man perceiving the coming of the Spirit shall say, ‘We are all filled in the morning with Thy favour, and we rejoice and are made glad in our days 4338 .’
12. Since this is so, let us make a joyful noise with the saints, and let no one of us fail of his duty in these things; counting as nothing the affliction or the trials which, especially at this time, have been enviously directed against us by the party of Eusebius. Even now they wish to injure us, and by their accusations to compass our death, because of that godliness, whose helper is the Lord. But, as faithful servants of God, knowing that He is our salvation in the time of trouble:—for our Lord promised beforehand, saying, ‘Blessed are ye when men revile you and persecute you, and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for My sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for your reward is great in heaven 4339 .’ Again, it is the Redeemer’s own word, that affliction shall not befall every man in this world, but only those who have a holy fear of Him:—on this account, the more the enemies hem us in, the more let us be at liberty; although they revile us, let us come together; and the more they would turn us aside from godliness, let us the more boldly preach it saying, ‘All these things are come upon us, yet have we not forgotten Thee 4340 ,’ and we have not done evil with the Ario-maniacs, who say that Thou hast existence from those things that exist not. The Word which is eternally with the Father, is also from Him.
13. Let us therefore keep the feast, my brethren, celebrating it not at all as an occasion of distress and mourning, neither let us mingle with heretics through temporal trials brought upon us by godliness. But if anything that would promote joy and gladness should offer, let us attend to it; so that our heart may not be sad, like that of Cain; but that, like faithful and good servants of the Lord, we may hear the words, ‘Enter into the joy of thy Lord 4341 .’ For we do not institute days of mourning and sorrow, as some may consider these of Easter to be, but we keep the feast, being filled with joy and gladness. We keep it then, not regarding it after the deceitful error of the Jews, nor according to the teaching of the Arians, which takes away the Son from the Godhead, and numbers Him among creatures; but we look to the correct doctrine we derive from the Lord. For the guile of the Jews, and the unbounded impiety of the Arians, cause nothing but sad reflections, for the former at the beginning slew the Lord; but these latter take away His position of having conquered that death to which the Jews brought Him, in that they say He is not the Creator, but a creature. For if He were a creature, He would have been holden by death; but if He was not holden by death, according to the Scriptures, He is not a creature, but the Lord of the creatures, and the subject 4342 of this immortal feast.
14. For the Lord of death would abolish death, and being Lord, what He would was accomplished; for we have all passed from death unto life. But the imagination of the Jews, and of those who are like them, was vain, since the result was not such as they contemplated, but turned out adverse to themselves; and ‘at both of them He that sitteth in the heaven shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision 4343 .’ Hence, when our Saviour was led to death, He restrained the women who followed Him weeping, saying, ‘Weep not for Me 4344 ;’ meaning to shew that the Lord’s death is an event, not of sorrow but of joy, and that He Who dies for us is alive. For He does not derive His being from those things which are not, but from the Father. It is truly a subject of joy, that we can see the signs of victory against death, even our own incorruptibility, through the body of the Lord. For since He rose gloriously, it is clear that the resurrection of all of us will take place; and since His body remained without corruption, there can be no doubt regarding our incorruption 4345 . For as by one man 4346 , as saith Paul (and it is the truth), sin passed upon all men, so by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, we shall all rise. ‘For,’ he says, ‘this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality 4347 .’ Now this came to pass in the time of the Passion, in which our Lord died for us, for ‘our Passover, Christ, is sacrificed 4348 .’ Therefore, because He was sacrificed, let each of us feed upon Him, and with alacrity and diligence partake of His sustenance; since He is given to all without grudging, and is in every one ‘a well of water flowing to everlasting life 4349 .’
15. We begin the fast of forty days on the ninth of the month Phamenoth (Mar. 5); and having, in these days, served the Lord with abstinence, and first purified ourselves 4350 , we commence also the holy Easter on the fourteenth of the month Pharmuthi (April 9). Afterwards, extending the fast to the seventh day, on the seventeenth 4351 of the month, let us rest late in the evening. And the light of the Lord having first dawned upon us, and the holy Sunday on which our Lord rose shining upon us, we should rejoice and be glad with the joy which arises from good works, during the seven weeks which remain—to Pentecost—giving glory to the Father, and saying, ‘This is the day which the Lord hath made: we will rejoice and be glad in it, 4352 ’ through our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, through Whom to the same, and to His Father, be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. Salute one another with a holy kiss. All the brethren who are with me salute you. That ye may have health in the Lord, I pray, brethren beloved.
Here endeth the eleventh Letter of holy Athanasius.
Footnotes
532:4260Cf. Eph. vi. 14
532:4261Cf. 1 Cor. iv. 4
532:42622 Cor. xii. 4.
532:42631 Cor. 13:9, 12.
532:4264Cf. Eph. ii. 19
532:4265Phil. iii. 15.
532:4266Rom. 8:24, 25.
532:42671 Cor. vii. 7.
532:4268Cf. Letter 10, §4.
532:4269Ps. 66:11, 12; iv. 1.
532:4270Psa. 120.5, LXX.
533:42712 Cor. xii. 21.
533:42721 Cor. xi. 1.
533:42731 Tim. ii. 7.
533:4274Cf. Letter ii. §1, and Letter iii. §5.
533:4275Vid. Letter vii. 8, note 17.
533:4276Deut. vi. 4.
533:4277Heb. xi. 6.
533:4278Isa. 55:6, 7.
533:4279Herm. Mand. 1.
533:4280John i. 1.
533:42812 Tim. iii. 14; ii. 8.
534:42821 Tim. iv. 15.
534:4283The Syriac word here rendered not merely formal is one which stems to take no other meaning than ‘inexpiable’—a sense scarcely admissible in this place. The Greek was probably ἀγαπὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν ἀχώριστον καὶ οὐκ ἀφοσιουμένην. This supposition would account for the Syriac misapprehension of the word.
534:4284Rom. viii. 35.
534:4285The Syriac text from here to the words, ‘There is also such a proverb as this’ (end of §), was discovered after Cureton’s edition of the Syriac, and is absent in Larsow.
534:42861 Cor. vi. 17.
534:4287Ps. cxxv. 1; 1 Cor. x. 4; Matt. vii. 25
534:4288Matt. xiii. 22.
534:4289Ps. xxxviii. 12.
534:4290Prov. xix. 27, LXX.
534:4291Isa. 59:3, 4.
534:4292Isa. 59:4, 5.
534:4293Isa. 59.9-11.
534:4294Heb. iv. 12.
534:4295Ps. lvii. 4.
534:4296Ps. 37:15, Prov. 5:22Prov. v. 22.
534:4297Ps. ii. 1.
534:4298The parallel clause of this sentence would seem to determine that by ‘Life’ here we must understand Christ.
534:4299ἄλογα κατὰ τοῦ Λόγου τοῦ Πατρός. Cf. Suicer. Thes. s.v. ῎Αλογος tom. i. p. 199.
535:4300Isa. 3:9, 10, Wis. 2:12Isa. 3:9, 10, LXX.; cf. Wisd. ii. 12.
535:4301Eccl. x. 8.
535:4302Ps. ix. 15.
535:4303Psa. 35.8.
535:43041 Cor. ii. 8.
535:4305Matt. xiii. 52; Deut. vi. 7.
535:4306Ps. i. 1.
535:4307Ps. 49:3, Ps. 143:5, Ps. 63:6.
535:4308Psa. 19.14.
535:4309Psa. 19.14
535:4310Psa. 125.1, LXX.
535:4311Exod. xiv. 14.
535:4312Rom. xii. 12.
535:4313Ps. cxix. 143.
535:4314Psa. 119.148.
535:4315Matt. 5:28, 22.
535:43162 Tim. iii. 17.
535:43171 Tim. 4:7, 8.
535:4318Cf. Letter 3, §3, note 17; Apol. Const. 26.
536:4319Ps. 14:1, 2.
536:4320Jer. ix. 2.
536:4321Cf. John vii. 17
536:43222 Tim. 2:16, 17.
536:43232 Tim. 2.18.
536:43242 Tim. 3.12.
536:43252 Tim. 3.14.
536:43261 Tim. iv. 7.
536:43271 Tim. 4:7, 8.
536:4328Rom. xvi. 18.
536:43292 Tim. ii. 19.
536:4330Exod. viii. 26.
536:43312 Cor. vi. 17.
536:4332The Syriac appears to be a translation of κρατήσει τῆς ὁμολογίας τῆς πίστεως (cf. Heb. iv. 14).
537:43331 Thess. v. 16-18
537:4334Ps. xcv. 1.
537:4335Ps. 19:4, Mal. 1:11Mal. i. 11.
537:4336For a parallel passage to this, vid. Letter x. 2.
537:4337Cf. Letter x. 2, note 9. Vid. also John vii. 39; Rom. v. 5; John xx. 22
537:4338Ps. xc. 14, LXX.
537:4339Matt. 5:11, 12.
537:4340Ps. xliv. 17.
537:4341Matt. xxv. 21.
537:4342Syr. ὑπόθεσις. Cf. Letter x. 2, note 8.
537:4343Ps. ii. 4.
537:4344Luke xxiii. 28.
538:4345Cf. de Incarn. §50.
538:4346Rom. v. 12.
538:43471 Cor. xv. 53.
538:43481 Cor. 5.7.
538:4349John iv. 14.
538:4350Cf. Letter vi. 11.
538:4351Read ‘nineteenth.
538:4352Ps. cxviii. 24.
*XII.—(Probably for 340 a.d.) To the Beloved Brother, and our fellow Minister Serapion 4353 .
Thanks be to Divine Providence for those things which, at all times, it vouchsafes to us; for it has vouchsafed to us now to come to the season of the festival. Having, therefore, according to custom, written the Letter respecting the festival, I have sent it to you, my beloved; that through you all the brethren may be able to know the day of rejoicing. But because some Meletians, being come from Syria, have boasted that they had received what does not belong to them, I mean, that they also were reckoned in the Catholic Church; on this account, I have sent to you a copy of one letter of our fellow-ministers who are of Palestine, that when it reaches you, you may know the fraud of the pretenders in this matter. For because they boasted, as I have said before, it was necessary for me to write to the Bishops who are in Syria, and immediately those of Palestine sent us a reply, having agreed in 4354 the judgment against them, as you may learn from this example. That you may not have to consider the letters of all the Bishops one after the other, I have sent you one, which is of like character with the rest, in order that from it you may know the purport of all of them. I know also that when they are convicted in this matter, they will incur perfect odium at the hands of all men. And thus far concerning the pretenders. But I have further deemed it highly necessary and very urgent, to make known to your modesty—for I have written this to each one—that you should proclaim the fast of forty days to the brethren, and persuade them to fast, lest, while all the world is fasting, we who are in Egypt should be derided, as the only people who do not fast, but take our pleasure in these days. For if, on account of the Letter [not] being yet read, we do not fast, we should take away this pretext, and it should be read before the fast of forty days, so that they may not make this an excuse for neglect or fasting. Also, when it is read, they may be able to learn about the fast. But O, my beloved, whether in this way or any other, persuade and teach them to fast the forty days. For it is a disgrace that when all the world does this, those alone who are in Egypt, instead of fasting, should find their pleasure. For even I being grieved because men deride us for this, have been constrained to write to you. When therefore you receive the letters, and have read them and given the exhortation, write to me in return, my beloved, that I also may rejoice upon learning it.
2. But I have also thought it necessary to inform 4355 you of the fact, that Bishops have succeeded those who have fallen asleep. In Tanis in the stead of Elias 4356 , is Theodorus. In Arsenoitis, Silvanus 4357 instead of Calosiris. In Paralus, Nemesion is instead of Nonnus 4358 . In Bucolia 4359 is Heraclius. In Tentyra, Andronicus is instead of Saprion 4360 , his father. In Thebes, Philon instead of Philon. In Maximianopolis, Herminus instead of Atras. In the lower Apollon is Sarapion instead of Plution. In Aphroditon, Serenus is in the place of Theodorus. In Rhinocoruron, Salomon. In Stathma, Arabion, and in Marmarica. In the eastern Garyathis, Andragathius 4361 in the place of Hierax. In the southern Garyathis, Quintus 4362 instead of Nicon 4363 . So that to these you may write, and from these receive the canonical Letters.
Salute one another with a holy kiss. All the brethren who are with me salute you.
He wrote this from Rome. There is no twelfth Letter.
Footnotes
538:4353This Letter being introduced (as it is in the ms.) after the eleventh, with the remark at the end of it, that there is no twelfth; together with the exhortations concerning fasting contained in it, was probably written in lieu of a twelfth. Serapion was doubtless the Bishop of Thmuis (see Letter 54).
538:4354Or, ‘fulfilled the judgment.’ Cureton.
538:4355There is a similar notification of the appointment of fresh Bishops appended to the nineteenth Letter.
539:4356Larsow writes ‘Ilius.’ Tanis is situate in Augustamnica Prima. Vid. Quatremère Mémoires geogr. et histor. sur l’Egypte, tom. i. p. 284, &c. (L.) The word Τάνις is the LXX. rendering of ‘Zoan.’ In the Apol. c. Ar. 50, we have a list of ninety-four Egyptian Bishops, among others, who subscribed to the letter of the Council of Sardica. A reference to this list explains some names which otherwise would have been obscure. For a list of the Egyptian Bishoprics, the reader is referred to Neale’s Hist. of the Holy Eastern Church. Gen. Introd. vol. i. pp. 115, 116. To the list there given must be added the names of Bucolia, Stathma, the Eastern Garyathis, the Southern Garyathis. There were two Egyptian Bishops named Elias who subscribed their names to the letter of the Council of Sardica.
539:4357Silvanus was succeeded by Andreas, as we learn from the postscript to the nineteenth Letter.
539:4358An Egyptian Bishop named Nonnus was present at the Synod of Tyre. Apol. c. Ar. §79.
539:4359For a dissertation on the situation of Bucolia, see the treatise by Quatremère, already referred, to (tom. i. pp. 224–233). In p. 233, he writes; La contrée de l’Elearchie ou des Bucolies est, si je ne me trompe, parfaitement identique avec la province de Baschmour.
539:4360An Egyptian Bishop of the name of Saprion was at the Synod of Tyre. Apol. c. Ar. §79. He is ‘Serapion’ in Vit. Pach. 20.
539:4361Apol. Ar. 50.
539:4362Apol. Ar. 50.
539:4363Apol. Ar. 79.
Letter XIII.—(For 341.) Coss. Marcellinus, Probinus; Præf. Longinus; Indict. xiv; Easter-day, xiii Kal. Maii, xxiv Pharmuthi; Æra Dioclet. 57.
Again, my beloved brethren, I am ready to notify to you the saving feast 4364 , which will take place according to annual custom. For although the opponents of Christ 4365 have oppressed you together with us with afflictions and sorrows; yet, God having comforted us by our mutual faith 4366 , behold, I write to you even from Rome. Keeping the feast here with the brethren, still I keep it with you also in will and in spirit, for we send up prayers in common to God, ‘Who hath granted us not only to believe in Him, but also now to suffer for His sake 4367 .’ For troubled as we are, because we are so far from you, He moves us to write, that by a letter we might comfort ourselves, and provoke one another to good 4368 . For, indeed, numerous afflictions and bitter persecutions directed against the Church have been against us. For heretics, corrupt in their mind, untried in the faith, rising against the truth, violently persecute the Church, and of the brethren, some are scourged and others torn with stripes, and hardest of all, their insults reach even to the Bishops. Nevertheless, it is not becoming, on this account, that we should neglect the feast. But we should especially remember it, and not at all forget its commemoration from time to time. Now the unbelievers do not consider that there is a season for feasts, because they spend all their lives in revelling and follies; and the feasts which they keep are an occasion of grief rather than of joy. But to us in this present life they are above all an uninterrupted passage [to heaven]—it is indeed our season. For such things as these serve for exercise and trial, so that, having approved ourselves zealous and chosen servants of Christ, we may be fellow-heirs with the saints 4369 . For thus Job: ‘The whole world is a place of trial to men upon the earth 4370 .’ Nevertheless, they are proved in this world by afflictions, labours, and sorrows, to the end that each one may receive of God such reward as is meet for him, as He saith by the prophet, ‘I am the Lord, Who trieth the hearts, and searcheth the reins, to give to every one according to his ways 4371 .’
2. Not that He first knows the things of a man on his being proved (for He knows them all before they come to pass), but because He is good and philanthropic, He distributes to each a due reward according to his actions, so that every man may exclaim, Righteous is the judgment of God! As the prophet says again, ‘The Lord trieth the just, and discerneth the reins 4372 .’ Again, for this cause He tries each one of us, either that to those who know it not, virtue may be manifested by means of those who are proved, as was said respecting Job; ‘Thinkest thou that I was revealed to thee for any other cause, than that thou shouldest be seen righteous 4373 ?’ or that, when men come to a sense of their deeds, they may be able to know of what manner they are, and so may either repent of their wickedness, or abide confirmed in the faith. Now the blessed Paul, when troubled by afflictions, and persecutions, and hunger and thirst, ‘in everything was a conqueror, through Jesus Christ, Who loved us 4374 .’ Through suffering he was weak indeed in body, yet, believing and hoping, he was made strong in spirit, and his strength was made perfect in weakness 4375 .
3. The other saints also, who had a like confidence in God, accepted a like probation with gladness, as Job said, ‘Blessed be the name of the Lord 4376 .’ But the Psalmist, ‘Search me, O Lord, and try me: prove my reins and my heart 4377 .’ For since, when the strength is proved, it convinceth the foolish, they perceiving the cleansing and the advantage resulting from the divine fire, were not discouraged in trials like these, but they rather delighted in them, suffering no injury at all from the things which happened, but being seen to shine more brightly, like gold from the fire 4378 , as he said, who was tried in such a school of discipline as this; ‘Thou hast tried my heart, Thou hast visited me in the night-season; Thou hast proved me, and hast not found iniquity in me, so that my mouth shall not speak of the works of men 4379 .’ But those whose actions are not restrained by law, who know of nothing beyond eating and drinking and dying, account trials as danger. They soon stumble at them, so that, being untried in the faith, they are given over to a reprobate mind, and do those things which are not seemly 4380 . Therefore the blessed Paul, when urging us to such exercises as these, and having before measured himself by them, says, ‘Therefore I take pleasure in afflictions, in infirmities.’ And again, ‘Exercise thyself unto godliness 4381 .’ For since he knew the persecutions that befel those who chose to live in godliness, he wished his disciples to meditate beforehand on the difficulties connected with godliness; that when trials should come, and affliction arise, they might be able to bear them easily, as having been exercised in these things. For in those things wherewith a man has been conversant in mind, he ordinarily experiences a hidden joy. In this way, the blessed martyrs, becoming at first conversant with difficulties, were quickly perfected in Christ, regarding as nought the injury of the body, while they contemplated the expected rest.
4. But all those who ‘call their lands by their own names 4382 ,’ and have wood, and hay, and stubble 4383 in their thoughts; such as these, since they are strangers to difficulties, become aliens from the kingdom of heaven. Had they however known that ‘tribulation perfecteth patience, and patience experience, and experience hope, and hope maketh not ashamed,’ they would have exercised themselves, after the example of Paul, who said, ‘I keep under my body and bring it into subjection, lest when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway 4384 .’ They would easily have borne the afflictions which were brought upon them to prove them from time to time, if the prophetic admonition 4385 had been listened to by them; ‘It is good for a man to take up Thy yoke in his youth; he shall sit alone and shall be silent, because he hath taken Thy yoke upon him. He will give his cheek to him who smiteth him; he will be filled with reproaches. Because the Lord does not cast away for ever; for when He abases, He is gracious, according to the multitude of His tender mercies 4386 .’ For though all these things should proceed from the enemies, stripes, insults, reproaches, yet shall they avail nothing against the multitude of God’s tender mercies; for we shall quickly recover from them since they are merely temporal, but God is always gracious, pouring out His tender mercies on those who please [Him]. Therefore, my beloved brethren, we should not look at these temporal things, but fix our attention on those which are eternal. Though affliction may come, it will have an end, though insult and persecution, yet are they nothing to the hope which is set [before us]. For all present matters are trifling compared with those which are future; the sufferings of this present time not being worthy to be compared with the hope that is to come 4387 . For what can be compared with the kingdom? or what is there in comparison with life eternal? Or what is all we could give here, to that which we shall inherit yonder? For we are ‘heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ 4388 .’ Therefore it is not right, my beloved, to consider afflictions and persecutions, but the hopes which are laid up for us because of persecutions.
5. Now to this the example of Issachar, the patriarch, may persuade, as the Scripture 4389 saith, ‘Issachar desires that which is good, resting between the heritages; and when he saw that the rest was good, and the land fertile 4390 , he bowed his shoulder to labour, and became a husbandman.’ Being consumed by divine love, like the spouse in the Canticles, he gathered abundance from the holy Scriptures, for his mind was captivated not by the old alone, but by both the heritages. And hence as it were, spreading his wings, he beheld afar off ‘the rest’ which is in heaven, and,—since this ‘land’ consists of such beautiful works,—how much more truly the heavenly [country] must also [consist] of such 4391 ; for the other is ever new, and grows not old. For this ‘land’ passes away, as the Lord said; but that which is ready to receive the saints is immortal. Now when Issachar, the patriarch, saw these things, he joyfully made his boast of afflictions and toils, bowing his shoulders that he might labour. And he did not contend with those who smote him, neither was he disturbed by insults; but like a strong man triumphing the more by these things, and the more earnestly tilling his land, he received profit from it. The Word scattered the seed, but he watchfully cultivated it, so that it brought forth fruit, even a hundred-fold.
6. Now what does this mean, my beloved, but that we also, when the enemies are arrayed against us, should glory in afflictions 4392 , and that when we are persecuted, we should not be discouraged, but should the rather press after the crown of the high calling 4393 in Christ Jesus our Lord? and that being insulted, we should not be disturbed, but should give our cheek to the smiter, and bow the shoulder? For the lovers of pleasure and the lovers of enmity are tried, as saith the blessed Apostle James, ‘when they are drawn away by their own lusts and enticed 4394 .’ But let us, knowing that we suffer for the truth, and that those who deny the Lord smite and persecute us, ‘count it all joy, my brethren,’ according to the words of James, ‘when we fall into trials of various temptations, knowing that the trial of our faith worketh patience 4395 .’ Let us rejoice as we keep the feast, my brethren, knowing that our salvation is ordered in the time of affliction. For our Saviour did not redeem us by inactivity, but by suffering for us He abolished death. And respecting this, He intimidated to us before, saying, ‘In the world ye shall have tribulation 4396 .’ But He did not say this to every man, but to those who diligently and faithfully perform good service to Him, knowing beforehand, that they should be persecuted who would live godly toward Him.
7. ‘But evil-doers and sorcerers will wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived 4397 .’ If therefore, like those expounders of dreams and false prophets who professed to give signs, these ignorant men being drunk, not with wine, but with their own wickedness, make a profession of priesthood, and glory in their threats, believe them not; but since we are tried, let us humble ourselves, not being drawn away by them. For so God warned His people by Moses, saying, ‘If there shall rise up among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and shall give signs and tokens, and the sign or the token shall come to pass which he spake to thee, saying, Let us go and serve strange gods, which ye have not known; ye shall not hearken unto the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams. For the Lord your God trieth you, that He may know whether you will love the Lord your God with all your heart 4398 .’ So we, when we are tried by these things, will not separate ourselves from the love of God. But let us now keep the feast, my beloved, not as introducing a day of suffering, but of joy in Christ, by Whom we are fed every day. Let us be mindful of Him Who was sacrificed in the days of the Passover; for we celebrate this, because Christ the Passover was sacrificed 4399 . He Who once brought His people out of Egypt, and hath now abolished death, and him that had the power of death, that is the devil 4400 , will likewise now turn him to shame, and again grant aid to those who are troubled, and cry unto God day and night 4401 .
8. We begin the fast of forty days on the thirteenth of Phamenoth (9 Mar.), and the holy week of Easter on the eighteenth of Pharmuthi (Apr. 13); and resting on the seventh day, being the twenty-third (Apr. 18), and the first of the great week having dawned on the twenty-fourth of the same month Pharmuthi (Apr. 19), let us reckon from it till Pentecost. And at all times let us sing praises, calling on Christ, being delivered from our enemies by Christ Jesus our Lord, through Whom to the Father be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen. Greet one another with a holy kiss. All those who are here with me salute you. I pray, my beloved brethren, that ye may have health in the Lord.
He wrote this also from Rome. Here endeth the thirteenth Letter.
Footnotes
539:4364Vid. Letter x. 1.
539:4365The Arians (οἱ χριστόμαχοι).
539:4366Cf. Rom. i. 12
539:4367Phil. i. 29.
539:4368Cf. Heb. x. 24
539:4369Cf. Col. i. 12
539:4370Job vii. 1. not LXX.
539:4371Jer. xvii. 10.
539:4372Jer. 20.12.
539:4373Job 40:8, 9, (3, 4, LXX.).
539:4374Rom. viii. 37.
540:43752 Cor. xii. 9.
540:4376Job i. 21.
540:4377Ps. xxvi. 2.
540:4378Cf. Mal. 3:3, 1 Pet. 1:7.
540:4379Ps. 17:3, 4, LXX.
540:4380Rom. i. 28.
540:43812 Cor. xii. 10; 1 Tim. iv. 7.
540:4382Ps. xlix. 11 (Larsow mistakes the reference)
540:4383Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 12.
540:4384Rom. v. 3; 1 Cor. ix. 27.
540:4385Lam. iii. 27.
540:4386Cf. Serapion Epistola ad Monachos, in Mai Spicileg. Rom. tom. iv. p. li. (L.)
540:4387Cf. Rom. 8:18, 2 Cor. 4:17.
540:4388Rom. viii. 17.
540:4389Gen. xlix. 14.
540:4390Jarchi interprets the passage figuratively of Issachar being strong to bear the yoke of the law. The Jerusalem Targum thus paraphrases the verse. ‘And he saw the rest of the world to come, that it was good, and the portion of the land of Israel, that it was pleasant; therefore he inclined his shoulders to work in the law, and his brethren brought gifts unto him.
541:4391Larsow’s rendering of the above is followed.
541:4392Rom. v. 3.
541:4393Cf. Phil. iii. 14 τὸ βραβεῖον τῆς ἄνω κλήσεως.
541:4394James i. 14.
541:4395James 1.2.
541:4396John xvi. 33.
541:43972 Tim. iii. 13.
541:4398Deut. xiii. 1-3.
541:43991 Cor. v. 7.
541:4400Heb. ii. 14.
541:4401Luke xviii. 7.
Letter XIV.—(For 342.) Coss. Augustus Constantius III, Constans II, Præf. the same Longinus; Indict. xv; Easter-day iii Id. Apr., xvi Pharmuthi; Æra Dioclet. 58.
The gladness of our feast, my brethren, is always near at hand, and never fails those who wish to celebrate it 4402 . For the Word is near, Who is all things on our behalf, even our Lord Jesus Christ, Who, having promised that His habitation with us should be perpetual, in virtue thereof cried, saying, ‘Lo, I am with you all the days of the world 4403 .’ For as He is the Shepherd, and the High Priest, and the Way and the Door, and everything at once to us, so again, He is shewn to us as the Feast, and the Holy day, according to the blessed Apostle; ‘Our Passover, Christ, is sacrificed 4404 .’ He it was who was expected, He caused a light to shine at the prayer of the Psalmist, who said, ‘My Joy, deliver me from those who surround me 4405 ;’ this being indeed true rejoicing, this being a true feast, even deliverance from wickedness, whereto a man attains by thoroughly adopting an upright conversation, and being approved in his mind of godly submission towards God 4406 . For thus the saints all their lives long were like men rejoicing at a feast. One found rest in prayer to God, as blessed David 4407 , who rose in the night, not once but seven times. Another gave glory in songs of praise, as great Moses, who sang a song of praise for the victory over Pharaoh, and those task-masters 4408 . Others performed worship with unceasing diligence, like great Samuel and blessed Elijah; who have ceased from their course, and now keep the feast in heaven, and rejoice in what they formerly learnt through shadows, and from the types recognise the truth.
2. But what sprinklings shall we now employ, while we celebrate the feast? Who will be our guide, as we haste to this festival? None can do this, my beloved, but Him Whom you will name with me, even our Lord Jesus Christ Who said, ‘I am the Way.’ For it is He Who, according to the blessed John, ‘taketh away the sin of the world 4409 .’ He purifies our souls, as Jeremiah the prophet says in a certain place, ‘Stand in the ways and see, and enquire, and look which is the good path, and ye shall find in it cleansing for your souls 4410 .’ Of old time, the blood of he-goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkled upon those who were unclean, were fit only to purify the flesh 4411 ; but now, through the grace of God the Word, every man is thoroughly cleansed. Following Him, we may, even here, as on the threshold of the Jerusalem which is above, meditate beforehand on the feast which is eternal, as also the blessed Apostles, together following the Saviour Who was their Leader, have now become teachers of a like grace, saying, ‘Behold, we have left all, and followed Thee 4412 .’ For the following of the Lord, and the feast which is of the Lord, is not accomplished by words only, but by deeds, every enactment of laws and every command involving a distinct performance. For as great Moses, when administering the holy laws, exacted a promise from the people 4413 , respecting the practice of them, so that having promised, they might not neglect them, and be accused as liars, thus also, the celebration of the least of the Passover raises no question, and demands no reply; but when the word is given, the performance of it follows, for He saith, ‘And the children of Israel shall keep the Passover 4414 ;’ intending that there should be a ready performance of the commandment, while the command should aid its execution. But respecting these matters, I have confidence in your wisdom, and your care for instruction. Such points as these have been touched upon by us often and in various Letters.
3. But now, which is above all things most necessary, I wish to remind you, and myself with you, how that the command would have us come to the Paschal feast not profanely and without preparation, but with sacramental and doctrinal rites, and prescribed observances, as indeed we learn from the historical account, ‘A man who is of another nation, or bought with money, or uncircumcised, shall not eat the Passover 4415 .’ Neither should it be eaten in ‘any’ house, but He commands it to be done in haste; inasmuch as before we groaned and were made sad by the bondage to Pharaoh, and the commands of the task-masters. For when in former time the children of Israel acted in this way, they were counted worthy to receive the type, which existed for the sake of this feast, nor is the feast now introduced on account of the type. As also the Word of God, when desirous of this, said to His disciples, ‘With desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you 4416 .’ Now that is a wonderful account, for a man might have seen them at that time girded as for a procession or a dance, and going out with staves, and sandals, and unleavened bread. These things, which took place before in shadows, were typical. But now the Truth is nigh unto us, ‘the Image of the invisible God 4417 ,’ our Lord Jesus Christ, the true Light, Who instead of a staff, is our sceptre, instead of unleavened bread, is the bread which came down from heaven, Who, instead of sandals, hath furnished us with the preparation of the Gospel 4418 , and Who, to speak briefly, by all these hath guided us to His Father. And if enemies afflict us and persecute us, He again, instead of Moses, will encourage us with better words, saying, ‘Be of good cheer; I have overcome the wicked one 4419 .’ And if after we have passed over the Red Sea heat should again vex us or some bitterness of the waters befall us, even thence again the Lord will appear to us, imparting to us of His sweetness, and His life-giving fountain, saying, ‘If any man thirst, let him come to Me, and drink 4420 .’
4. Why therefore do we tarry, and why do we delay, and not come with all eagerness and diligence to the feast, trusting that it is Jesus who calleth us? Who is all things for us, and was laden in ten thousand ways for our salvation; Who hungered and thirsted for us, though He gives us food and drink in His saving gifts 4421 . For this is His glory, this the miracle of His divinity, that He changed our sufferings for His happiness. For, being life, He died that He might make us alive, being the Word, He became flesh, that He might instruct the flesh in the Word, and being the fountain of life, He thirsted our thirst, that thereby He might urge us to the feast, saying, ‘If any man thirst, let him come to Me, and drink 4422 .’ At that time, Moses proclaimed the beginning of the feast, saying, ‘This month is the beginning of months to you 4423 .’ But the Lord, Who came down in the end of the ages 4424 , proclaimed a different day, not as though He would abolish the law, far from it, but that He should establish the law, and be the end of the law. ‘For Christ is the end of the law to every one that believeth in righteousness;’ as the blessed Paul saith, ‘Do we make void the law by faith? far from it: we rather establish the law 4425 .’ Now these things astonished even the officers who were sent by the Jews, so that wondering they said to the Pharisees, ‘No man ever thus spake 4426 .’ What was it then that astonished those officers, or what was it which so affected the men as to make them marvel? It was nothing but the boldness and authority of our Saviour. For when of old time prophets and scribes studied the Scriptures, they perceived that what they read did not refer to themselves, but to others. Moses, for instance, ‘A prophet will the Lord raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; to him hearken in all that he commands you.’ Isaiah again, ‘Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and ye shall call his name Emmanuel 4427 .’ And others prophesied in different and various ways, concerning the Lord. But by the Lord, of Himself, and of no other, were these things prophesied; to Himself He limited them all, saying, ‘If any man thirst, let him come to Me 4428 ’—not to any other person, but to ‘Me.’ A man may indeed hear from those concerning My coming, but he must not henceforth drink from others, but from Me.
5. Therefore let us also, when we come to the feast, no longer come as to old shadows, for they are accomplished, neither as to common feasts, but let us hasten as to the Lord, Who is Himself the feast 4429 , not looking upon it as an indulgence and delight of the belly, but as a manifestation of virtue. For the feasts of the heathen are full of greediness, and utter indolence, since they consider they celebrate a feast when they are idle 4430 ; and they work the works of perdition when they feast. But our feasts consist in the exercise of virtue and the practice of temperance; as the prophetic word testifies in a certain place, saying, ‘The fast of the fourth, and the fast of the fifth, and the fast of the seventh, and the fast of the tenth [month], shall be to the house of Judah for gladness, and rejoicing, and for pleasant feasts 4431 .’ Since therefore this occasion for exercise is set before us, and such a day as this is come, and the prophetic voice has gone forth that the feast shall be celebrated, let us give all diligence to this good proclamation, and like those who contend on the race course, let us vie with each other in observing the purity of the fast 4432 , by watchfulness in prayers, by study of the Scriptures, by distributing to the poor, and let us be at peace with our enemies. Let us bind up those who are scattered abroad, banish pride, and return to lowliness of mind, being at peace with all men, and urging the brethren unto love. Thus also the blessed Paul was often engaged in fastings and watchings, and was willing to be accursed for his brethren. Blessed David again, having humbled himself by fastings, used boldness, saying, ‘O Lord my God, if I have done this, if there is any iniquity in my hands, if I have repaid those who dealt evil with me, then may I fall from my enemies as a vain man 4433 .’ If we do these things, we shall conquer death; and receive an earnest 4434 of the kingdom of heaven.
6. We begin the holy Easter feast on the tenth of Pharmuthi (April 5), desisting from the holy fasts on the fifteenth of the same month Pharmuthi (April 10), on the evening of the seventh day. And let us keep the holy feast on the sixteenth of the same month Pharmuthi (April 11); adding one by one [the days] till the holy Pentecost, passing on to which, as through a succession of feasts, let us keep the festival to the Spirit, Who is even now near us, in Jesus Christ, through Whom and with Whom to the Father be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.
The fifteenth and sixteenth are wanting.
Footnotes
541:4402Cf. Letter v. 1.
542:4403Matt. xxviii. 20.
542:44041 Cor. v. 7.
542:4405Ps. xxxi. 7, LXX.
542:4406Cf. Letter iii. 2.
542:4407Ps. 19:62, 164.
542:4408Exod. xv.
542:4409John xiv. 6; i. 29.
542:4410Jer. vi. 16.
542:4411Heb. ix. 13.
542:4412Mark x. 28.
542:4413Exod. xix. 8.
542:4414Exod. 12.47.
542:4415Exod. 12.43-48.
542:4416Luke xxii. 15.
542:4417Col. i. 15.
542:4418Eph. vi. 15.
543:4419John 16:33, 1 John 2:13John xvi. 33; cf. 1 John ii. 13.
543:4420John 7.37.
543:4421Cf. supr. p. 88.
543:4422John vii. 37.
543:4423Exod. xii. 2.
543:4424Heb. ix. 26.
543:4425Rom. x. 4; iii. 31.
543:4426John vii. 46.
543:4427Deut. xviii. 15; Is. vii. 14. These two texts are also quoted together in Orat. i. §54.
543:4428John vii. 37.
543:4429Cf. 1 Cor. v. 7
543:4430Cf. Letter vii. 3.
543:4431Zech. viii. 19.
543:4432Cf. 1 Cor. ix. 24-27.
543:4433Rom. ix. 3; Ps. 7:3, 4, LXX.
543:4434Syr. ᾽Αῤ& 191·αβών. Cf. Eph. 1:13, 14, &c.
Letter XVII.—(For 345.) Coss. Amantius, Albinus; Præf. Nestorius of Gaza; Indict. iii; Easter-day, vii Id. Apr., xii Pharmuthi; Moon 19; Æra Dioclet. 61.
Athanasius to the Presbyters and Deacons of Alexandria, and to the beloved brethren, greeting in Christ.
According to custom, I give you notice respecting Easter, my beloved, that you also may notify the same to the districts of those who are at a distance, as is usual. Therefore, after this present festival 4435 , I mean this which is on the twentieth of the month Pharmuthi, the Easter-day following will be on the vii Id. April, or according to the Alexandrians on the twelfth of Pharmuthi. Give notice therefore in all those districts, that Easter-day will be on the vii Id. April, or according to the Alexandrian reckoning on the twelfth of Pharmuthi. That you may be in health in Christ, I pray, my beloved brethren.
Footnotes
544:4435Observe that Athan. gives notice at Easter, a.d. 344, upon what day Easter is to be observed in a.d. 345, and not immediately after the succeeding Epiphany, as Cassian asserts to have been the custom of the Patriarch of Alexandria. (Cassian. Collat. x. 1.) Cf. Letters 2, 4, 10, 18, &c.
Letter XVIII.—(For 346.) Coss. Augustus Constantius IV, Constans III; Præf. the same Nestorius; Indict. iv; Easter-day iii Kal. Apr., iv Pharmuthi; Moon 21; Æra Dioclet. 62.
Athanasius, to the Presbyters and Deacons of Alexandria, brethren beloved in the Lord, greeting.
You have done well, dearly beloved brethren, that you have given the customary notice of the holy Easter in those districts; for I have seen and acknowledged your exactness. By other letters I have also given you notice, that when this year is finished, ye may know concerning the next. Yet now I have thought it necessary to write the same things that, when you have it exactly, you also may write with care. Therefore, after the conclusion of this feast, which is now drawing to its close, on the twelfth of the month Pharmuthi, which is on the vii Id. Apr. 4436 , Easter-day will be on the iii Kal, April; the fourth of Pharmuthi, according to the Alexandrians. When therefore the feast is finished, give notice again in these districts, according to early custom, thus: Easter Sunday is on the iii Kal. April, which is the fourth of Pharmuthi, according to the Alexandrian reckoning. And let no man hesitate concerning the day, neither let any one contend, saying, It is requisite that Easter should be held on the twenty-seventh of the month Phamenoth; for it was discussed in the holy Synod 4437 , and all there settled it to be on the iii Kal. April. I say then that it is on the fourth of the month Pharmuthi; for the week before this is much too early 4438 . Therefore let there be no dispute, but let us act as becometh us. For I have thus written to the Romans also. Give notice then as it has been notified to you, that it is on the iii Kal. April; the fourth of Pharmuthi, according to the Alexandrian reckoning.
That ye may have health in the Lord, I pray, my dearly beloved brethren.
Footnotes
544:4436The number vii is omitted in the ms.
544:4437Sardica, in 343.
544:4438The 14th day of the Moon, reckoning from the time of mean New Moon, took place on Sunday the 23rd. According to the rule which obtained in later times and continued in use until the Gregorian reformation of the Calendar, the 14th day of the Ecclesiastical Moon took place on Saturday the 22nd, which would make Easter-day happen on the 23rd. It would seem, therefore, that the decision of the Synod referred to, brought the Ecclesiastical Moon into closer accordance with that of the heavens, than the later Calendar would have done. In 357 Easter was apparently kept on Mar. 23.
Letter XIX.—(For 347.) Coss. Rufinus, Eusebius; Præf. the same Nestorius; Indict. v; Easter-day, Prid. Id. Apr., Pharmuthi xvii; Æra Dioclet. 63; Moon 15.
‘Blessed is God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ 4439 ,’ for such an introduction is fitting for an Epistle, and more especially now, when it brings thanksgiving to the Lord, in the Apostle’s words, because He hath brought us from a distance, and granted us again to send openly to you, as usual, the Festal Letters. For this is the season of the feast, my brethren, and it is near; being not now proclaimed by trumpets, as the history records 4440 , but being made known and brought near to us by the Saviour, Who suffered on our behalf and rose again, even as Paul preached, saying, ‘Our Passover, Christ, is sacrificed 4441 .’ Henceforth the feast of the Passover is ours, not that of a stranger, nor is it any longer of the Jews 4442 . For the time of shadows is abolished, and those former things have ceased, and now the month of new things 4443 is at hand, in which every man should keep the feast, in obedience to Him who said, ‘Observe the month of new things, and keep the Passover to the Lord thy God 4444 .’ Even the heathen fancy they keep festival, and the Jews hypo-critically feign to do so. But the feast of the heathen He reproves, as the bread 4445 of mourners, and He turns His face from that of the Jews, as being outcasts, saying, ‘Your new moons and your sabbaths My soul hateth 4446 .’
2. For actions not done lawfully and piously, are not of advantage, though they may be reputed to be so, but they rather argue hypocrisy in those who venture upon them. Therefore, although such persons feign to offer sacrifices, yet they hear from the Father, ‘Your whole burnt-offerings are not acceptable, and your sacrifices do not please Me; and although ye bring fine flour, it is vanity, incense also is an abomination unto Me 4447 .’ For God does not need anything 4448 ; and, since nothing is unclean to Him, He is full in regard to them, as He testifies, by Isaiah, saying, ‘I am full 4449 .’ Now there was a law given about these things, for the instruction of the people, and to prefigure things to come, for Paul saith to the Galatians; ‘Before faith came, we were kept guarded under the law, being shut up in the faith which should afterwards be revealed unto us; wherefore the law was our instructor in Christ, that we might be justified by faith 4450 .’ But the Jews knew not, neither did they understand, therefore they walked in the daytime as in darkness, feeling for, but not touching, the truth we possess, which [was contained] in the law; conforming to the letter, but not submitting to the spirit. And when Moses was veiled, they looked on him, but turned away their faces from him when he was uncovered. For they knew not what they read, but erroneously substituted one thing for another. The prophet, therefore, cried against them, saying, ‘Falsehood and faithlessness have prevailed among them.’ The Lord also therefore said concerning them, ‘The strange children have dealt falsely with Me; the strange children have waxen old 4451 .’ But how gently does He reprove them, saying, ‘Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed Me, for he wrote of Me 4452 .’ But being faithless, they went on to deal falsely with the law, affirming things after their own pleasure, but not understanding the Scripture; and, further, as they had hypocritically made a pretence of the plain text of Scripture, and had confidence in this, He is angry with them, saying by Isaiah, ‘Who hath required these of your hands 4453 ?’ And by Jeremiah, since they were very bold, he threatens, ‘Gather together your whole burnt-offerings with your sacrifices, and eat flesh, for I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices 4454 .’ For they did not act as was right, neither was their zeal according to law, but they rather sought their own pleasure in such days, as the prophet accuses them, beating down their bondsmen, and gathering themselves together for strifes and quarrels, and they smote the lowly with the fist, and did all things that tended to their own gratification. For this cause, they continue without a feast until the end, although they make a display now of eating flesh, out of place and out of season. For, instead of the legally-appointed lamb, they have learned to sacrifice to Baal; instead of the true unleavened bread, ‘they collect the wood, and their fathers kindle the fire, and their wives prepare the dough, that they may make cakes to the host of heaven, and pour out libations to strange gods, that they may provoke Me to anger, saith the Lord 4455 .’ They have the just reward of such devices, since, although they pretend to keep the Passover, yet joy and gladness is taken from their mouth, as saith Jeremiah, ‘There hath been taken away from the cities of Judah, and the streets of Jerusalem, the voice of those who are glad, and the voice of those who rejoice; the voice of the bridegroom, and the voice of the bride 4456 .’ Therefore now, ‘he who among them sacrificeth an ox, is as he who smiteth a man, and he who sacrificeth a lamb is as he who killeth a dog, he that offereth fine flour, is as [if he offered] swine’s blood, he that giveth frankincense for a memorial, is as a blasphemer 4457 .’ Now these things will never please God, neither thus hath the word required of them. But He saith, ‘These have chosen their own ways; and their abominations are what their soul delighteth in 4458 .’
3. And what does this mean my brethren? For it is right for us to investigate the saying of the prophet, and especially on account of heretics who have turned their mind against the law. By Moses then, God gave commandment respecting sacrifices, and all the book called Leviticus is entirely taken up with the arrangement of these matters, so that He might accept the offerer. So through the Prophets, He blames him who despised these things, as disobedient to the commandment saying, ‘I have not required these at your hands. Neither did I speak to your fathers respecting sacrifices, nor command them concerning whole burnt-offerings 4459 .’ Now it is the opinion of some, that the Scriptures do not agree together, or that God, Who gave the commandment, is false. But there is no disagreement whatever, far from it, neither can the Father, Who is truth, lie; ‘for it is impossible that God should lie 4460 ,’ as Paul affirms. But all these things are plain to those who rightly consider them, and to those who receive with faith the writings of the law. Now it appears to me—may God grant, by your prayers, that the remarks I presume to make may not be far from the truth—that not at first were the commandment and the law concerning sacrifices, neither did the mind of God, Who gave the law, regard whole burnt-offerings, but those things which were pointed out and prefigured by them. ‘For the law contained a shadow of good things to come.’ And, ‘Those things were appointed until the time of reformation 4461 .’
4. Therefore, the whole law did not treat of sacrifices, though there was in the law a commandment concerning sacrifices, that by means of them it might begin to instruct men and might withdraw them from idols, and bring them near to God, teaching them for that present time. Therefore neither at the beginning, when God brought the people out of Egypt, did He command them concerning sacrifices or whole burnt-offerings, nor even when they came to mount Sinai. For God is not as man, that He should be careful about these things beforehand; but His commandment was given, that they might know Him Who is truly God, and His Word, and might despise those which are falsely called gods, which are not, but appear in outward show. So He made Himself known to them in that He brought them out of Egypt, and caused them to pass through the Red Sea. But when they chose to serve Baal, and dared to offer sacrifices to those that have no existence, and forgot the miracles which were wrought in their behalf in Egypt, and thought of returning thither again; then indeed, after the law, that commandment concerning sacrifices was ordained as law; so that with their mind, which at one time had meditated on those which are not, they might turn to Him Who is truly God, and learn not, in the first place, to sacrifice, but to turn away their faces from idols, and conform to what God commanded. For when He saith, ‘I have not spoken concerning sacrifices, neither given commandment concerning whole burnt-offerings,’ He immediately adds, ‘But this is the thing which I commanded them, saying, Obey My voice, and I will be to you a God, and ye shall be to Me a people, and ye shall walk in all the ways that I command you 4462 .’ Thus then, being before instructed and taught, they learned not to do service to any one but the Lord. They attained to know what time the shadow should last, and not to forget the time that was at hand, in which no longer should the bullock of the herd be a sacrifice to God, nor the ram of the flock, nor the he-goat 4463 , but all these things should be fulfilled in a purely spiritual manner, and by constant prayer, and upright conversation, with godly words; as David sings, ‘May my meditation be pleasing to Him. Let my prayer be set forth before Thee as incense, and the lifting up of my hands as the evening sacrifice 4464 .’ The Spirit also, who is in him, commands, saying, ‘Offer unto God the sacrifice of praise, and pay to the Lord thy vows. Offer the sacrifice of righteousness, and put your trust in the Lord 4465 .’
5. Samuel, that great man, no less clearly reproved Saul, saying, ‘Is not the word better than a gift 4466 ?’ For hereby a man fulfils the law, and pleases God, as He saith, ‘The sacrifice of praise shall glorify Me.’ Let a man ‘learn what this means, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice 4467 ,’ and I will not condemn the adversaries. But this wearied them, for they were not anxious to understand, ‘for had they known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory 4468 .’ And what their end is, the prophet foretold, crying, ‘Woe unto their soul, for they have devised an evil thought, saying, let us bind the just man, because he is not pleasing to us 4469 .’ The end of such abandonment as this can be nothing but error, as the Lord, when reproving them, saith, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures 4470 .’ Afterwards when, being reproved, they should have come to their senses, they rather grew insolent, saying, ‘We are Moses’ disciples; and we know that God spake to Moses 4471 ;’ dealing the more falsely by that very expression, and accusing themselves. For had they believed him to whom they hearkened, they would not have denied the Lord, Who spake by Moses, when He was present. Not so did the eunuch in the Acts, for when he heard, ‘Understandest thou what thou readest 4472 ?’ he was not ashamed to confess his ignorance, and implored to be taught. Therefore, to him who became a learner, the grace of the Spirit was given. But as for those Jews who persisted in their ignorance; as the proverb saith, ‘Death came upon them. For the fool dies in his sins 4473 .’
6. Like these too, are the heretics, who, having fallen from true discernment, dare to invent to themselves atheism. ‘For the fool saith in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, and become abominable in their doings 4474 .’ Of such as are fools in their thoughts, the actions are wicked, as He saith, ‘can ye, being evil, speak good things 4475 ;’ for they were evil, because they thought wickedness. Or how can those do just acts, whose minds are set upon fraud? Or how shall he love, who is prepared beforehand to hate? How shall he be merciful, who is bent upon the love of money? How shall he be chaste, who looks upon a woman to lust after her? ‘For from the heart proceed evil thoughts, fornications, adulteries, murders 4476 .’ By them the fool is wrecked, as by the waves of the sea, being led away and enticed by his fleshly pleasures; for this stands written, ‘All flesh of fools is greatly tempest-tossed 4477 .’ While he associates with folly, he is tossed by a tempest, and perishes, as Solomon says in the Proverbs, ‘The fool and he who lacketh understanding shall perish together, and shall leave their wealth to strangers 4478 .’ Now they suffer such things, because there is not among them one sound of mind to guide them. For where there is sagacity, there the Word, who is the Pilot of souls, is with the vessel; ‘for he that hath understanding shall possess guidance 4479 ;’ but they who are without guidance fall like the leaves. Who has so completely fallen away as Hymenæus and Philetus, who held evil opinions respecting the resurrection, and concerning faith in it suffered shipwreck? And Judas being a traitor, fell away from the Pilot, and perished with the Jews 4480 . But the disciples since they were wise, and therefore remained with the Lord, although the sea was agitated, and the ship covered with the waves, for there was a storm, and the wind was contrary, yet fell not away. For they awoke the Word, Who was sailing with them 4481 , and immediately the sea became smooth at the command of its Lord, and they were saved. They became preachers and teachers at the same time; relating the miracles of our Saviour, and teaching us also to imitate their example. These things were written on our account and for our profit, so that through these signs we may acknowledge the Lord Who wrought them.
7. Let us, therefore, in the faith of the disciples, hold frequent converse with our Master. For the world is like the sea to us, my brethren, of which it is written, ‘This is the great and wide sea, there go the ships; the Leviathan, which Thou hast created to play therein 4482 .’ We float on this sea, as with the wind, through our own free-will, for every one directs his course according to his will, and either, under the pilotage of the Word, he enters into rest, or, laid hold on by pleasure, he suffers shipwreck, and is in peril by storm. For as in the ocean there are storms and waves, so in the world there are many afflictions and trials. The unbelieving therefore ‘when affliction or persecution ariseth is offended 4483 ,’ as the Lord said. For not being confirmed in the faith, and having his regard towards temporal things, he cannot resist the difficulties which arise from afflictions. But like that house, built on the sand by the foolish man, so he, being without understanding 4484 , falls before the assault of temptations, as it were by the winds. But the saints, having their senses exercised in self-possession 4485 , and being strong in faith, and understanding the word, do not faint under trials; but although, from time to time, circumstances of greater trial are set against them, yet they continue faithful, and awaking the Lord Who is with them, they are delivered. So, passing through water and fire, they find relief and duly keep the feast, offering up prayers with thanksgiving to God Who has redeemed them. For either being tempted they are known, like Abraham, or suffering they are approved, like Job, or being oppressed and deceitfully treated, like Joseph, they patiently endure it, or being persecuted, they are not overtaken; but as it is written, through God they ‘leap over the wall 4486 ’ of wickedness, which divides and separates between brethren, and turns them from the truth. In this manner the blessed Paul, when he took pleasure in infirmities, in reproach, in necessities, in persecutions, and in distresses for Christ, rejoiced, and wished all of us to rejoice saying, ‘Rejoice always; in everything give thanks 4487 .’
8. For what is so fitting for the feast, a turning from wickedness, and a pure conversation, and prayer offered without ceasing to God, with thanksgiving? Therefore let us, my brethren, looking forward to celebrate the eternal joy in heaven, keep the feast here also, rejoicing at all times, praying incessantly, and in everything giving thanks to the Lord. I give thanks to God, for those other wonders He has done, and for the various helps that have now been granted us, in that though He hath chastened us sore, He did not deliver us over to death, but brought us from a distance even as from the ends of the earth, and hath united us again with you. I have been mindful while I keep the feast, to give you also notice of the great feast of Easter, that so we may go up together, as it were, to Jerusalem, and eat the Passover, not separately but as in one house 4488 ; let us not as sodden in water, water down the word of God; neither let us, as having broken its bones, destroy the commands of the Gospel. But as roasted with fire, with bitterness, being fervent in spirit, in fastings and watchings, with lying on the ground, let us keep it with penitence and thanksgiving.
9. We begin the fast of forty days on the sixth day of Phamenoth (Mar. 2); and having passed through that properly, with fasting and prayers, we may be able to attain to the holy day. For he who neglects to observe the fast of forty days, as one who rashly and impurely treads on holy things, cannot celebrate the Easter festival. Further, let us put one another in remembrance, and stimulate one another not to be negligent, and especially that we should fast those days, so that fasts may receive us in succession, and we may rightly bring the feast to a close.
10. The fast of forty days begins then, as was already said, on the sixth of Phamenoth (Mar. 2), and the great week of the Passion on the eleventh of Pharmuthi (Apr. 6). And let us rest from the fast on the sixteenth of it (Apr. 11), on the seventh day, late in the evening. Let us keep the feast when the first of the week dawns upon us, on the seventeenth of the same month Pharmuthi (Apr. 12). Let us then add, one after the other, the seven holy weeks of Pentecost, rejoicing and praising God, that He hath by these things made known to us beforehand, joy and rest everlasting, prepared in heaven for us and for those who truly believe in Christ Jesus our Lord; through Whom, and with Whom, be glory and dominion to the Father, with the Holy Ghost, for ever and ever. Amen.
Salute one another with a holy kiss. The brethren who are with me salute you.
4489 I have also thought it necessary to inform you of the appointment of Bishops, which has taken place in the stead of our blessed fellow-ministers, that ye may know to whom to write, and from whom ye should receive letters. In Syene, therefore, Nilammon, instead of Nilammon of the same name. In Latopolis, Masis, instead of Ammonius. In Coptos, Psenosiris 4490 , instead of Theodorus 4491 . In Panopolis, because Artemidorus 4492 desired it, on account of his old age, and weakness of body, Arius is appointed coadjutor. In Hypsele, Arsenius, having become reconciled to the Church. In Lycopolis, Eudæmon 4493 in the stead of Plusianus 4494 . In Antinoöpolis, Arion 4495 , instead of Ammonius and Tyrannus 4496 . In Oxyrynchus, Theodorus, instead of Pelagius. In Nilopolis, instead of Theon, Amatus 4497 , and Isaac, who are reconciled to each other. In Arsenoitis, Andreas 4498 , instead of Silvanus 4499 . In Prosopitis, Triadelphus, instead of Serapammon 4500 . In Diosphacus, on the river side, Theodorus, instead of Serapammon. In Sais, Paphnutius, instead of Nemesion. In Xois, Theodorus, instead of Anubion; and there is also with him Isidorus, who is reconciled to the Church. In Sethroitis, Orion 4501 , instead of Potammon 4502 . In Clysma, Tithonas 4503 , instead of Jacob; and there is with him Paulus, who has been reconciled to the Church.
Footnotes
544:4439Eph. i. 3.
544:4440Cf. Letter i. 1.
544:44411 Cor. v. 7, cf. Letter i.
544:4442Cf. Letter 6, §2, and note.
544:4443Deut. xvi. 1, LXX.
545:4444Deut. xvi. 1, LXX., cf. Letter 1, §9, and note.
545:4445Hos. ix. 4.
545:4446Is. i. 14.
545:4447Isa. 1:13, Jer. 6:20Jer. vi. 20.
545:4448Orat.ii. 28, 29.
545:4449Is. i. 11.
545:4450Gal. 3:23, 24. Athan. reads into S. Paul’s words the thought that the Law itself, however misunderstood by the Jews, involved the faith of Christ.
545:4451Ps. 18:44, 45, LXX.
545:4452John v. 46.
545:4453Is. i. 12.
545:4454Jer. 7:21, 22.
545:4455Jer. 7.18.
545:4456Jer. 7.34.
545:4457Is. lxvi. 3.
545:4458Isa. 66.3
546:4459Is. i. 12; Jer. vii. 22.
546:4460Heb. vi. 18.
546:4461Heb. 10:1, Heb. 9:10.
546:4462Jer. 7:22, 23.
546:4463Exod. xii. 5.
546:4464Ps. civ. 34; cxli. 2.
546:4465Ps. 50:14, Ps. 4:5.
546:4466Ecclesiasticus 18.17.
546:4467Ps. l. 23; Hosea vi. 6; Matt. ix. 13
546:44681 Cor. ii. 8.
546:4469Isa. 3:9, 10; Wisd. ii. 12.
546:4470Matt. xxii. 29.
546:4471John 9:28, 29.
546:4472Acts viii. 30.
547:4473Prov. 24:9, Ps. 55:15Prov. xxiv. 9, LXX., cf. Ps. lv. 15.
547:4474Ps. xiv. 1.
547:4475Matt. xii. 34.
547:4476Matt. 15.19.
547:4477Prov. xxvi. 10, LXX.
547:4478Not Proverbs, but Ps. xlix. 10.
547:4479Prov. i. 5, LXX.
547:4480Supr. Letter 7, §9.
547:4481Mark iv. 37-41
547:4482Ps. 4:25, 26.
547:4483Mark iv. 17.
547:4484Luke vi. 49.
547:4485Heb. v. 14.
547:4486Ps. xviii. 29.
547:44871 Thess. v. 18.
548:4488Exod. 12:8, 9, 46.
548:4489Vid. Letter 2, note.
548:4490Supr.p. 127?
548:4491Supr.p. 142.
548:4492Supr.p. 136, &c.
548:4493p. 127?
548:4494p. 136.
548:4495p. 127?
548:4496p. 142.
548:4497p. 127.
548:4498Cf. Tom. ad Ant. 10.
548:4499Supr. Letter 12.
548:4500pp. 127, 273.
548:4501p. 127.
548:4502p. 273.
548:4503Tithoes, p. 127.
Letter XX.—(For 348.) Coss. Philippus, Salia; Præfect the same Nestorius; Indict. vi; Easter-day iii Non. Apr., viii Pharmuthi; Æra Dioclet. 64; Moon 18.
Let us now keep the feast, my brethren, for as our Lord then gave notice to His disciples, so He now tells us beforehand, that ‘after some days is the Passover 4504 ,’ in which the Jews indeed betrayed the Lord, but we celebrate His death as a feast, rejoicing because we then obtained rest from our afflictions. We are diligent in assembling ourselves together, for we were scattered in time past and were lost, and are found. We were far off, and are brought nigh, we were strangers, and have become His, Who suffered for us, and was nailed on the cross, Who bore our sins, as the prophet 4505 saith, and was afflicted for us, that He might put away from all of us grief, and sorrow, and sighing. When we thirst, He satisfies us on the feast-day itself; standing and crying, ‘If any man thirst, let him come to Me, and drink 4506 .’ For such is the love of the saints at all times, that they never once leave off, but offer the uninterrupted, constant sacrifice to the Lord, and continually thirst, and ask of Him to drink 4507 ; as David sang, ‘My God, my God, early will I seek Thee, my soul thirsteth for Thee; many times my heart and flesh longeth for Thee in a barren land, without a path, and without water. Thus was I seen by Thee in the sanctuary 4508 .’ And Isaiah the prophet says, ‘From the night my spirit seeketh Thee early, O God, because Thy commandments are light 4509 .’ And another says, ‘My soul fainteth for the longing it hath for Thy judgments at all times.’ And again he says, ‘For Thy judgments I have hoped, and Thy law will I keep at all times 4510 .’ Another boldly cries out, saying, ‘Mine eye is ever towards the Lord.’ And with him one says, ‘The meditation of my heart is before Thee at all times.’ And Paul further advises, ‘At all times give thanks; pray without ceasing 4511 .’ Those who are thus continually engaged, are waiting entirely on the Lord, and say, ‘Let us follow on to know the Lord: we shall find Him ready as the morning, and He will come to us as the early and the latter rain for the earth 4512 .’ For not only does He satisfy them in the morning; neither does He give them only as much to drink as they ask; but He gives them abundantly according to the multitude of His lovingkindness, vouchsafing to them at all times the grace of the Spirit. And what it is they thirst for He immediately adds, saying, ‘He that believeth on Me.’ For, ‘as cold waters are pleasant to those who are thirsty 4513 ,’ according to the proverb, so to those who believe in the Lord, the coming of the Spirit is better than all refreshment and delight.
2. It becomes us then in these days of the Passover, to rise early with the saints, and approach the Lord with all our soul, with purity of body, with confession and godly faith in Him; so that when we have here first drunk, and are filled with these divine waters which [flow] from Him, we may be able to sit at table with the saints in heaven, and may share in the one voice of gladness which is there. From this sinners, because it wearied them, are rightly cast out, and hear the words, ‘Friend, how camest thou in hither, not having a wedding garment 4514 ?’ Sinners indeed thirst, but not for the grace of the Spirit; but being inflamed with wickedness, they are wholly set on fire by pleasures, as saith the Proverb, ‘All day long he desires evil desires.’ But the Prophet cries against them, saying, ‘Wo unto those who rise up early, and follow strong drink; who continue until the evening, for wine inflameth them 4515 .’ And since they run wild in wantonness, they dare to thirst for the destruction of others. Having first drunk of lying and unfaithful waters, those things have come upon them, which are stated by the Prophet; ‘My wound,’ saith he, ‘is grievous, whence shall I be healed; it hath surely been to me like deceitful waters, in which there is no trust 4516 .’ Secondly, while they drink with their companions, they lead astray and disturb the right mind, and turn away the simple from it. And what does he cry? ‘Wo unto him who causeth his neighbour to drink turbid destruction, and maketh him drunk, that he may look upon his caverns 4517 .’ But those who dissemble, and steal away the truth, quench their hearts. Having first drunk of these things, they go on to say those things which the whore saith in the Proverbs, ‘Lay hold with delight on hidden bread, and sweet stolen waters 4518 .’ They lay snares secretly, because they have not the freedom of virtue, nor the boldness of Wisdom 4519 , who praises herself in the gates, and employs freedom of speech in the broad ways, preaching on high walls. For this reason, they are bidden to ‘lay hold with delight 4520 ,’ because, having the choice between faith and pleasures, they steal the sweetness of truth, and disguise their own bitter waters [to escape] from the blame of their wickedness, which would have been speedy and public. On this account, the wolf puts on the skin of the sheep, sepulchres deceive by their whitened exteriors 4521 . Satan, that is 4522 …
Footnotes
548:4504Matt. xxvi. 2.
548:4505Isa. liii. 4.
548:4506John vii. 37.
548:4507Cf. Letter vii. 5–7. The striking similarity between the seventh and the twentieth Letters has been already noticed.
549:4508Ps. 63:1, 2, LXX.
549:4509Is. xxvi. 9.
549:4510Ps. 19:20, 43, 44.
549:4511Ps. 25:15, Ps. 19:14, 1 Thess. 5:171 Thess. v. 17.
549:4512Hos. vi. 3.
549:4513John vii. 38; Prov. xxv. 25.
549:4514Matt. xxii. 12.
549:4515Prov. xxi. 26; Is. v. 11.
549:4516Jer. xv. 18.
549:4517Hab. ii. 15, LXX.
549:4518Prov. ix. 17.
549:4519Prov. 8.2.
549:4520Cf. Letter vii. §5.
549:4521Matt. vii. 15; xxiii. 27.
549:4522The Syriac ms. (which is imperfect) ends here. The fragments that follow are derived from different sources, mention whereof is made in the notes.
From Letter XXII 4523 .—(For 350.)
Where our Lord Jesus Christ, who took upon Him to die for all, stretched forth His hands, not somewhere on the earth beneath, but in the air itself, in order that the Salvation effected by the Cross might be shewn to be for all men everywhere: destroying the devil who was working in the air: and that He might consecrate our road up to Heaven, and make it free.
Footnotes
549:4523The above fragments are from Cosmos Indicopleustes: the Greek in Migne xxvi. 1432, sqq.
From Letter XXIV 4524 .—(For 352.)
And at that time when they went forth and crossed over Egypt, their enemies were the sport of the sea; but now, when we pass over from earth to Heaven, Satan himself henceforth falls like lightning from Heaven.
Footnotes
549:4524The above fragments are from Cosmas Indicopleustes: the Greek in Migne xxvi. 1432, sqq.
From Letter XXVII.—(For 355.) From the twenty-seventh Festal Letter of Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria and Confessor; of which the commencement is, ‘Again the season of the day of the living Passover 4525 .’
For who is our joy and boast, but our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who suffered for us, and by Himself made known to us the Father? For He is no other than He Who of old time spoke by the Prophets; but now He saith to every man, ‘I Who speak am near 4526 .’ Right well is this word spoken, for He does not at one time speak, at another keep silence; but continually and at all times, from the beginning without ceasing, He raises up every man, and speaks to every man in his heart.
Footnotes
550:4525The fragment here given of the twenty-seventh Letter, as well as fragments of the twenty-ninth and forty-fourth, are from Syriac translations, discovered by Mr. Cureton as quoted by Severus Patriarch of Antioch, in his work against Johannes Grammaticus contained in the Syriac collection of the British Museum (Cod. Add. 12, 157, fol. 202), and published by him with the preceding Letters. Their style would argue them to be part of the same translation.
550:4526John iv. 26.
From Letter XXVIII 4527 .—(For 356.)
…In order that while He might become a sacrifice for us all, we, nourished up in the words of truth, and partaking of His living doctrine, might be able with the saints to receive also the joy of Heaven. For thither, as He called the disciples to the upper chamber, so does the Word call us with them to the divine and incorruptible banquet; having suffered for us here, but there, preparing the heavenly tabernacles for those who most readily hearken to the summons, and unceasingly, and [gazing] at the goal, pursue the prize of their high calling; where for them who come to the banquet, and strive with those who hinder them, there is laid up both a crown, and incorruptible joy. For even though, humanly speaking, the labour of such a journey is great, yet the Saviour Himself has rendered even it light and kindly.
Footnotes
550:4527From Cosmas, see Migne xxvi. p. 1433.
Another Fragment.
But let us, brethren, who have received the vineyard from the Saviour, and are invited to the heavenly banquet, inasmuch as the Feast is now drawing nigh, take the branches of the palm 4528 trees, and proving conquerors of sin, let us too like those, who on that occasion went to meet the Saviour, make ourselves ready by our conduct, both to meet Him when He comes, and to go in with Him and partake of the immortal food, and from thenceforth live eternally in the heavens.
Footnotes
550:4528John xii. 13.
From Letter XXIX 4529 .—(For 357.) From the twenty-ninth Letter, of which the beginning is, ‘Sufficient for this present time is that which we have already written.’
The Lord proved the disciples 4530 , when He was asleep on the pillow, at which time a miracle was wrought, which is especially calculated to put even the wicked to shame. For when He arose, and rebuked the sea, and silenced the storm, He plainly shewed two things; that the storm of the sea was not from the winds, but from fear of its Lord Who walked upon it, and that the Lord Who rebuked it was not a creature, but rather its Creator, since a creature is not obedient to another creature. For although the Red Sea was divided before by Moses 4531 , yet it was not Moses who did it, for it came to pass, not because he spoke, but because God commanded. And if the sun stood still in Gibeon 4532 , and the moon in the valley of Ajalon, yet this was the work, not of the son of Nun, but of the Lord, Who heard his prayer. He it was Who both rebuked the sea, and on the cross caused the sun to be darkened 4533 .
Footnotes
550:4529If these fragments are authentic, the statement in the Index, that this year no letter could be sent, is an error.
550:4530Mark iv. 37-41
550:4531Exod. xiv. 21.
550:4532Josh. x. 12.
550:4533Matt. xxvii. 45.
Another Fragment 4534 .
And whereas what is human comes to an end, what is divine does not. For which reason also when we are dead, and when our nature is tired out, he raises us up, and leads us up [though] born of earth to heaven.
Footnotes
550:4534From Cosmas; Migne xxvi. 1436.
Another Fragment 4535 .
Here begins a letter of S. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, to his children. May God comfort you. I know moreover that not only this thing saddens you, but also the fact that while others have obtained the churches by violence, you are meanwhile cast out from your places. For they hold the places, but you the Apostolic Faith. They are, it is true, in the places, but outside of the true Faith; while you are outside the places indeed, but the Faith, within you. Let us consider whether is the greater, the place or the Faith. Clearly the true Faith. Who then has lost more, or who possesses more? He who holds the place, or he who holds the Faith? Good indeed is the place, when the Apostolic Faith is preached there, holy is it if the Holy One dwell there. (After a little:) But ye are blessed, who by faith are in the Church, dwell upon the foundations of the faith, and have full satisfaction, even the highest degree of faith which remains among you unshaken. For it has come down to you from Apostolic tradition, and frequently has accursed envy wished to unsettle it, but has not been able. On the contrary, they have rather been cut off by their attempts to do so. For this is it that is written, ‘Thou art the Son of the Living God 4536 ,’ Peter confessing it by revelation of the Father, and being told, ‘Blessed art thou Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood did not reveal it to thee,’ but ‘My Father Who is in heaven,’ and the rest. No one therefore will ever prevail against your Faith, most beloved brethren. For if ever God shall give back the churches (for we think He will) yet without 4537 such restoration of the churches the Faith is sufficient for us. And lest, speaking without the Scriptures, I should [seem to] speak too strongly, it is well to bring you to the testimony of Scriptures, for recollect that the Temple indeed was at Jerusalem; the Temple was not deserted, aliens had invaded it, whence also the Temple being at Jerusalem, those exiles went down to Babylon by the judgment of God, who was proving, or rather correcting them; while manifesting to them in their ignorance punishment [by means] of blood-thirsty enemies 4538 . And aliens indeed had held the Place, but knew not the Lord of the Place, while in that He neither gave answer nor spoke, they were deserted by the truth. What profit then is the Place to them?
For behold they that hold the Place are charged by them that love God with making it a den of thieves, and with madly making the Holy Place a house of merchandise, and a house of judicial business for themselves to whom it was unlawful to enter there. For this and worse than this is what we have heard, most beloved, from those who are come from thence. However really, then, they seem to hold the church, so much the more truly are they cast out. And they think themselves to be within the truth, but are exiled, and in captivity, and [gain] no advantage by the church alone. For the truth of things is judged…
Footnotes
550:4535The following fragment (Migne, ib. p. 1189), was published by Montfaucon from a Colbertine Latin ms. of about 800 a.d. He conjectured that it belonged to a Festal Letter. On this hypothesis, which is, however, as Mai observes, by no means self-evident, we append it to the above fragments of Letter 29, since internal evidence connects it with the handing over of the churches at Alexandria to the partisans of George, June, 356. At any rate, in spite of the heading of the fragment, its beginning is clearly not preserved.
551:4536Matt. 16:16, 17.
551:4537Text corrupt.
551:4538Lat. somewhat obscure.
From Letter XXXIX.—(For 367.) Of the particular books and their number, which are accepted by the Church. From the thirty-ninth Letter of Holy Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, on the Paschal festival; wherein he defines canonically what are the divine books which are accepted by the Church.
…1. They have 4539 fabricated books which they call books of tables 4540 , in which they shew stars, to which they give the names of Saints. And therein of a truth they have inflicted on themselves a double reproach: those who have written such books, because they have perfected themselves in a lying and contemptible science; and as to the ignorant and simple, they have led them astray by evil thoughts concerning the right faith established in all truth and upright in the presence of God.
…2. But 4541 since we have made mention of heretics as dead, but of ourselves as possessing the Divine Scriptures for salvation; and since I fear lest, as Paul wrote to the Corinthians 4542 , some few of the simple should be beguiled from their simplicity and purity, by the subtilty of certain men, and should henceforth read other books—those called apocryphal—led astray by the similarity of their names with the true books; I beseech you to bear patiently, if I also write, by way of remembrance, of matters with which you are acquainted, influenced by the need and advantage of the Church.
3. In proceeding to make mention of these things, I shall adopt, to commend my undertaking, the pattern of Luke the Evangelist, saying on my own account: ‘Forasmuch as some have taken in hand 4543 ,’ to reduce into order for themselves the books termed apocryphal, and to mix them up with the divinely inspired Scripture, concerning which we have been fully persuaded, as they who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word, delivered to the fathers; it seemed good to me also, having been urged thereto by true brethren, and having learned from the beginning, to set before you the books included in the Canon, and handed down, and accredited as Divine; to the end that any one who has fallen into error may condemn those who have led him astray; and that he who has continued stedfast in purity may again rejoice, having these things brought to his remembrance.
4. There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second 4544 are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and 4545 the epistle, one book; afterwards, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament.
5. Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are, the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterwards, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.
6. These are fountains of salvation, that they who thirst may be satisfied with the living words they contain. In these alone is proclaimed the doctrine of godliness. Let no man add to these, neither let him take ought from these. For concerning these the Lord put to shame the Sadducees, and said, ‘Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures.’ And He reproved the Jews, saying, ‘Search the Scriptures, for these are they that testify of Me 4546 .’
7. But for greater exactness I add this also, writing of necessity; that there are other books besides these not indeed included in the Canon, but appointed by the Fathers to be read by those who newly join us, and who wish for instruction in the word of godliness. The Wisdom of Solomon, and the Wisdom of Sirach, and Esther, and Judith, and Tobit, and that which is called the Teaching of the Apostles, and the Shepherd. But the former, my brethren, are included in the Canon, the latter being [merely] read; nor is there in any place a mention of apocryphal writings. But they are an invention of heretics, who write them when they choose, bestowing upon them their approbation, and assigning to them a date, that so, using them as ancient writings, they may find occasion to lead astray the simple.
Footnotes
551:4539This section is preserved in the Coptic (Memphitic) Life of S. Theodore (Amélineau Ann. du Musée Guimet. xvii. p. 239). Its contents and the context in which it is quoted appear decisive for its identification as part of Letter 39. But the Letter from which the fragment comes is stated in the context to have been received by Theodore in the spring previous to his death. If Theodore died in 364, as seems probable on other grounds (see p. 569, note 3), the speech from which our fragment comes must have been written for him by his biographer. This is not unlikely, nor does it throw any suspicion on the genuineness of the fragment itself.
551:4540Copt. ἀπογράμμων: astrological charts or tables appear to be meant.
551:4541The remainder of the thirty-ninth Letter has long been before the world, having been preserved, with the heading of the Letter, in the original Greek, by Theodorus Balsamon. It may be found in the first volume of the Benedictine edition of the works of S. Athan. tom. i. p. 767. ed. 1777. [Migne, ubi supra]. A Syriac translation of it was discovered by Cureton in an anonymous Commentary on the Scriptures in the collection of the British Museum (Cod. 12, 168). This translation commences only at the quotation from S. Luke. The Syriac is apparently the work of a different translator.
551:45422 Cor. xi. 3.
551:4543Luke i. 1.
552:4544i.e. Ezra and Nehemiah.
552:4545i.e. Baruch vi.—The Syriac has the conjunction, which is rejected by the Benedictine editors.
552:4546Matt. xxii. 29; John v. 39.
From Letter XL 4547 .—(For 368.)
‘Ye are they that have continued with Me in My temptations; and I appoint unto you a kingdom, as My Father hath appointed unto Me, that ye may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom 4548 .’ Being called, then, to the great and heavenly Supper, in that upper room which has been swept, let us ‘cleanse ourselves,’ as the Apostle exhorted, ‘from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God 4549 ;’ that so, being spotless within and without,—without, clothing ourselves with temperance and justice; within, by the Spirit, rightly dividing the word of truth—we may hear, ‘Enter into the joy of thy Lord 4550 .’
Footnotes
552:4547The following fragments are, except Letter 44, preserved in the original Greek, by Cosmas (Migne xxvi. 1440 sqq.).
552:4548Luke xxii. 28-30
552:45492 Cor. vii. 1.
552:4550Matt. xxv. 21.
From Letter XLII.—(For 370.)
For we have been called, brethren, and are now called together, by Wisdom, and according to the Evangelical parable, to that great and heavenly Supper, and sufficient for every creature; I mean, to the Passover,—to Christ, Who is sacrificed; for ‘Christ our Passover is sacrificed.’ (And afterwards:) They, therefore, that are thus prepared shall hear, ‘Enter into the joy of thy Lord 4551 .’
Footnotes
552:4551Matt. 25:21, 1 Cor. 5:7.
From Letter XLIII.—(For 371.)
Of us, then, whose also is the Passover, the calling is from above, and ‘our conversation is in heaven,’ as Paul says; ‘For we have here no abiding city, but we seek that which is to come 4552 ,’ whereto, also, looking forward, we properly keep the feast. (And again, afterwards:) Heaven truly is high, and its distance from us infinite; for ‘the heaven of heavens,’ says he, ‘is the Lord’s 4553 .’ But not, on that account, are we to be negligent or fearful, as though the way thereto were impossible; but rather should we be zealous. Yet not, as in the case of those who formerly, removing from the east and finding a plain in Senaar, began [to build a tower], is there need for us to bake bricks with fire, and to seek slime for mortar; for their tongues were confounded, and their work was destroyed. But for us the Lord has consecrated a way through His blood, and has made it easy. (And again:) For not only has He afforded us consolation respecting the distance, but also in that He has come and opened the door for us which was once shut. For, indeed, it was shut from the time He cast out Adam from the delight of Paradise, and set the Cherubim and the flaming sword, that turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life—now, however, opened wide. And He that sitteth upon the Cherubim having appeared with greater grace and loving-kindness, led into Paradise with himself the thief who confessed, and having entered heaven as our forerunner, opened the gates to all. (And again:) Paul also, ‘pressing toward the mark for the prize of the high calling 4554 ,’ by it was taken up to the third heaven, and having seen those things which are above, and then descended, he teaches us, announcing what is written to the Hebrews, and saying, ‘For ye are not come unto the mount that might be touched, and that burned with fire, and clouds, and darkness, and a tempest, and to the voice of words. But ye are come unto Mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, and to the general assembly and Church of the first-born, which are written in heaven 4555 .’ Who would not wish to enjoy the high companionship with these! Who not desire to be enrolled with these, that he may hear with them, ‘Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world 4556 .’
Footnotes
553:4552Phil. iii. 20; Heb. xiii. 14.
553:4553Ps. cxv. 16.
553:4554Phil. iii. 14.
553:4555Heb. xii. 18-23
553:4556Matt. xxv. 34.
From Letter XLIV.—(For 372.) And again, from the forty-fourth Letter, of which the commencement is, ‘All that our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ did instead of us and for us 4557 .’
When therefore the servants of the Chief Priests and the Scribes saw these things, and heard from Jesus, ‘Whosoever is athirst, let him come to Me and drink 4558 ;’ they perceived that this was not a mere man like themselves, but that this was He Who gave water to the saints, and that it was He Who was announced by the prophet Isaiah. For He was truly the splendour of the light 4559 , and the Word of God. And thus as a river from the fountain he gave drink also of old to Paradise; but now to all men He gives the same gift of the Spirit, and says, ‘If any man thirst, let him come to Me and drink.’ Whosoever ‘believeth on Me, as saith the Scripture, rivers of living water shall flow out of his belly 4560 .’ This was not for man to say, but for the living God, Who truly vouchsafes life, and gives the Holy Spirit.
Footnotes
553:4557See Letter 27, note 1.
553:4558John vii. 37.
553:4559Cf. Heb. i. 3
553:4560John 7:37, 38.
From Letter XLV.—(For 373.)
Let us all take up our sacrifices, observing distribution to the poor, and enter into the holy place, as it is written; ‘whither also our forerunner Jesus is entered for us, having obtained eternal redemption 4561 .’…(From the same:)…And this is a great proof that, whereas we were strangers, we are called friends; from being formerly aliens, we are become fellow-citizens with the saints, and are called children of the Jerusalem which is above, whereof that which Solomon built was a type. For if Moses made all things according to the pattern shewed him in the mount, it is clear that the service performed in the tabernacle was a type of the heavenly mysteries, whereto the Lord, desirous that we should enter, prepared for us the new and abiding way. And as all the old things were a type of the new, so the festival that now is, is a type of the joy which is above, to which coming with psalms and spiritual songs, let us begin the fasts 4562 .
Footnotes
553:4561Heb. vi. 20; ix. 12.
553:4562This fragment is the latest writing of Athanasius that we possess.
II. Personal Letters.
Letter XLVI.—Letter 4563 to the Mareotis from Sardica, a.d. 343–4.
Athanasius to the presbyters and deacons and the people of the Catholic Church in the Mareotis, brethren beloved and longed for, greeting in the Lord.
The holy council has praised your piety in Christ. They have all acknowledged your spirit and fortitude in all things, in that ye did not fear threats, and though you had to bear insults and persecutions against your piety you held out. Your letters when read out to all produced tears and enlisted universal sympathy. They loved you though absent, and reckoned your persecutions as their own. Their letter to you is a proof of their affection: and although it would suffice to include you along with the holy Church of Alexandria 4564 , yet the holy synod has written separately to you in order that ye may be encouraged not to give way on account of your sufferings, but to give thanks to God; because your patience shall have good fruit.
Formerly the character of the heretics was not evident. But now it is revealed and laid open to all. For the holy synod has taken cognisance of the calumnies these men have concocted against you, and has had them in abhorrence, and has deposed Theodore, Valens, Ursacius, in Alexandria 4565 and the Mareotis by consent of all. The same notice has been given to other Churches also. And since the cruelty and tyranny practised by them against the Churches can no longer be borne, they have been cast out from the episcopate and expelled from the communion of all. Moreover of Gregory they were unwilling even to make mention, for since the man has lacked the very name of bishop, they thought it superfluous to name him. But on account of those who are deceived by him they have mentioned his name; not because he seemed worthy of mention, but that those deceived by him might thereby recognise his infamy and blush at the kind of man with whom they have communicated. You will learn what has been written about them from the previous document 4566 : and though not all of the bishops came together to sign, yet it was drawn up by all, and they signed for all. Salute one another with a holy kiss. All the brethren salute you.
I, Protogenes 4567 , bishop, desire that you may be preserved in the Lord, beloved and longed for.
I, Athenodorus*, bishop, desire that ye may be preserved in the Lord, most beloved brethren. [Other signatures] Julian, Ammonius, Aprianus, Marcellus, Gerontius*, Porphyrius*, Zosimus, Asclepius, Appian, Eulogius, Eugenius, Liodorus (26), Martyrius, Eucarpus, Lucius*, Caloes. Maximus: by letters from the Gauls I desire that ye may be preserved in the Lord, beloved. We, Arcidamus and Philoxenus, presbyters, and Leo a deacon, from Rome, desire that ye may be preserved. I, Gaudentius, bishop of Naissus, desire that ye may be preserved in the Lord. [Also] Florentius of Meria in Pannonia, Ammianus (9), of Castellum in Pannonia, Januarius of Beneventum, Prætextatus of Narcidonum in Pannonia, Hyperneris (48) of Hypata in Thessaly, Castus of Cæsaraugusta, Severus of Calcisus in Thessaly, Julian of Therae Heptapolis 4568 , Lucius of Verona, Eugenius (35) of Hecleal Cycbinae 4569 , Zosimus (92) of Lychni 4570 Sunosion in Apulia 4571 , Hermogenes of Syceon 4572 , Thryphos of Magara, Paregorius* of Caspi, Caloes (21) of Castromartis, Ireneus of Syconis, Macedonius of Lypianum, Martyrius of Naupacti, Palladius of Dius, Broseus (87) of Lu[g]dunum in Gaul, Ursacius of Brixia, Amantius of Viminacium, by the presbyter Maximus, Alexander of Gypara in Achaia, Eutychius of Mothona, Aprianus of Petavio in Pannonia, Antigonus of Pallene in Macedonia, Dometius* of Acaria Constantias, Olympius of Enorodope 4573 , Zosimus of Oreomarga, Protasius of Milan, Mark of Siscia on the Save, Eucarpus of Opûs in Achaia, Vitalis* of Vertara in Africa, Helianus of Tyrtana, Symphorus of Herapythae in Crete, Mosinius (64) of Heracla, Eucissus of Chisamus 4574 , Cydonius of Cydonia 4575 .
Footnotes
554:4563This and the following letters were first printed by Scipio Maffei from a Latin ms. in the Chapter Library of Verona, along with the Historia Acephala. They were included in Galland, Bibl. Patr. vol. 5, and in Justiniani’s Ed. of Athanasius (Padua, 1777). The letters are printed in Migne, xxvi. 1333, sqq., along with one (from the same source) addressed by the Council to the Mareotic Churches. Hefele doubts their genuineness, but without reason (ii. 166, E. Tra.) The list of signatures (an independent source of information, supr. p. 147) alone proves the contrary. The two letters may be taken as a supplement to the documents given, Apol. c. Ar. 37–50 (see also p. 147), with which they have many points of resemblance. The Latin is very bad and occasionally without sense; it bears clear traces of being a rendering by an unskilful hand from Greek.
554:4564In the letter referred to in note 1.
554:4565i.e. has given notice to those places of their deposition.
554:4566The letter of the Council.
554:4567For the probably correct names and sees, see p. 147, sq. The asterisk denotes signatories of the letter of the Council to the Mareotis, the numbers in brackets denote those of the list on pp. 147, sq.
554:4568Thera was divided into seven districts. Herod. iv. 153.
554:4569These two sees are a puzzle.
554:4570These two sees are a puzzle.
554:4571Probably Canusium, the name of Stercorius being lost, lurks in this corruption.
554:4572In Galatia?
554:4573Æni in Thrace. D.C.B. iv. 75 (3).
554:4574In Crete, near Cydonia.
554:457559 signatures, to which add Stercorius (note 8) and Athanasius, making 61.
Letter XLVII.—To the Church of Alexandria on the same occasion.
Athanasius to all the presbyters and deacons of the holy Catholic Church at Alexandria and the Parembola, brethren most beloved, greeting.
In writing this I must begin my letter, most beloved brethren, by giving thanks to Christ. But now this is especially fitting, since both many things and great, done by the Lord, deserve our thanks 4576 , and those who believe in Him ought not to be ungrateful for His many benefits. We thank the Lord therefore, who always manifests us to all in the faith, who also has at this time done many wonderful things for the Church. For what the heretical party of Eusebius and heirs of Arius have maintained and spread abroad, all the bishops who assembled have pronounced false and fictitious. And the very men who are thought terrible by many, like those who are called giants, were counted as nothing, and rightly so, for just as the darkness is illuminated when light comes, so, iniquity is unveiled by the coming of the just, and when the good are present, the worthless are exposed.
For you yourselves, beloved, are not ignorant what the successors of the ill-named heresy of Eusebius did, namely Theodore, Narcissus, Valens, Ursacius, and the worst of them all, George, Stephen, Acacius, Menophantus, and their colleagues, for their madness is manifest to all; nor has it escaped your observation what they committed against the Churches. For you were the first they injured, your Church the first they tried to corrupt. But they who did so many great things, and were, as I said above, terrible to the minds of all, have been so frightened as to pass all imagination. For not only did they fear the Roman Synod, not only when invited to it did they excuse themselves, but, now also having arrived at Sardica, so conscience-stricken were they, that when they had seen the judges, they were astonished. So they fainted in their minds. Verily, one might say to them: ‘Death, where is thy sting, Death, where is thy victory?’ For neither did it go as they wished, for them to give judgment as they pleased; this time they could not over-reach whom they would. But they saw faithful men, that cared for justice, nay rather, they saw our Lord Himself among them, like the demons of old from the tombs; for being sons of falsehood, they could not bear to see the truth. So Theodore, Narcissus, and Ursacius, with their friends said as follows 4577 : ‘Stay, what have we to do with you, men of Christ? We know that you are true, and fear to be convicted: we shrink from confessing our calumnies to your face. We have nothing to do with you; for you are Christians, while we are foes to Christ; and while with you truth is powerful, we have learned to over-reach. We thought our deeds were hid; we did not think that we were now coming to judgment; why do you expose our deeds before their time; and by exposing us vex us before the day?’ and although they are of the worst character and walk in darkness, yet they have learnt at last that there is no agreement between light and darkness, and no concord between Christ and Belial. Accordingly, beloved brethren, since they knew what they had done, and saw their victims 4578 ready as accusers, and the witnesses before their eyes, they followed the example of Cain and fled like him; in that they greatly wandered 4579 , for they imitated his flight, and so have received his condemnation. For the holy council knows their works; it has heard our blood crying aloud, heard from themselves the voices of the wounded. All the Bishops know how they have sinned, and how many things they have done against our Churches and others; and accordingly they have expelled these men from the Churches like Cain. For who did not weep when your letter was read? who did not groan to see whom those men had exiled? Who did not reckon your tribulations his own? Most beloved brethren, you suffered formerly when they were committing evil against you, and perhaps it is no long time since the war has ceased. Now, however, all the Bishops who assembled and heard what you have suffered, grieved and lamented just as you did when you suffered the injuries and 4580 they shared your grief at that time.…
On account of these deeds then, and all the others which they have committed against the Churches, the holy general council has deposed them all, and not only has judged them aliens from the Church, but has held them unworthy to be called Christians. For how can men be called Christians who deny Christ? And how can men be admitted to church who do evil against the Churches? Accordingly, the holy council has sent to the Churches everywhere, that they may be marked among all, so that they who were deceived by them may now return to full assurance and truth. Do not therefore fail, beloved brethren; like servants of God, and professors of the faith of Christ, be tried in the Lord, and let not tribulation cast you down, neither let troubles caused by the heretics who plot against you make you sad. For you have the sympathy of the whole world in your grief, and what is more, it bears you all in mind. Now I think that those deceived by them will, when they see the severe sentence of the Council, turn aside from them and reject their impiety. If, however, even after this their hand is lifted up, do you not be astonished, nor fear if they rage; but pray and raise your hands to God, and be sure that the Lord will not tarry but will perform all things according to your will. I could wish indeed to write you a longer letter with a detailed account of what has taken place, but since the presbyters and deacons are competent to tell you in person of all they have seen, I have refrained from writing much. One thing alone I charge you, considering it a necessity, that having the fear of the Lord before your eyes you will put Him first, and carry on all things with your wonted concord as men of wisdom and understanding. Pray for us, bearing in mind the necessities of the widows 4581 , especially since the enemies of truth have taken away what belongs to them. But let your love overcome the malice of the heretics. For we believe that according to your prayers the Lord will be gracious and permit me to see you speedily. Meanwhile you will learn the proceedings at the Synod by what all the Bishops have written to you, and from the appended letter you will perceive the deposition of Theodore, Narcissus, Stephen, Acacius, George, Menophantus, Ursacius and Valens. For Gregory they did not wish to mention: since they thought it superfluous to name a man who lacked the very name of bishop. Yet for the sake of those deceived by him they have mentioned his name, not that his name was worthy of mention, but in order that those deceived by him may learn his infamy and blush for the sort of man they have communicated with 4582 .…I pray that you may be preserved in the Lord, brethren most beloved and longed for.
Footnotes
555:4576Latin hardly translateable.
555:4577Cf. Hist. Ar. and Introd. Fialon, p. 209, remarks on the uncritical adoption (by Fleury and his plagiarist Rohrbacher) of these satirical colloquies as an authentic account of what was actually said.
555:4578Lat. ‘quæcunque miserrimos videntes accusatores, testes præ oculis habentes:’ apparently a barbarous rendering of ἴδοντες καὶ τοὺς παρ᾽ αὐτῶν παθόντας, τοὺς κατηγόρους, τοὺς ἐλέγχους πρὸ ὀφθαλμῶν ἔχοντες, as in Apol. Ar. 45.
555:4579‘Granditer erraverunt,’ either for μακρὰν ἀπέφυγον, or for σφόδρα ἐπλημμέλησαν: no verb elsewhere used in this connection in Athanasius exactly corresponds to ‘erraverunt,’ nor is the flight to Philippopolis elsewhere compared, as here, to that of Cain. But the latter comparison is often used by Ath. in other connections.
555:4580illis…erat dolor communis illo tempore quo processistis. The Latin has quite lost the sense.
556:4581For the φιλοπτωχία of Athanasius, cf. Hist. Ar. 61, Vit. Ant. 17, 30, and the stress laid on the hardship of the ἄρτοι (as here) in Encycl. 4, Hist. Ar. ubi supr. and 72.
556:4582….‘tamen, et hoc cum illis.’
Letter XLVIII.—Letter to Amun 4583 . Written before 354 a.d.
All things made by God are beautiful and pure, for the Word of God has made nothing useless or impure. For ‘we are a sweet savour of Christ in them that are being saved 4584 ,’ as the Apostle says. But since the devil’s darts are varied and subtle, and he contrives to trouble those who are of simpler mind, and tries to hinder the ordinary exercises of the brethren, scattering secretly among them thoughts of uncleanness and defilement; come let us briefly dispel the error of the evil one by the grace of the Saviour, and confirm the mind of the simple. For ‘to the pure all things are pure,’ but both the conscience and all that belongs to the unclean are defiled 4585 . I marvel also at the craft of the devil, in that, although he is corruption and mischief itself, he suggests thoughts under the show of purity; but with the result of a snare rather than a test. For with the object, as I said before, of distracting ascetics from their customary and salutary meditation, and of appearing to overcome them, he stirs some such buzzing thoughts as are of no profit in life, vain questions and frivolities which one ought to put aside. For tell me, beloved and most pious friend, what sin or uncleanness there is in any natural secretion,—as though a man were minded to make a culpable matter of the cleanings of the nose or the sputa from the mouth? And we may add also the secretions of the belly, such as are a physical necessity of animal life. Moreover if we believe man to be, as the divine Scriptures say, a work of God’s hands, how could any defiled work proceed from a pure Power? and if, according to the divine Acts of the Apostles 4586 , ‘we are God’s offspring,’ we have nothing unclean in ourselves. For then only do we incur defilement, when we commit sin, that foulest of things. But when any bodily excretion takes place independently of will, then we experience this, like other things, by a necessity of nature. But since those whose only pleasure is to gainsay what is said aright, or rather what is made by God, pervert even a saying in the Gospels, alleging that ‘not that which goeth in defileth a man, but that which goeth out 4587 ,’ we are obliged to make plain this unreasonableness,—for I cannot call it a question—of theirs. For firstly, like unstable persons, they wrest the Scriptures 4588 to their own ignorance. Now the sense of the divine oracle is as follows. Certain persons, like these of today, were in doubt about meats. The Lord Himself, to dispel their ignorance, or it may be to unveil their deceitfulness, lays down that, not what goes in defiles the man, but what goes out. Then he adds exactly whence they go out, namely from the heart. For there, as he knows, are the evil treasures of profane thoughts and other sins. But the Apostle teaches the same thing more concisely, saying, ‘But meat shall not bring us before God 4589 .’ Moreover, one might reasonably say no natural secretion will bring us before him for punishment. But possibly medical men (to put these people to shame even at the hands of outsiders) will support us on this point, telling us that there are certain necessary passages accorded to the animal body, to provide for the dismissal of the superfluity of what is secreted in our several parts; for example, for the superfluity of the head, the hair and the watery discharges from the head, and the purgings of the belly, and that superfluity again of the seminative channels. What sin then is there in God’s name, elder most beloved of God, if the Master who made the body willed and made these parts to have such passages? But since we must grapple with the objections of evil persons, as they may say, ‘If the organs have been severally fashioned by the Creator, then there is no sin in their genuine use,’ let us stop them by asking this question: What do you mean by use? That lawful use which God permitted when He said, ‘Increase and multiply, and replenish the earth 4590 ,’ and which the Apostle approves in the words, ‘Marriage is honourable and the bed undefiled 4591 ,’ or that use which is public, yet carried on stealthily and in adulterous fashion? For in other matters also which go to make up life, we shall find differences according to circumstances. For example, it is not right to kill, yet in war it is lawful and praiseworthy to destroy the enemy; accordingly not only are they who have distinguished themselves in the field held worthy of great honours, but monuments are put up proclaiming their achievements. So that the same act is at one time and under some circumstances unlawful, while under others, and at the right time, it is lawful and permissible. The same reasoning applies to the relation of the sexes. He is blessed who, being freely yoked in his youth, naturally begets children. But if he uses nature licentiously, the punishment of which the Apostle 4592 writes shall await whoremongers and adulterers.
For there are two ways in life, as touching these matters. The one the more moderate and ordinary, I mean marriage; the other angelic and unsurpassed, namely virginity. Now if a man choose the way of the world, namely marriage, he is not indeed to blame; yet he will not receive such great gifts as the other. For he will receive, since he too brings forth fruit, namely thirtyfold 4593 . But if a man embrace the holy and unearthly way, even though, as compared with the former, it be rugged and hard to accomplish, yet it has the more wonderful gifts: for it grows the perfect fruit, namely an hundredfold. So then their unclean and evil objections had their proper solution long since given in the divine Scriptures. Strengthen then, father, the flocks 4594 under you, exhorting them from the Apostolic writings, guiding them from the Evangelical, counselling them from the Psalms, and saying, ‘quicken me according to Thy Word 4595 ;’ but by ‘Thy Word,’ is meant that we should serve Him with a pure heart. For knowing this, the Prophet says, as if interpreting himself, ‘Make me a clean heart, O God 4596 ,’ lest filthy thoughts trouble me. David again, ‘And stablish me with Thy free spirit 4597 ,’ that even if ever thoughts disturb me, a certain strong power from Thee may stablish me, acting as a support. Giving then this and the like advice, say with regard to those who are slow to obey the truth, ‘I will teach Thy ways unto the wicked,’ and, confident in the Lord that you will persuade them to desist from such wickedness, sing ‘and sinners shall be converted unto Thee 4598 .’ And be it granted, that they who raise malicious questions may cease from such vain labour, and that they who doubt in their simplicity may be strengthened with a ‘free spirit;’ while as many of you as surely know the truth, hold it unbroken and unshaken in Christ Jesus our Lord, with whom be to the Father glory and might, together with the Holy Spirit, for ever and ever. Amen.
Footnotes
556:4583See Migne xxvi. 1169, sqq.; Prolegg. ch. ii, §7. Amun, probably the Nitrian monk (supr. p. 212, and D.C.B. i. 102 init.). At any rate, Athanasius addresses his correspondent as ‘elder’ and ‘father,’ which accords well with the language of Vit. Ant. ubi supr. The letter states clearly Athanasius’ opinion as to the relative value of the celibate and married state. It also shews the healthy good sense of the great bishop in dealing with the morbid scrupulosity which even at that early date had begun to characterise certain circles in the Monastic world.
556:45842 Cor. ii. 15.
556:4585Tit. i. 15.
556:4586Acts xvii. 28.
557:4587Matt. xv. 11.
557:45882 Pet. iii. 16.
557:45891 Cor. viii. 8.
557:4590Gen. i. 28.
557:4591Heb. xiii. 4.
557:4592Heb. xiii. 4.
557:4593See Mark iv. 20, &c.
557:4594This is a clear reference to the Monastic Societies which had now long existed in the Nitrian desert.
557:4595Ps. cxix. 107.
557:4596Ps. li. 10.
557:4597Psa. 51.12
557:4598Psa. 51.13.
Letter XLIX.—Letter to Dracontius 4599 . Written a.d. 354 or 355.
I am at a loss how to write. Am I to blame you for your refusal? or for having regard to the trials, and hiding for fear of the Jews 4600 ? In any case, however it may be, what you have done is worthy of blame, beloved Dracontius. For it was not fitting that after receiving the grace you should hide, nor that, being a wise man, you should furnish others with a pretext for flight. For many are offended when they hear it; not merely that you have done this, but that you have done it having regard to the times and to the afflictions which are weighing upon the Church. And I fear lest, in flying for your own sake, you prove to be in peril in the sight of the Lord on account of others. For if ‘he that offendeth one of the little ones, should rather choose that a mill stone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depths of the sea 4601 ,’ what can be in store for you, if you prove an offence to so many? For the surprising unanimity about your election in the district 4602 of Alexandria will of necessity be broken up by your retirement: and the episcopate of the district will be grasped at by many,—and many unfit persons, as you are well aware. And many heathen who were promising to become Christians upon your election will remain heathen, if your piety sets at nought the grace given you.
2. What defence will you offer for such conduct? With what arguments will you be able to wash away and efface such an impeachment? How will you heal those who on your account are fallen and offended? Or how will you be able to restore the broken peace? Beloved Dracontius, you have caused us grief instead of joy, groaning instead of consolation. For we expected to have you with us as a consolation; and now we behold you in flight, and that you will be convicted in judgment, and when upon your trial will repent it. And ‘Who shall have pity upon thee 4603 ,’ as the Prophet says, who will turn his mind to you for peace, when he sees the brethren for whom Christ died injured on account of your flight? For you must know, and not be in doubt, that while before your election you lived to yourself, after it, you live for your flock. And before you had received the grace of the episcopate, no one knew you; but after you became one, the laity expect you to bring them food, namely instruction from the Scriptures. When then they expect, and suffer hunger, and you are feeding yourself 4604 only, and our Lord Jesus Christ comes and we stand before Him, what defence will you offer when He sees His own sheep hungering? For had you not taken the money, He would not have blamed you. But He would reasonably do so if upon taking it you dug and buried it,—in the words which God forbid that your piety should ever hear: ‘Thou oughtest to have given my money to the bankers, that when I came I might demand it of them 4605 .’
3. I beseech you, spare yourself and us. Yourself, lest you run into peril; us, lest we be grieved because of you. Take thought of the Church, lest many of the little ones be injured on your account, and the others be given an occasion of withdrawing. Nay but if you feared the times and acted as you did from timidity, your mind is not manly; for in such a case you ought to manifest zeal for Christ, and rather meet circumstances boldly, and use the language of blessed Paul: ‘in all these things we are more than conquerors 4606 ;’ and the more so in that we ought to serve not the time, but the Lord 4607 . But if the organising of the Churches is distasteful to you, and you do not think the ministry of the episcopate has its reward, why, then you have brought yourself to despise the Saviour that ordered these things. I beseech you, dismiss such ideas, nor tolerate those who advise you in such a sense, for this is not worthy of Dracontius. For the order the Lord has established by the Apostles abides fair and firm; but the cowardice of the brethren shall cease 4608 .
4. For if all were of the same mind as your present advisers, how would you have become a Christian, since there would be no bishops? Or if our successors are to inherit this state of mind, how will the Churches be able to hold together? Or do your advisers think that you have received nothing, that they despise it? If so surely they are wrong. For it is time for them to think that the grace of the Font is nothing, if some are found to despise it. But you have received it, beloved Dracontius; do not tolerate your advisers nor deceive yourself. For this will be required of you by the God who gave it. Have you not heard the Apostle say, ‘Neglect not the gift that is in thee 4609 ?’ or have you not read how he accepts the man that had doubled his money, while he condemned the one that had hidden it? But may it come to pass that you may quickly return, in order that you too may be one of those who are praised. Or tell me, whom do your advisers wish you to imitate? For we ought to walk by the standard of the saints and the fathers, and imitate them, and to be sure that if we depart from them we put ourselves also out of their fellowship. Whom then do they wish you to imitate? The one who hesitated, and while wishing to follow, delayed it and took counsel because of his family 4610 , or blessed Paul, who, the moment the stewardship was entrusted to him, ‘straightway conferred not with flesh and blood 4611 ?’ For although he said, ‘I am not worthy to be called an Apostle 4612 ,’ yet, knowing what he had received, and being not ignorant of the giver, he wrote, ‘For woe is me if I preach not the gospel 4613 .’ But, as it was ‘woe to me’ if he did not preach, so, in teaching and preaching the gospel, he had his converts as his joy and crown 4614 . This explains why the saint 4615 was zealous to preach as far as Illyricum, and not to shrink from proceeding to Rome 4616 , or even going as far as the Spains 4617 , in order that the more he laboured, he might receive so much the greater reward for his labour. He boasted then that he had fought the good fight, and was confident that he should receive the great crown 4618 . Therefore, beloved Dracontius, whom are you imitating in your present action? Paul, or men unlike him? For my part, I pray that you, and myself, may prove an imitator of all the saints.
5. Or possibly there are some who advise you to hide, because you have given your word upon oath not to accept the office if elected. For I hear that they are buzzing in your ears to this effect, and consider that they are thus acting conscientiously. But if they were truly conscientious, they would above all have feared God, Who imposed this ministry upon you. Or if they had read the divine Scriptures, they would not have advised you contrary to them. For it is time for them to blame Jeremiah also, and to impeach the great Moses, in that they did not listen to their advice, but fearing God fulfilled their ministry, and prophesying were made perfect. For they also when they had received their mission and the grace of Prophecy, refused. But afterwards they feared, and did not set at nought Him that sent them. Whether then you be of stammering utterance, and slow of tongue, yet fear God that made you, or if you call yourself too young to preach, yet reverence Him Who knew you before you were made. Or if you have given your word (now their word was to the saints as an oath), yet read Jeremiah, how he too had said, ‘I will not name the Name of the Lord 4619 ,’ yet afterwards he feared the fire kindled within him, and did not do as he had said, nor hid himself as if bound by an oath, but reverenced Him that had entrusted to him his office, and fulfilled the prophetic call. Or are you not aware, beloved, that Jonah also fled, but met with the fate that befel him, after which he returned and prophesied?
6. Do not then entertain counsels opposite to this. For the Lord knows our case better than we ourselves, and He knows to whom He is entrusting His Churches. For even if a man be not worthy, yet let him not look at his former life, but let him carry out his ministry, lest, in addition to his life he incur also the curse of negligence. I ask you, beloved Dracontius, whether knowing this, and being a wise man, you are not pricked in your soul? Do you not feel anxious lest any of those entrusted to you should perish? Do you not burn, as with a fire in your conscience? Are you not in fear of the day of judgment, in which none of your present advisers will be there to aid you? For each shall give account of those entrusted to his hands. For how did his excuse benefit the man who hid the money? Or how did it benefit Adam to say, ‘The woman beguiled me 4620 ?’ Beloved Dracontius, even if you are really weak, yet you ought to take up the charge, lest, the Church being unoccupied, the enemies injure it, taking advantage of your flight. You should gird yourself up, so as not to leave us alone in the struggle; you should labour with us, in order to receive the reward also along with all.
7. Make haste then, beloved, and tarry no longer, nor suffer those who would prevent you: but remember Him that has given, and come hither to us who love you, who give you Scriptural advice, in order that you may both be installed by ourselves, and, as you minister in the churches make remembrance of us. For you are not the only one who has been elected from among monks, nor the only one to have presided over a monastery, or to have been beloved by monks. But you know that not only was Serapion a monk, and presided over that number of monks; you were not unaware of how many monks Apollos was father; you know Agathon, and are not ignorant of Ariston. You remember Ammonius who went abroad 4621 with Serapion. Perhaps you have also heard of Muitus 4622 in the upper Thebaid, and can learn about Paul 4623 at Latopolis, and many others. And yet these, when elected, did not gainsay; but taking Elisha as an example, and knowing the story of Elijah, and having learnt all about the disciples and apostles, they grappled with the charge, and did not despise the ministry, and were not inferior to themselves, but rather look for the reward of their labour, advancing themselves, and guiding others onward. For how many have they turned away from the idols? How many have they caused to cease from their familiarity with demons by their warning? How many servants have they brought to the Lord, so as to cause those who saw such wonders to marvel at the sight? Or is it not a great wonder to make a damsel live as a virgin, and a young man live in continence, and an idolater come to know Christ?
8. Let not monks then prevent you, as though you alone had been elected from among monks; nor do you make excuses, to the effect that you will deteriorate. For you may even grow better if you imitate Paul, and follow up the actions of the Saints. For you know that men like those, when appointed stewards of the mysteries, all the more pressed forward to the mark of their high calling 4624 . When did Paul meet martyrdom and expect to receive his crown, if not after being sent to teach? When did Peter make his confession, if not when he was preaching the Gospel, and had become a fisher of men 4625 ? When was Elijah taken up, if not after completing his prophetic career? When did Elisha gain a double share of the Spirit, if not after leaving all to follow Elijah? Or why did the Saviour choose disciples, if not to send them out as apostles?
9. So take these as an example, beloved Dracontius, and do not say, or believe those who say, that the bishop’s office is an occasion of sin, nor that it gives rise to temptations to sin. For it is possible for you also as a bishop to hunger and thirst 4626 , as Paul did. You can drink no wine, like Timothy 4627 , and fast constantly too, like Paul 4628 , in order that thus fasting after his example you may feast others with your words, and while thirsting for lack of drink, water others by teaching. Let not your advisers, then, allege these things. For we know both bishops who fast, and monks who eat. We know bishops who drink no wine, as well as monks who do. We know bishops who work 4629 wonders, as well as monks who do not. Many also of the bishops have not even married, while monks have been 4630 fathers of children; just as conversely we know bishops who are fathers of children and monks ‘of the completest kind 4631 .’ And again, we know clergy who suffer hunger, and monks who fast. For it is possible in the latter way, and not forbidden in the former. But let a man, wherever he is, strive earnestly; for the crown is given not according to position, but according to action.
10. Do not then suffer those who give contrary advice. But rather hasten and delay not; the more so as the holy festival is approaching; so that the laity may not keep the feast without you, and you bring great danger upon yourself. For who will in your absence preach them the Easter sermon? Who will announce to them the great day of the Resurrection, if you art in hiding? Who will counsel them, if you are in flight, to keep the feast fittingly? Ah, how many will be the better if you appear, how many be injured if you fly! And who will think well of you for this? and why do they advise you not to take up the bishop’s office, when they themselves wish to have presbyters 4632 ? For if you are bad, let them not associate with you. But if they know that you are good, let them not envy the others. For if, as they say, teaching and government is an occasion of sin, let them not be taught themselves, nor have presbyters, lest they deteriorate, both they and those who teach them. But do not attend to these human sayings, nor suffer those who give such advice, as I have often already said. But rather make haste and turn to the Lord, in order that, taking thought for his sheep, you may remember us also. But to this end I have bidden our beloved Hierax, the presbyter, and Maximus the reader go, and bid you by word of mouth also, that you may be able thus to learn both with what feelings I have written, and the danger that results from gainsaying the ordinance of the Church.
Footnotes
557:4599Dracontius, Bishop of Hermupolis Parva, was one of the bishops expelled from their sees, 356–7. His place of exile was the desert near ‘Clysma,’ i.e. the gulf of Suez (Hist. Ar. 75, cf. Hieron. Vit. Hilar. 30). We find him in 362 at the Council of Alexandria. The present letter, written to urge Dracontius not to refuse the Episcopate, was written just before Easter (§10), when persecution was expected (§3), and after the mission of Serapion, Ammonius and others to Constantius, a.d. 353. It was probably written, therefore, early either in 354 or 355. The letter is one of the masterpieces of Athanasius: its unforced warmth, vigour, and affection can fail to touch no one who reads it. It is, like the letter to Amun, one of our most important documents for the history of Egyptian Monasticism. (Migne xxv. 524 sqq.)
558:4600Cf. John 3:2, John 19:38.
558:4601Matt. xviii. 6.
558:4602Hermupolis Parva was in the nome, or department, of Alexandria (anciently called the nome of Hermupolis in the Delta), and lay on a canal 44 miles east of the Capital; it is identified with Damanhur. Agathammon, a Meletian bishop of this ‘district,’ is mentioned in the list, Apol. Ar. 71, where the district of ‘Sais’ seems to include a much wider area than the ancient Saite nome (Maspero. Hist. Anc. 4, p. 24).
558:4603Jer. xv. 5.
558:4604Cf. Ezek. xxxiv. 2.
558:4605See Matt. 25:27, Luke 19:23Matt. xxv. 27, and Luke xix. 23. It is not clear whether by the ‘money’ received by Drac. is meant his actual consecration, or merely his election.
558:4606Rom. viii. 37.
558:4607Rom. xii. 11, and Westcott and Hort on various reading.
558:4608It should be observed that the fear of Dracontius was, not that he would suffer in dignity by becoming a bishop, but lest he should deteriorate spiritually (§8, init.). Cf. the dying soliloquy of Pope Eugenius IV.: ‘Gabriele, hadst thou never been Pope nor Cardinal it had been better for thy salvation.’ See also S. Bernard, de Consideratione.
559:46091 Tim. iv. 14.
559:4610Luke ii. 61.
559:4611Gal. i. 16.
559:46121 Cor. xv. 9.
559:46131 Cor. 9.16.
559:46141 Thes. ii. 19.
559:4615Reading τῷ ἁγί& 251· as proposed by Montf.
559:4616Rom. i. 15.
559:4617Rom. 15:19, 28.
559:46182 Tim. 4:7, 8.
559:4619Jer. xx. 9.
559:4620Gen. iii. 12.
560:4621In 353, see Fest. Ind. xxv.; Sozom. iv. 9.
560:4622Perhaps the ‘Muis’ of the Sardican subscriptions (Apol. Ar.) and the ‘Move’ of Vit. Pachom. c. 72.
560:4623Paulus, perhaps identical with the ‘Philo’ of Sard. subsc. and Vit. Pach. ubi supr. A ‘Philo’ and ‘Muius’ also occur close together in Apol. Fug. 7 (note 9).
560:4624Phil. iii. 14.
560:4625Matt. iv. 19.
560:4626Phil. iv. 12.
560:46271 Tim. v. 23.
560:46282 Cor. xi. 27.
560:4629σημεῖα. At the end of §7 this word can only be rendered ‘wonders.’ But here it appears at least probable that it has the different sense of ‘miracles.’
560:4630Probably the reference is to married men who had subsequently become monks. Or else, as monks at this time lived in many cases in the world, not in communities, it may refer to married men leading an ascetic life.
560:4631ἐξ ὁλοκλήρου γένους.
560:4632This is not our earliest notice of ordained persons in monastic societies. see Apol. Ar. 67.
Letter L.—First Letter to Lucifer 4633 .
To our lord, and most beloved brother the Bishop and Confessor Lucifer. Athanasius greeting in the Lord.
Being well in body by God’s favour, we have now sent our most beloved deacon Eutyches, that your most pious holiness, as is much desired by us, may be pleased to inform us of the safety of yourself and those with you. For we believe it is by the life of you Confessors and servants of God that the state of the Catholic Church is renewed; and that what heretics have assayed to rend in pieces, our Lord Jesus Christ by your means restores whole.
For although the forerunners of Antichrist have by the power of this world done everything to put out the lantern of truth, yet the Deity by your confession shews its light all the clearer, so that none can fail to see their deceit. Heretofore perhaps they were able to dissimulate: now they are called Antichrists. For who can but execrate them, and fly from their communion like a taint, or the poison of a serpent? The whole Church everywhere is mourning, every city groans, aged bishops are suffering in exile, and heretics dissembling, who while denying Christ have made themselves publicans, sitting in the Churches and exacting revenue 4634 . O new kind of men and of persecution which the devil has devised, namely to use such cruelty, and even ministers as the agents of evil. But although they act thus, and have gone all lengths in pride and blasphemy, yet your confession, your piety and wisdom, will be the very greatest comfort and solace to the brotherhood. For it has been reported to us that your holiness has written to Constantius Augustus; and we wonder more and more that dwelling as it were among scorpions you yet preserve freedom of spirit, in order, by advice or teaching or correction, to bring those in error to the light of truth. I ask then, and all confessors join me in asking, that you will be good enough to send us a copy; so that all may perceive, not by hearsay only but by letters, the valour of your spirit, and the confidence and firmness of your faith. Those who are with me salute your holiness. I salute all those who are with you. May the deity ever keep you safe and sound and mindful of us, most beloved lord, and true man of God.
Upon receiving this letter, blessed Lucifer sent the books which he had addressed to Constantius; and when he had read them Athanasius sent the following letter:
Footnotes
561:4633Lucifer, bishop of Calaris (Cagliari) in Sardinia, exiled by Constantius after the Council of Milan (Prolegg. ch. ii. §7), first to Germanicia, then to Eleutheropolis in Palestine, at both of which places he was subjected to harsh treatment, lastly to the Thebaid. The violence of his advocacy of the Nicene faith, coupled with extreme personal abusiveness, may have aggravated his sufferings. On his part in the events of 362, see Prolegg. ch. ii. §9. The present letters exist only in Latin (Migne xxvi. 1181), and are probably a translation from the Greek. Athan. may have known Latin, but there is no evidence that he ever wrote in that language. The play on the name Lucifer in Letter 51 proves nothing to the contrary. Dr. Bright (in D.C.B. i. 198, note) expresses a doubt as to the genuineness of our letters which is I think unsupported by internal evidence. The main difficulty is in the reconciliation of the apparent references (51 init.) to the events of 356 as recent with the clear references to the de Athanasio and Moriendum pro Filio Dei of Lucifer, neither of which works were penned before 358, while the latter in its final form mentions the translation of Eudoxius to CP., and therefore falls as late as 360 (for proof of this, see Krüger, Lucifer, pp. 102–109). But on close examination, the language of Letter 51 is satisfied by the events of 359, the vindictive commission of Paul Catena and the search for Athanasius among the Monasteries (cf. Letter 53, note 1). The respectful reference to Constantius in Letter 50 is of a purely formal character. The reference to the parents of Athanasius as still living is of great interest as one of the very few notices of the family of the great bishop (Prolegg. ch. ii. §1). The agitated tone of the Epistles reminds us of the Arian History, and they may be set down to about the year 359. On Lucifer, the monograph of Krüger is the standard authority.
561:4634An exact description of George in 357 and 358.
Letter LI.—Second Letter to Lucifer.
To the most glorious lord and deservedly much-desired fellow-Bishop Lucifer, Athanasius greeting in the Lord.
Although I believe that tidings have reached your holiness also of the persecution which the enemies of Christ have just now attempted to raise, seeking our blood, yet our own most beloved messengers can tell your piety about it. For to such a length did they dare to carry their madness by means of the soldiers, that they not only banished the Clergy of the city, but also went out to the Hermits, and laid their fatal hands upon Solitaries. Hence I also withdrew far away, lest those who entertained me should suffer trouble at their hands. For whom do Arians spare, who have spared not even their own souls? Or how can they give up their infamous actions while they persist in denying Christ our Lord the only Son of God? This is the root of their wickedness; on this foundation of sand they build up the perversity of their ways, as we find it written in the thirteenth Psalm, ‘The fool said in his heart there is no God;’ and presently follows, ‘Corrupt are they and become abominable in their works 4635 .’ Hence the Jews who denied the Son of God, deserved to be called ‘a sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, a seed of evil doers, children without law 4636 .’ Why ‘without law?’—because you have deserted the Lord. And so the most blessed Paul, when he had begun not only to believe in the Son of God, but also to preach His deity, wrote, ‘I know nothing against myself 4637 .’ Accordingly we too, according to your confession of faith, desire to hold the Apostolic tradition, and to live according to the commands of the divine law, that we may be found along with you in that band in which now Patriarchs, Prophets, Apostles and Martyrs are rejoicing. So then, though the Arian madness, aided by external power, was so active that our brethren on account of their fury could not even see the open air with freedom, yet by God’s favour, according to your prayers, I have been able, though with trouble and danger, to see the brother who is wont to bring me necessaries and the letters of your holiness, along with those of others. And so we have received the books of your most wise and religious soul, in which we have seen the image of an Apostle, the confidence of a Prophet, the teaching of truth, the doctrine of true faith, the way of heaven, the glory of martyrdom, the triumphs against the Arian heresy, the unimpaired tradition of our Fathers, the right rule of the Church’s order. O truly Lucifer, who according to your name bring the light of truth, and have set it on a candlestick to give light to all. For who, except the Arians, does not clearly see from your teaching the true faith and the taint of the Arians. Forcibly and admirably, like light from darkness, you have separated the truth from the subtilty and dishonesty of heretics, defended the Catholic Church, proved that the arguments of the Arians are nothing but a kind of hallucination, and taught that the diabolical gnashings of the teeth are to be despised. How good and welcome are your exhortations to martyrdom; how highly to be desired have you shewn death to be on behalf of Christ the Son of the living God 4638 . What love you have shewn for the world to come and for the heavenly life. You seem to be a true temple of the Saviour, Who dwells in you and utters these exact words through you, and has given such grace to your discourses. Beloved as you were before among all, now such passionate affection for you is settled in the minds of all, that they call you the Elijah of our times; and no wonder. For if they who seem to please God are called Sons of God, much more proper is it to give that name to the associates of the Prophets, namely the Confessors, and especially to you. Believe me, Lucifer, it is not you only who has uttered this, but the Holy Spirit with you. Whence comes so great a memory for the Scriptures? Whence an unimpaired sense and understanding of them? Whence has such an order of discourse been framed? Whence did you get such exhortations to the way of heaven, whence such confidence against the devil, and such proofs against heretics, unless the Holy Spirit had been lodged in you? Rejoice therefore to see that you are already there where also are your predecessors the martyrs, that is, among the band of angels. We also rejoice, having you as an example of valour, and patience, and liberty. For I blush to say anything of what you have written about my name 4639 , lest I should appear a flatterer. But I know and believe that the Lord Himself, Who has revealed all knowledge to your holy and religious spirit, will reward you for this labour also with a reward in the kingdom of the heavens. Since then you are such a man, we ask the Lord in prayer that you may pray for us, that in His mercy He may now deign to look down upon the Catholic Church, and deliver all His servants from the hands of persecutors; in order that all they too who have fallen on account of temporal fear may at length be enabled to raise themselves and return to the way of righteousness, led away from which they are wandering, poor people, not knowing in what a pit they are. In particular I ask, if I have said anything amiss, you would be good enough to overlook it, for from so great a fountain my unskilfulness has not been able to draw what it might have done. But as to our brethren, I ask you again to overlook my not having been able to see them. For truth itself is my witness that I wished and longed to compass this, and was greatly grieved at being unable. For my eyes ceased not from tears, nor my spirit from groaning, because we are not permitted even to see the brethren. But God is my witness, that on account of their persecution I have not been able to see even the parents whom I have 4640 . For what is there that the Arians leave undone? They watch the roads, observe those who enter and leave the city, search the vessels, go round the deserts, ransack houses, harass the brethren, cause unrest to everybody. But thanks be to God, in so doing they are more and more incurring the execration of all, and coming to be truly known for what your holiness has called them: slaves of Antichrist. And, poor wretches, hated as they are, they persist in their malice, until they shall be condemned to the death of their ancestor Pharaoh. Those with me salute your piety. Pray salute those who are with you. May God’s divine grace preserve you, mindful of us and ever blessed, worthily called man of God, servant of Christ, partner of the Apostles, comfort of the brotherhood, master of truth, and in all things most longed for.
Footnotes
561:4635Ps. xiv. 1.
561:4636Isa. i. 4.
561:46371 Cor. iv. 4.
562:4638Lucifer had written among other books one called ‘Moriendum pro Dei Filio.’ His two books ‘pro sancto Athanasio’ are referred to below.
562:4639Lucifer’s two books pro Athanasio.
562:4640‘Parentes quos habeo.’ Can this refer to literal parents? (1) he was now over 60 years old; (2) some 6 years later, under Valens, he hid, according to the tale in Socr. iv. 13, for four months in his father’s tomb (see Prolegg. ch. ii. §9).
Letter LII.—First Letter to Monks 4641 . (Written 358–360).
1. To those in every place 4642 who are living a monastic life, who are established in the faith of God, and sanctified in Christ, and who say, ‘Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed Thee 4643 ,’ brethren dearly beloved and longed for, heartiest greeting in the Lord.
1. In compliance with your affectionate request, which you have frequently urged upon me, I have written a short account of the sufferings which ourselves and the Church have undergone, refuting, according to my ability, the accursed heresy of the Arian madmen, and proving how entirely it is alien from the Truth. And I thought it needful to represent to your Piety what pains the writing of these things has cost me, in order that you may understand thereby how truly the blessed Apostle has said, ‘O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God 4644 ;’ and may kindly bear with a weak man such as I am by nature. For the more I desired to write, and endeavoured to force myself to understand the Divinity of the Word, so much the more did the knowledge thereof withdraw itself from me; and in proportion as I thought that I apprehended it, in so much I perceived myself to fail of doing so. Moreover also I was unable to express in writing even what I seemed to myself to understand; and that which I wrote was unequal to the imperfect shadow of the truth which existed in my conception.
2. Considering therefore how it is written in the Book of Ecclesiastes, ‘I said, I will be wise, but it was far from me; That which is far off, and exceeding deep, who shall find it out 4645 ?’ and what is said in the Psalms, ‘The knowledge of Thee is too wonderful for me; it is high, I cannot attain unto it 4646 ;’ and that Solomon says, ‘It is the glory of God to conceal a thing 4647 ;’ I frequently designed to stop and to cease writing; believe me, I did. But lest I should be found to disappoint you, or by my silence to lead into impiety those who have made enquiry of you, and are given to disputation, I constrained myself to write briefly, what I have now sent 4648 to your piety. For although a perfect apprehension of the truth is at present far removed from us by reason of the infirmity of the flesh, yet it is possible, as the Preacher himself has said, to perceive the madness of the impious, and having found it, to say that it is ‘more bitter than death 4649 .’ Wherefore for this reason, as perceiving this and able to find it out, I have written, knowing that to the faithful the detection of impiety is a sufficient information wherein piety consists. For although it be impossible to comprehend what God is, yet it is possible to say what He is not 4650 . And we know that He is not as man; and that it is not lawful to conceive of any originated nature as existing in Him. So also respecting the Son of God, although we are by nature very far from being able to comprehend Him; yet is it possible and easy to condemn the assertions of the heretics concerning Him, and to say, that the Son of God is not such; nor is it lawful even to conceive in our minds such things as they speak, concerning His Godhead; much less to utter them with the lips.
3. Accordingly I have written as well as I was able; and you, dearly beloved, receive these communications not as containing a perfect exposition of the Godhead of the Word, but as being merely a refutation of the impiety of the enemies of Christ, and as containing and affording to those who desire it, suggestions for arriving at a pious and sound faith in Christ. And if in anything they are defective (and I think they are defective in all respects), pardon it with a pure conscience, and only receive favourably the boldness of my good intentions in support of godliness. For an utter condemnation of the heresy of the Arians, it is sufficient for you to know the judgment given by the Lord in the death of Arius, of which you have already been informed by others. ‘For what the Holy God hath purposed, who shall scatter 4651 ?’ and whom the Lord condemned who shall justify 4652 ? After such a sign given, who do not now acknowledge, that the heresy is hated of God, however it may have men for its patrons? Now when you have read this account, pray for me, and exhort one another so to do. And immediately send it back to me, and suffer no one whatever to take a copy of it, nor transcribe it for yourselves 4653 . But like good money-changers 4654 be satisfied with the reading; but read it repeatedly if you desire to do so. For it is not safe that the writings of us babblers and private persons should fall into the hands of them that shall come after. Salute one another in love, and also all that come unto you in piety and faith. For ‘if any man’ as the Apostle has said, ‘love not the Lord, let him be anathema. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you 4655 . Amen.’
Footnotes
563:4641This beautiful and striking Letter (Migne xxv. 691) formed the introduction to a work, which the Author, as he says in the course of it, thought unworthy of being preserved for posterity. Some critics have supposed it to be the Orations against the Arians; but this opinion can hardly be maintained (supr. p. 267). The Epistle was written in 358, or later, before the Epistle to Serapion. On its relation to the ‘Arian History,’ see above, pp. 267, 268.
563:4642This appears inconsistent with the directions below, §3 (note 3). The heading is, therefore, of doubtful genuineness.
563:4643Matt. xix. 27.
563:4644Rom. xi. 33.
563:4645Eccl. 7:23, 24.
563:4646Ps. cxxxix. 6.
563:4647Prov. xxv. 2.
563:4648Probably a lost writing.
563:4649Eccles. vii. 26.
563:4650Newman observes in loc. “This negative character of our knowledge, whether of the Father or of the Son, is insisted on by other writers..…‘All we can know about the Divine Nature is, that it is not to be known; and whatever positive statements we make concerning God, relate not to His Nature, but to the accompaniments of His Nature.’ Damasc. F.O. i. 4; S. Basil c. Eunom. i. 10, ‘Totum ab animo rejicite; quidquid occurrerit, negate.…dicite non est illud.’ August. Enarrat. 2. in Psalm xxvi. 8. Cyril, Catech. xi. 11. Anonym. in Append. Aug. Oper. t. 5. p. 383.” [Patr. Lat. xxxix. 2175.]
563:4651Is. xiv. 27.
563:4652Rom. 8:33, 34, so quoted Ep. Æg. 19.
563:4653Letter 54, fin.
564:4654“On this celebrated text, as it may be called, which is cited so frequently by the Fathers, vid. Coteler. in Const. Apol. ii. 36. in Clement Hom. ii. 51. Potter in Clem. Strom. i. p. 425. Vales. in Euseb. Hist. vii. 7.” [Westcott, Introd. to Study of Gospels, Appendix C.]
564:46551 Cor. 16:22, 23.
Letter LIII.—Second Letter 4656 to Monks.
Athanasius, Archbishop 4657 of Alexandria, to the Solitaries.
Athanasius to those who practise a solitary life, and are settled in faith in God, most beloved brethren, greeting in the Lord.
I thank the Lord who hath given to you to believe in Him, that ye too may have with the saints eternal life. But because there are certain persons who hold with Arius and go about the monasteries with no other object save that under colour of visiting you, and returning from us they may deceive the simple; whereas there are certain who, while they affirm that they do not hold with Arius, yet compromise themselves and worship with his party; I have been compelled, at the instance of certain most sincere brethren, to write at once in order that keeping faithfully and without guile the pious faith which God’s grace works in you, you may not give occasion of scandal to the brethren. For when any sees you, the faithful in Christ, associate and communicate with such people, [or worshipping along with them], certainly they will think it a matter of indifference and will fall into the mire of irreligion. Lest, then, this should happen, be pleased, beloved, to shun those who hold the impiety [of Arius], and moreover to avoid those who, while they pretend not to hold with Arius, yet worship with the impious. And we are specially bound to fly from the communion of men whose opinions we hold in execration. [If then any come to you, and, as blessed John 4658 says, brings with him right doctrine, say to him, All hail, and receive such an one as a brother.] But if any pretend that he confesses the right faith, but appear to communicate with those others, exhort him to abstain from such communion, and if he promise to do so, treat him as a brother, but if he persist in a contentious spirit, him avoid. [I might greatly lengthen my letter, adding from the divine Scriptures the outline of this teaching. But since, being wise men, you can anticipate those who write, and rather, being intent upon self-denial, are fit to instruct others also, I have dictated a short letter, as from one loving friend to others, in the confidence] that living as you do you will preserve a pure and sincere faith, and that those persons, seeing that you do not join with them in worship, will derive benefit, fearing lest they be accounted as impious, and as those who hold with them.
Footnotes
564:4656This short letter, like those to Lucifer, was printed at first in Latin, evidently the almost servile rendering of a Greek original. The latter was discovered by Montfaucon after the completion of the Benedictine edition, and printed in his ‘Nova Collectio Patrum’ (1706). (Migne xxvi. 1185.)
The date is fixed a parte post in an interesting manner. We read in the Life of Pachomius, §88 (the story is also found in the Coptic documents in the collection of Zoega p. 36), that when Duke Artemius came to the monastery of Pabau in search of Athanasius, the steward of the community replied, ‘Although Athanasius is our Father under God, we have never seen his face.’ The Duke answered by a request for the prayers of the brethren before he left. The ‘abbat Psarphi’ replied that the ‘Father’ had forbidden the monks to pray with strangers who consorted with the Arians,—a clear allusion to the letter before us. Now Duke Artemius was in search of Athanasius in 359–60 (Fest. Ind.). Accordingly our letter was issued before that date.
The Greek text is evidently imperfect: the square brackets in the translation denote passages supplied from the Latin. The first part of the letter (down to the words ‘along with’…) is preserved in a contemporary inscription (Boeckh. C.I.G. iv. 8607) on the walls of an ancient Egyptian tomb at Abd-el-Kurna, which in those later days had become a monastic cell. The remainder is effaced. (See Fialon, p. 134, who has failed to notice the identity of the inscription with our present letter.)
564:4657This first heading is from the inscription mentioned above, note 1, and is important as recording a very early use of the title ‘archbishop.’ See also Letter 55, note 1, supr. p. 137, note 6, and Epiph. vol. ii. p. 188 c (Migne).
564:46582 John 10.
Letter LIV.—To Serapion, concerning the death of Arius.
Athanasius to Serapion 4659 , a brother and fellow-minister, health in the Lord.
I have read the letters of your piety, in which you have requested me to make known to you the events of my times relating to myself, and to give an account of that most impious heresy of the Arians, in consequence of which I have endured these sufferings, and also of the manner of the death of Arius. With two out of your three demands I have readily undertaken to comply, and have sent to your Godliness what I wrote to the Monks; from which you will be able to learn my own history as well as that of the heresy. But with respect to the other matter, I mean the death, I debated with myself for a long time, fearing lest any one should suppose that I was exulting in the death of that man. But yet, since a disputation which has taken place amongst you concerning the heresy, has issued in this question, whether Arius died after previously communicating with the Church; I therefore was necessarily desirous of giving an account of his death, as thinking that the question would thus be set at rest, considering also that by making this known I should at the same time silence those who are fond of contention. For I conceive that when the wonderful circumstances connected with his death become known, even those who before questioned it will no longer venture to doubt that the Arian heresy is hateful in the sight of God.
2. I was not at Constantinople when he died, but Macarius the Presbyter was, and I heard the account of it from him. Arius had been invited by the Emperor Constantine, through the interest of Eusebius and his fellows; and when he entered the presence the Emperor enquired of him, whether he held the Faith of the Catholic Church? And he declared upon oath that he held the right Faith, and gave in an account of his Faith in writing, suppressing the points for which he had been cast out of the Church by the Bishop Alexander, and speciously alleging expressions out of the Scriptures. When therefore he swore that he did not profess the opinions for which Alexander had excommunicated him, [the Emperor] dismissed him, saying 4660 , ‘If thy Faith be right, thou hast done well to swear; but if thy Faith be impious, and thou hast sworn, God judge of thee according to thy oath.’ When he thus came forth from the presence of the Emperor, Eusebius and his fellows, with their accustomed violence, desired to bring him into the Church. But Alexander, the Bishop of Constantinople of blessed memory, resisted them, saying that the inventor of the heresy ought not to be admitted to communion; whereupon Eusebius and his fellows threatened, declaring, ‘As we have caused him to be invited by the Emperor, in opposition to your wishes, so to-morrow, though it be contrary to your desire, Arius shall have communion with us in this Church.’ It was the Sabbath when they said this.
3. When the Bishop Alexander heard this, he was greatly distressed, and entering into the church, he stretched forth his hands unto God, and bewailed himself; and casting himself upon his face in the chancel, he prayed, lying upon the pavement. Macarius also was present, and prayed with him, and heard his words. And he besought these two things, saying, ‘If Arius is brought to communion to-morrow, let me Thy servant depart, and destroy not the pious with the impious; but if Thou wilt spare Thy Church (and I know that Thou wilt spare), look upon the words of Eusebius and his fellows, and give not thine inheritance to destruction and reproach 4661 , and take off Arius, lest if he enter into the Church, the heresy also may seem to enter with him, and henceforward impiety be accounted for piety.’ When the Bishop had thus prayed, he retired in great anxiety; and a wonderful and extraordinary circumstance took place. While Eusebius and his fellows threatened, the Bishop prayed; but Arius, who had great confidence in Eusebius and his fellows, and talked very wildly, urged by the necessities of nature withdrew, and suddenly, in the language of Scripture, ‘falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst 4662 ,’ and immediately expired as he lay, and was deprived both of communion and of his life together.
4. Such has been the end of Arius: and Eusebius and his fellows, overwhelmed with shame, buried their accomplice, while the blessed Alexander, amidst the rejoicings of the Church, celebrated the Communion with piety and orthodoxy, praying with all the brethren, and greatly glorifying God, not as exulting in his death (God forbid!), for ‘it is appointed unto all men once to die 4663 ,’ but because this thing had been shewn forth in a manner transcending human judgments. For the Lord Himself judging between the threats of Eusebius and his fellows, and the prayer of Alexander, condemned the Arian heresy, shewing it to be unworthy of communion with the Church, and making manifest to all, that although it receive the support of the Emperor and of all mankind, yet it was condemned by the Church herself. So the antichristian gang of the Arian madmen has been shewn to be unpleasing to God and impious; and many of those who before were deceived by it changed their opinions. For none other than the Lord Himself who was blasphemed by them condemned the heresy which rose up against Him, and again shewed that howsoever the Emperor Constantius may now use violence to the Bishops in behalf of it, yet it is excluded from the communion of the Church, and alien from the kingdom of heaven. Wherefore also let the question which has arisen among you be henceforth set at rest; (for this was the agreement made among you), and let no one join himself to the heresy, but let even those who have been deceived repent. For who shall receive what the Lord condemned? And will not he who takes up the support of that which He has made excommunicate, be guilty of great impiety, and manifestly an enemy of Christ?
5. Now this is sufficient to confound the contentious; read it therefore to those who before raised this question, as well as what was briefly addressed to the Monks against the heresy, in order that they may be led thereby more strongly to condemn the impiety and wickedness of the Arian madmen. Do not however consent to give a copy of these to any one, neither transcribe them for yourself (I have signified the same to the Monks also); but as a sincere friend, if anything is wanting in what I have written, add it, and immediately send them back to me. For you will be able to learn from the letter which I have written to the Brethren, what pains it has cost me to write it, and also to perceive that it is not safe for the writings of a private person to be published (especially if they relate to the highest and chief doctrines), for this reason;—lest what is imperfectly expressed through infirmity or the obscurity of language, do hurt to the reader. For the majority of men do not consider the faith, or the aim of the writer, but either through envy or a spirit of contention, receive what is written as themselves choose, according to an opinion which they have previously formed, and misinterpret it to suit their pleasure. But the Lord grant that the Truth and a sound 4664 faith in our Lord Jesus Christ may prevail among all, and especially among those to whom you read this. Amen.
Footnotes
564:4659On this letter (Migne xxv. 686) in relation to other writings, see above, Letter 52, note 1, and pp. 267, 268. Serapion would seem to have been the right-hand man of Athan. among the bishops of Egypt. The dates of his birth and episcopate are not certain, but the tone of the letters to him imply that he is junior to Athanasius. The theory of Ceillier, based on a precarious inference from the words of an untrustworthy writer (Philip of Side) that this Serapion (the name was very common) had presided over the catechetical school before Peter, i.e. at the end of the third century, is quite out of the question. Moreover, no Serapion appears among the Egyptian bishops at Tyre in 335 (p. 142), but the name occurs among the Alexandrian presbyterate of the same date (pp. 139, 140), while two bishops of the name sign the Sardican decrees (p. 127). It is then not unlikely that Athan. selected Serapion for the very important (Amm. Marc. xxii. 16) see of Thmuis in the Delta between 337 and 339 (supr. Letter 12, note 1). In 353 the trusted suffragan is chosen for a difficult and perilous mission to Constantius (supr. pp. 497, 504). For some reason we miss his name from the list of exiles in 356–7 (pp. 257, 297), nor is he named as present at the ‘Council of Confessors’ in 362. During the third exile, however, Ath. addressed to him our present letter, and an important dogmatic treatise (Prolegg. ch. iii. §1, no. 22). Serapion was a friend and legatee of S. Antony (supr. p. 220). The date of Serapion’s death is not known, but he is said to have been living after 368 (Leont. adv. fraud. Apoll. in Galland. xii. 701, see Bright, Later Treat. p. 44). For further details, and for writings ascribed to him, see D.C.B. iv. 613 (9). On the death of Arius, see Prolegg, ch. ii. §5.
565:4660Ep. Æg. 18.
565:4661Joel ii. 17.
565:4662Acts i. 18.
565:4663Heb. ix. 27.
566:4664ὑγιαινουσαν, vid. supr. p. 71, §5. fin.
Letter LV.—Letter to Rufinianus.
To our lord, son, and most desired fellow-minister Rufinianus 4665 . Athanasius greeting in the Lord.
You write what is proper for a beloved son to write to a father: accordingly, I embraced you when you came near me in writing, most desired Rufinianus. And I, though I might write to you as a son both in the opening and the middle and the close, refrained, lest my commendation and testimony should be made known by writing. For you are my letter, as it is written 4666 , known and read in the heart. That you then are in such case, believe, yea believe. I address you, and invite you to write. For by doing so you afford me the highest gratification. But since in an honourable and church-like spirit, such as becomes your piety, you ask me about those who were drawn away by necessity but not corrupted by error, and wish me to write what resolution has been come to about them, whether in synods or elsewhere; know, most desired Lord, that to begin with 4667 , when violence was ceased, a synod 4668 has been held, bishops from foreign parts being present; while others have been held by our fellow-ministers resident in Greece, as well as by those in Spain and Gaul 4669 : and the same decision was come to here and everywhere, namely, in the case of those who had fallen and been leaders of impiety, to pardon them upon their repentance, but not to give them the position of clergy: but in the case of men not deliberate in impiety, but drawn away by necessity and violence, that they should not only receive pardon, but should occupy the position of clergy: the more so, in that they offered a plausible defence, and what had happened seemed due to a certain special purpose 4670 . For they assured us that they had not gone over to impiety; but lest certain most impious persons should be elected and ruin the Churches they elected rather to acquiesce in the violence and to bear the burden, than to lose the people. But in saying this, they appeared to us to say what was plausible; for they alleged in excuse Aaron the brother of Moses, who in the wilderness acquiesced in the people’s transgression; and that he had had as his excuse the danger of the people returning to Egypt and abiding in idolatry. For there was reason in the view, that if they remained in the wilderness they might cease from their impiety: but if they went into Egypt they would become ruined and increase the impiety in their midst. For this reason, then, they have been allowed to rank as clergy, those who had been deceived and suffered violence being pardoned. I give this information to your piety in the confidence that you will both accept 4671 what has been resolved upon, and not charge those who assembled, as I have said, with remissness. But be good enough to read it to the clergy and laity under you, that they may be informed, and may not blame you for being thus minded about such persons. For it would not be fitting for me to write, when your piety is able to do so, and to announce our mind with regard to them, and carry out all that remains to be done. Thanks to the Lord that filled you 4672 with all utterance and with all knowledge. Let then those that repent openly anathematise by name the error of Eudoxius and Euzoius. For they blasphemed still, and wrote that He was a creature, ringleaders of the Arian heresy. But let them confess the faith confessed by the fathers at Nicæa, and that they put no other synod before that one. Greet the brotherhood with you. That with us greets you in the Lord.
Footnotes
566:4665This letter (Migne xxvi. 1180) deals with one of the questions which occupied the council of 362 (supr. p. 481), and was probably written not long after, although the contents furnish no precise terminus ad quem. The personality and see of Rufinianus are uncertain. The latter must have been distant from Alexandria: the Coptic documents call him ‘Rufinus the archbishop,’ which seems to place him outside Egypt. The mention of Eudoxius and Euzoius sub. fin. possibly points to Syria. I suspect that he is the ‘Lucinianus’ associated with ‘Eusebius’ (of Vercellæ?) in the little fragment (4) quoted in note 7 below, which comes from a letter of Ath. dealing with the same subject. The Coptic ‘Acts’ of Revillout, p. 462 (as referred to supr. p. 188) give part of a letter of Rufinianus himself, which shews that the correspondence of which our letter is the principal relic bore on the Christological decision of the Council of 362: ‘Sound is the idea of perfection for the Divinity, as for the Economy of the Manhood: Sound is the doctrine of the Divinity in a single essence. Pure, and wholesome for the souls of the faithful, is the Confession of the Holy Triad. Perfect then is the Economy of the Manhood of the Saviour, and Perfect is His Soul also; nothing is lacking to Him. It is thus that It was manifested to us.’
566:46662 Cor. iii. 2.
566:4667Immediately after the death of Constantius.
566:4668At Alexandria, a.d. 362, see above p. 481.
566:4669These unnamed councils are all connected with the general return of the exiled orthodox bishops on Julian’s accession. They are possibly the same as are referred to again in the opening of the letter to Epict. below, p. 570.
566:4670οἰκονομία
567:4671‘Do you, then, who confess all this, abstain, I pray, from condemning those who confess the same. But explain the words they use, nor, ignoring the latter, repel their authors. Nay, entreat and advise them, that they be willing to come to one mind.’ ad Eus. Lucin., &c., supr. note 1.
567:46721 Cor. i. 5.
Letter LVI.—To the Emperor Jovian.
Copy of a letter of the Emperor Jovian, sent to Athanasius, the most holy Archbishop of Alexandria.
To the most religious and friend of God, Athanasius, Jovian.
Admiring exceedingly the achievements of your most honourable life, and of your likeness to the God of all, and of your affection toward our Saviour Christ, we accept you, most honoured bishop. And inasmuch as you have not flinched from all labour, nor from the fear of your persecutors, and, regarding dangers and threats of the sword as dung, holding the rudder of the orthodox faith which is dear to you, are contending even until now for the truth, and continue to exhibit yourself as a pattern to all the people of the faithful, and an example of virtue:—our imperial Majesty recalls you, and desires that you should return to the office of the teaching of salvation. Return then to the holy Churches, and tend the people of God, and send up to God with zeal your prayers for our clemency. For we know that by your supplication we, and all who hold with us [the Christian faith], shall have great assistance from the supreme God.
56. Letter of Athanasius to Jovian 4673 concerning the Faith.
1. A desire to learn and a yearning for heavenly things is suitable to a religious Emperor; for thus you will truly have ‘your heart’ also ‘in the hand of God 4674 .’ Since then your Piety desired 4675 to learn from us the faith of the Catholic Church, giving thanks for these things to the Lord, we counselled above all things to remind your Piety of the faith confessed by the Fathers at Nicæa. For this certain set at nought, while plotting against us in many ways, because we would not comply with the Arian heresy, and they have become authors of heresy and schisms in the Catholic Church. For the true and pious faith in the Lord has become manifest to all, being both ‘known and read 4676 ’ from the Divine Scriptures. For in it both the saints were made perfect and suffered martyrdom, and now are departed in the Lord; and the faith would have abode inviolate always had not the wickedness of certain heretics presumed to tamper with it. For a certain Arius and those with him attempted to corrupt it, and to introduce impiety in its place, affirming that the Son of God was from nought, and a creature, and a thing made and changeable. But with these words they deceived many, so that even ‘they that seemed to be somewhat were carried away 4677 ,’ with their blasphemy. And yet our holy Fathers, as we said before, came promptly together at the Synod at Nicæa, and anathematised them, and confessed in writing the faith of the Catholic Church, so that, this being everywhere preached, the heresy kindled by the heretics might be quenched. This faith then was everywhere in every Church sincerely known and preached. But since now certain who wish to renew the Arian heresy have presumed to set at nought this faith confessed at Nicæa by the Fathers, and while pretending to confess it, do in fact deny it, explaining away the ‘Coessential 4678 ,’ and blaspheming of their own accord 4679 against the Holy Spirit, in affirming that It is a creature, and came into being as a thing made by the Son, we hasten as of bounden duty, in view of the injury resulting to the people from such blasphemy, to hand to your Piety the faith confessed at Nicæa; in order that thy religiousness may know what has been written with all accuracy, and how far wrong they are who teach contrary to it.
2. For know, most religious Augustus, that these things have been preached from time immemorial, and this faith the Fathers who met at Nicæa confessed; and to it have assented all the Churches in every quarter, both those in Spain, and Britain, and the Gauls, and all Italy and Dalmatia, Dacia and Mœsia, Macedonia and all Greece, and in all Africa and Sardinia, and Cyprus and Crete, as well as Pamphylia, Lycia and Isauria, and those in Egypt and the Libyas, Pontus and Cappadocia, and those near at hand to us 4680 , and the Churches in the East, except a few who hold with Arius. For of all those above mentioned we have both learnt the opinion by experience, and we have letters. And you know, O most religious Augustus, that even if some few speak against this faith, they cannot create a demurrer 4681 , inasmuch as the whole world 4682 holds the Apostolic faith. For they having long been infected by the Arian heresy, now the more obstinately oppose the truth. And that your Piety may know, although you know already, yet we hasten to append the faith confessed by the Bishops at Nicæa. The faith then confessed at Nicæa by the Fathers is as follows:—
3. We believe 4683 , &c., &c.
4. By this faith, Augustus, all must needs abide, as Divine and Apostolic, and none must unsettle it by plausibilities, and contentions about words, which is what the Arian madmen have done, saying that the Son of God is from nought, and that once there was when He was not, and that He is created, and made and changeable. For for this cause, as we said before, the Synod at Nicæa anathematised such heresy, but confessed the faith of the truth. For they have not merely said that the Son is like 4684 the Father, lest He should be believed merely like God, instead of Very God from God; but they wrote ‘Coessential,’ which was peculiar to a genuine and true Son, truly and naturally from the Father. Nor yet did they make the Holy Spirit alien from the Father and the Son, but rather glorified Him together with the Father and the Son, in the one faith of the Holy Triad, because there is in the Holy Triad also one Godhead.
Appendix to Letter LVI.
Petition made at Antioch to Jovian the Emperor on the part of Lucius 4685 and Bernicianus, and certain other Arians against Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria.
First Petition which they made as the Emperor was departing to Camp, at the Roman Gate.
May it please your Might and your Majesty and your Piety to hear us. The Emperor: ‘Who are you and where from?’ The Arians: ‘Christians, my Lord.’ Emperor: ‘Where from, and from what city?’ The Arians: ‘Alexandria.’—Emperor: ‘What do you want?’ The Arians: ‘May it please your Might and your Majesty, give us a Bishop.’ Emperor: ‘I ordered the former one, whom you had before, Athanasius, to occupy the See.’ The Arians: ‘May it please your Might: he has been many years both in banishment, and under accusation.’ Suddenly a soldier answered in indignation: ‘May it please your Majesty, enquire of them who they are and where from, for these are the leavings and refuse of Cappadocia, the remains of that unholy George who desolated the city and the world.’ The Emperor on hearing this set spurs to his horse, and departed to the Camp.
Second Petition of the Arians.
‘We have accusations and clear proofs against Athanasius, in that ten and twenty years ago he was deprived by the ever memorable Constantine and Constantius, and incurred banishment under the most religious and philosophical and blessed Julian.’ Emperor: ‘Accusations ten, twenty, and thirty years old are now obsolete. Don’t speak to me about Athanasius, for I know why he was accused, and how he was banished.’
Third Petition of the Arians.
‘And now again, we have certain other accusations against Athanasius.’ Emperor: ‘The rights of the case will not appear by means of crowded numbers, and clamours, but choose two from yourselves, and from the party of the majority other two, for I cannot answer each one severally.’ Those from the majority: ‘These are the leavings from the unholy George, who desolated our province, and who would not allow a counsellor to dwell in the cities.’ The Arians: ‘May it please you, any one you will except Athanasius.’ Emperor: ‘I told you that the case of Athanasius was already settled,’ (and then angrily) ‘feri, feri 4686 !’ The Arians: ‘May it please you, if you send Athanasius, our city is ruined, and no one assembles with him.’ Emperor: ‘Yet I took pains, and ascertained that he holds right opinions and is orthodox, and teaches aright.’ The Arians: ‘With his mouth he utters what is right, but in his soul he harbours guile.’ Emperor: ‘That will do, you have testified of him, that he utters what is right and teaches aright, but if he teaches and speaks aright with his tongue, but harbours evil thoughts in his soul, it concerns him before God. For we are men, and hear what is said; but what is in the heart God knows.’ The Arians: ‘Authorise our holding communion together.’ Emperor: ‘Why, who prevents you?’ The Arians: ‘May it please you, he proclaims us as sectarians and dogmatisers.’ Emperor: ‘It is his duty, and that of those who teach aright.’ The Arians: ‘May it please your Might; we cannot bear this man, and he has taken away the lands of the Churches.’ Emperor: ‘Oh then, it is on account of property you are come here, and not on account of the faith’—then he added—‘go away, and keep the peace.’ Once more he added to the Arians: ‘Go away to the Church, to-morrow you have a Communion, and after the dismissal, there are Bishops here, and here is Nemesinus 4687 , each one of you shall sign as he believes: Athanasius is here too; whoever does not know the word of faith, let him learn from Athanasius. You have to-morrow and the day after, for I am going out to Camp.’ And a certain lawyer 4688 belonging to the Cynics petitioned the Emperor: ‘May it please your Majesty, on account of Bishop Athanasius, the Receiver-General 4689 seized my houses.’ Emperor: ‘If the Receiver-General seized your houses what has that to do with Athanasius?’ Another lawyer, Patalas, said: ‘I have a complaint against Athanasius.’ Emperor: ‘And what have you to do with Christians, being a heathen?’ But certain of the majority of them of Antioch took Lucius and brought him to the Emperor, saying: ‘May it please your Might and your Majesty, look whom they wanted to make a Bishop!’
Another petition made at the porch of the palace 4690 on the part of Lucius:—‘May it please your Might, listen to me.’ The Emperor stopped and said: ‘I ask you, Lucius, how did you come here, by sea or by land?’ Lucius: ‘May it please you, by sea.’ Emperor: ‘Well, Lucius, may the God of the world, and the radiant sun, and moon, be angry with those men that made the voyage with you, for not casting you into the sea; and may that ship never again have fair winds, nor find a haven with her passengers when in a storm.’ And through Euzoius 4691 the unbelieving Arians asked Probatius and his fellows, the successors of Eusebius 4692 and Bardio as eunuchs, that they might be granted an audience. The Emperor learned this, and tortured the eunuchs and said: ‘If any one wants to make a petition against Christians let this be his fate.’ And so the Emperor dismissed them.
Footnotes
567:4673Cf. Prolegg, ch. ii. §9, and ch. v. §3, h. and supr. p. 487. Athanasius, on the first news of Julian’s death, by a secret and rapid journey, succeeded in meeting Jovian, when still beyond the Euphrates on his return from the East. He thus secured the ear of the new Emperor before the Arian deputation from Alexandria could reach him. The letter before us (Migne xxvi. 813) was drawn up at Antioch, as it would seem in response to a request from Jovian on a doctrinal statement. The short letter of Jovian prefixed to the Epistle is a formal authorisation for the bishop’s return to his see, with which, taught by his experience under Julian, he was careful to arm himself. The documents given as an appendix are notes made at Antioch, and carefully preserved, of the reception given by Jovian to the Arian deputation. They are probably the ‘exemplaria’ referred to in Hist. Aceph. §14 (see note there). They are characteristic, and interesting in many ways; among others, as shewing how accurately Jovian had been primed by Athanasius with the leading facts of his case.
567:4674Prov. xxi. 1. The letter as given by Theodoret adds, ‘and you will peacefully enjoy a long reign:’ probably the words were erased from our text on account of Jovian’s premature death. If genuine, they stamp the prediction supr. p. 487, as, at least in part, a vaticinium ex eventu.
567:4675Very probably orally, see Prolegg. ubi supr.
567:46762 Cor. iii. 2.
567:4677Gal. 2:6, 13.
567:4678This reference is explained above, Prolegg. ch. ii. §9 sub fin.
567:4679᾽Αὐτοί, i.e. adding this, as a feature of their own, to the Arianism they shared with their predecessors. Acacius seems to be specially referred to; he had just signed the Homousios with explanations; cf. Pseudo-Ath. de Hypocr. Melet. et Euseb.
568:4680This points to Antioch as the place of composition, which is fairly certain on other grounds.
568:4681πρόκριμα, a ‘præjudicium’ or prima facie objection in their favour.
568:4682A pardonable exaggeration, but its very use is significant; cf. de Syn. 33, and Bright’s note, Later Treatises, p. 20.
568:4683Ut supr. p. 75; the other authorities for the text of the creed in Hahn §73, note. Cf. Hort, p. 54 sqq. The only important variant here not noticed by Hort is τὸν ἕνα κύριον.
568:4684See above, pp. 83 and 84, note 4, also Prolegg. ii. §8 (2) b.
568:4685Originally Arian deacon (p. 70), and presently bishop of the Arians at Alexandria; see Hist. Aceph. p. 499, and Prolegg ch. ii. §10.
568:4686i.e. strike, strike! probably a direction to the guard to silence the petitioners.
569:4687Possibly an imperial notary or registrar, see D.C.B. iv. 15.
569:4688Σχολαστικός
569:4689καθολικός
569:4690In the New Town, on the island of the Orontes.
569:4691Originally one of the Arian clergy of Alexandria (supr. p. 70), now Arian bishop of Antioch.
569:4692Hist. Ar. 35, &c.
Letter LVII.—First Letter to Orsisius 4693 .
‘And having spent a few days there, he saith to the Abbat Theodorus: Since the Passover is nigh, visit the brethren after your manner; and as the Lord shall dispose me, I will do. And he embraced him, and sent him away, having written a letter by him to the Abbat Orsisius and the brethren, to the following effect:’—
I have seen your fellow-worker and father of the brethren, Theodorus, and in him the master of our father Pachomius. And I rejoiced to see the sons of the Church, and they made me glad by their presence. But the Lord is their recompenser. And as Theodorus was about to leave me for you, he said to me: Remember me. And I said to him: If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand be forgotten, yea let my tongue cleave to my throat if I remember thee not 4694 .
Footnotes
569:4693Orsisius was chosen abbat of Tabenne in Upper Egypt, a.d. 347, in succession to Petronius. Presently, however, he resigned in favour of Theodorus, the favourite disciple of Pachomius. The two letters which follow are from the life of Pachomius, §§92, 96, Acta SS. for May, vol. iii. (Also in Migne xxvi. 977.) They belong, the first to the year 363 a.d., not long before the death of Julian (D.C.B. i. 199a), the second to the summer of the following year, 364 (infr. note 3). Both letters are characteristic; the second a moving and simple consolation to mourners.
569:4694Ps. cxxxvii. 6, LXX.
Letter LVIII.—Second Letter to Orsisius.
‘But the most holy Archbishop Athanasius, when he heard about our father Theodorus, was grieved, and sent this letter to the Abbat Orsisius and the brethren to console them for his decease, as follows:’—
Athanasius to Orsisius, Abbat, father of monks, and to all with him who practise the solitary life, and are settled in faith in God, beloved brethren most longed for in the Lord, greeting.
I have heard about the decease of the blessed Theodorus 4695 , and the tidings caused me great anxiety, knowing as I did his value to you. Now if it had not been Theodorus, I should have used many words to you, with tears, considering what follows after death. But since it is Theodorus whom you and I have known, what need I say in my letter save ‘Blessed is’ Theodorus, ‘who hath not walked in the council of the ungodly 4696 ?’ But if ‘he is blessed that feareth the Lord 4697 ,’ we may now confidently call him blessed, having the firm assurance that he has reached as it were a haven, and has a life without care. Would that the same had also befallen each one of us; would that each of us in his running might thus arrive; would that each of us, on his voyage, might moor his own bark there in the stormless haven, so that, at rest with the fathers, he might say, ‘here will I dwell, for I have a delight therein 4698 .’ Wherefore, brethren beloved and most longed-for, weep not for Theodorus, for he ‘is not dead, but sleepeth 4699 .’ Let none weep when he remembers him, but imitate his life. For one must not grieve over one that is gone to the place where grief is not. This I write to you all in common; but especially to you, beloved and most longed for Orsisius, in order that now that he is fallen asleep, you may take up the whole charge, and take his place among the brethren. For while he survived, you two were as one, and when one was away, the work of both was carried on: and when both were there you were as one, discoursing to the beloved ones what made for their good. Thus act, then, and so doing write and tell me of the safety of yourself and of the brotherhood. And I exhort you all to pray together that the Lord may grant further peace to the Churches. For we now kept festival with joy, both Easter and Pentecost, and we rejoice in the benefits of the Lord. I write to you all. Greet all who fear the Lord. Those with me greet you. I pray that you may be well in the Lord, beloved and much-longed-for brethren.
Footnotes
569:4695On Theodore see Amelineau, S. Pakhôme, &c., pp. xcv.–xcvii. The death of Theodore is fixed for April 27, 364, on the following grounds. He died (Vit. Pachom. 95) of a short and sudden illness, on Pachon 2 (April 27), and shortly after Easter. Moreover his death took place 18 years after that of Pachomius. But Ammon (as he tells us himself, supr. p. 487) became a Christian and a monk ‘a year and more’ after March 15, 351 (proclamation of Gallus as Cæsar), and six years after the death of Pachomius. (Ep. Amm. 4, 5.) This dates the latter event a little less than five years before March 15, 351. But Pachomius died, according to his Life, on Pachon 14 (May 9), of an epidemic which attacked the community after Easter. This double condition is satisfied by the year 346, in which Easter fell on Pharm. 4, forty days before the day of Pachomius’ decease. If then Pachomius died in 346, Theodore died in 364. Against this result we have (1) the fact that in that year April 27 was twenty-three days after Easter; but the Easter gathering of the monks would last over April 11 (Low Sunday), and the death of Theodore would come suddenly enough a fortnight later; (2) the fragment (supr. p. 551) probably belonging to Letter 39, which a coptic life of Theodore makes him state that he received before his last Easter. But this cannot be correct; for all known data forbid us to place the death of Theodore as late as 367. (Tillemont’s tentative opinion, vii. 691, 761, is bound up with an obsolete chronology of the exiles of Athan.) On the other hand Theodore cannot have died as early as 363. Athanasius was with him (supr. p. 487) in the summer of that year, and when our present letter was written Ath. had clearly kept Easter at home, which suits 364, but excludes 363.
569:4696Ps. i. 1.
569:4697Ps. cxii. 1.
569:4698Psa. 132.14.
569:4699Matt. ix. 24.
Letter LIX.—To Epictetus.
To my Lord, beloved brother, and most-longed-for fellow-minister Epictetus 4700 , Athanasius greeting in the Lord. I thought that all vain talk of all heretics, many as they may be, had been stopped by the Synod which was held at Nicæa. For the Faith there confessed by the Fathers according to the divine Scriptures is enough by itself at once to overthrow all impiety, and to establish the religious belief in Christ. For this reason at the present time, at the assembling of diverse synods, both in Gaul and Spain, and great Rome 4701 , all who came together, as though moved by one spirit, unanimously anathematised those who still were secretly holding with Arius, namely Auxentius of Milan, Ursacius, Valens, and Gaius of Pannonia. And they wrote everywhere, that, whereas the above-said were devising the names of synods to cite on their side, no synod should be cited in the Catholic Church save only that which was held at Nicæa, which was a monument of victory over all heresy, but especially the Arian, which was the main reason of the synod assembling when it did. How then, after all this, are some attempting to raise doubts or questions? If they belong to the Arians, this is not to be wondered at, that they find fault with what was drawn up against themselves, just as the Gentiles when they hear that ‘the idols of the heathen are silver and gold, the work of men’s hands 4702 ,’ think the doctrine of the divine Cross folly. But if those who desire to reopen everything by raising questions belong to those who think they believe aright, and love what the fathers have declared, they are simply doing what the prophet describes, giving their neighbour turbid confusion to drink 4703 , and fighting about words to no good purpose, save to the subversion of the simple.
2. I write this after reading the memoranda submitted by your piety, which I could wish had not been written at all, so that not even any record of these things should go down to posterity. For who ever yet heard the like? Who ever taught or learned it? For ‘from Sion shall come forth the law of God, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem 4704 ;’ but whence came forth this? What lower region has vomited the statement that the Body born of Mary is coessential with the Godhead of the Word? or that the Word has been changed into flesh, bones, hair, and the whole body, and altered from its own nature? Or who ever heard in a Church, or even from Christians, that the Lord wore a body putatively, not in nature; or who ever went so far in impiety as to say and hold, that this Godhead, which is coessential with the Father, was circumcised and became imperfect instead of perfect; and that what hung upon the tree was not the body, but the very creative Essence and Wisdom? Or who that hears that the Word transformed for Himself a passible body, not of Mary, but of His own Essence, could call him who said this a Christian? Or who devised this abominable impiety, for it to enter even his imagination, and for him to say that to pronounce the Lord’s Body to be of Mary is to hold a Tetrad instead of a Triad in the Godhead? Those who think thus, saying that the Body of the Saviour which He put on from Mary, is of the Essence of the Triad. Or whence again have certain vomited an impiety as great as those already mentioned; saying namely, that the body is not newer than the Godhead of the Word, but was coeternal with it always, since it was compounded of the Essence of Wisdom. Or how did men called Christians venture even to doubt whether the Lord, Who proceeded from Mary, while Son of God by Essence and Nature, is of the seed of David according to the flesh 4705 , and of the flesh of the Holy Mary? Or who have been so venturesome as to say that Christ Who suffered in the flesh and was crucified is not Lord, Saviour, God, and Son of the Father 4706 ? Or how can they wish to be called Christians who say that the Word has descended upon a holy man as upon one of the prophets, and has not Himself become man, taking the body from Mary; but that Christ is one person, while the Word of God, Who before Mary and before the ages was Son of the Father, is another? Or how can they be Christians who say that the Son is one, and the Word of God another?
3. Such were the contents of the memoranda; diverse statements, but one in their sense and in their meaning; tending to impiety. It was for these things that men who make their boast in the confession of the fathers drawn up at Nicæa were disputing and quarrelling with one another. But I marvel that your piety suffered it, and that you did not stop those who said such things, and propound to them the right faith, so that upon hearing it they might hold their peace, or if they opposed it might be counted as heretics. For the statements are not fit for Christians to make or to hear, on the contrary they are in every way alien from the Apostolic teaching. For this reason, as I said above, I have caused what they say to be baldly inserted in my letter, so that one who merely hears may perceive the shame and impiety therein contained. And although it would be right to denounce and expose in full the folly of those who have had such ideas, yet it would be a good thing to close my letter here and write no more. For what is so manifestly shewn to be evil, it is not necessary to waste time in exposing further, lest contentious persons think the matter doubtful. It is enough merely to answer such things as follows: we are content with the fact that this is not the teaching of the Catholic Church, nor did the fathers hold this. But lest the ‘inventors of evil things 4707 ’ make entire silence on our part a pretext for shamelessness, it will be well to mention a few points from Holy Scripture, in case they may even thus be put to shame, and cease from these foul devices.
4. Whence did it occur to you, sirs, to say that the Body is of one Essence with the Godhead of the Word? For it is well to begin at this point, in order that by shewing this opinion to be unsound, all the others too may be proved to be the same. Now from the divine Scriptures we discover nothing of the kind. For they say that God came in a human body. But the fathers who also assembled at Nicæa say that, not the body, but the Son Himself is coessential with the Father, and that while He is of the Essence of the Father, the body, as they admitted according to the Scriptures, is of Mary. Either then deny the Synod of Nicæa, and as heretics bring in your doctrine from the side; or, if you wish to be children of the fathers, do not hold the contrary of what they wrote. For here again you may see how monstrous it is: If the Word is coessential with the body which is of earthly nature, while the Word is, by your own confession, coessential with the Father, it will follow that even the Father Himself is coessential with the body produced from the earth. And why any longer blame the Arians for calling the Son a creature, when you go off to another form of impiety, saying that the Word was changed into flesh and bones and hair and muscles and all the body, and was altered from its own nature? For it is time for you to say openly that He was born of earth; for from earth is the nature of the bones and of all the body. What then is this great folly of yours, that you fight even with one another? For in saying that the Word is coessential with the Body, you distinguish the one from the other 4708 , while in saying that He has been changed into flesh, you imagine a change of the Word Himself. And who will tolerate you any longer if you so much as utter these opinions? For you have gone further in impiety than any heresy. For if the Word is coessential with the Body, the commemoration and the work of Mary are superfluous 4709 , inasmuch as the body could have existed before Mary, just as the Word also is eternal: if, that is, it is as you say co-essential with the Body. Or what need was there even of the Word coming among us, to put on what was coessential with Himself, or to change His own nature and become a body? For the Deity does not take hold 4710 of itself, so as to put on what is of its own Essence, any more than the Word sinned, in that it ransoms the sins of others, in order that changing into a body it should offer itself a sacrifice for itself, and ransom itself.
5. But this is not so, far be the thought. For he ‘takes hold of the seed of Abraham 4711 ,’ as the apostle said; whence it behoved Him to be made like His brethren in all things, and to take a Body like us. This is why Mary is truly presupposed, in order that He may take it from her, and offer it for us as His own. And this Isaiah pointed to in his prophecy, in the words: ‘Behold the Virgin 4712 ,’ while Gabriel is sent to her—not simply to a virgin, but ‘to a virgin betrothed to a man 4713 ,’ in order that by means of the betrothed man he might shew that Mary was really a human being. And for this reason Scripture also mentions her bringing forth, and tells of her wrapping Him in swaddling clothes; and therefore, too, the paps which He sucked were called blessed 4714 . And He was offered as a sacrifice, in that He Who was born had opened the womb 4715 . Now all these things are proofs that the Virgin brought forth. And Gabriel preached the Gospel to her without uncertainty, saying not merely ‘what is born in thee,’ lest the body should be thought to be extraneously induced upon her, but ‘of thee,’ that what was born might be believed to be naturally from her, inasmuch as Nature clearly shews that it is impossible for a virgin to produce milk unless she has brought forth, and impossible for a body to be nourished with milk and wrapped in swaddling clothes unless it has previously been naturally brought forth. This is the meaning of His being circumcised on the eighth day: of Symeon taking Him in his arms, of His becoming a young child, and growing when He was twelve years old, and of His coming to His thirtieth year. For it was not, as some suppose, the very Essence of the Word that was changed, and was circumcised, because it is incapable of alteration or change. For the Saviour Himself says, ‘Behold, behold, it is I, and I change not 4716 ,’ while Paul writes: ‘Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever 4717 .’ But in the Body which was circumcised, and carried, and ate and drank, and was weary, and was nailed on the tree and suffered, there was the impassible and incorporeal Word of God. This Body it was that was laid in a grave, when the Word had left it, yet was not parted from it, to preach, as Peter says, also to the spirits in prison 4718 .
6. And this above all shews the foolishness of those who say that the Word was changed into bones and flesh. For if this had been so, there were no need of a tomb. For the Body would have gone by itself to preach to the spirits in Hades. But as it was, He Himself went to preach, while the Body Joseph wrapped in a linen cloth, and laid it away at Golgotha 4719 . And so it is shewn to all that the Body was not the Word, but Body of the Word. And it was this that Thomas handled when it had risen from the dead, and saw in it the print of the nails, which the Word Himself had undergone, seeing them fixed in His own Body, and though able to prevent it, did not do so. On the contrary, the incorporeal Word made His own the properties of the Body, as being His own Body. Why, when the Body was struck by the attendant, as suffering Himself He asked, ‘Why smitest thou Me 4720 ?’ And being by nature intangible, the Word yet said, ‘I gave My back to the stripes, and My cheeks to blows, and hid not My face from shame and spitting 4721 .’ For what the human Body of the Word suffered, this the Word, dwelling in the body, ascribed to Himself, in order that we might be enabled to be partakers of the Godhead of the Word 4722 . And verily it is strange that He it was Who suffered and yet suffered not. Suffered, because His own Body suffered, and He was in it, which thus suffered; suffered not, because the Word, being by Nature God, is impassible. And while He, the incorporeal, was in the passible Body, the Body had in it the impassible Word, which was destroying the infirmities inherent in the Body. But this He did, and so it was, in order that Himself taking what was ours and offering it as a sacrifice, He might do away with it, and conversely might invest us with what was His, and cause the Apostle to say: ‘This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality 4723 .’
7. Now this did not come to pass putatively, as some have supposed: far be the thought: but the Saviour having in very truth become Man, the salvation of the whole man was brought about. For if the Word were in the Body putatively, as they say, and by putative is meant imaginary, it follows that both the salvation and the resurrection of man is apparent only, as the most impious Manichæus held. But truly our salvation is not merely apparent, nor does it extend to the body only, but the whole man, body and soul alike, has truly obtained salvation in the Word Himself. That then which was born of Mary was according to the divine Scriptures human by nature, and the Body of the Lord was a true one; but it was this, because it was the same as our body, for Mary was our sister inasmuch as we all are from Adam. And no one can doubt of this when he remembers what Luke wrote. For after He had risen from the dead, when some thought that they did not see the Lord in the body derived from Mary, but were beholding a spirit instead, He said, ‘See My hands and My feet, and the prints of the nails, that it is I Myself: handle Me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me to have. And when He had said thus, He shewed them His hands and His feet 4724 .’ Whence they can be refuted who have ventured to say that the Lord was transformed into flesh and bones. For He did not say, ‘As ye see Me to be flesh and bone,’ but ‘as ye see Me to have,’ in order that it might not be thought that the Word Himself was changed into these things, but that He might be believed to have them after His resurrection as well as before His death.
8. These things being thus demonstrated, it is superfluous to touch upon the other points, or to enter upon any discussion relating to them, since the body in which the Word was is not coessential with the Godhead, but was truly born of Mary, while the Word Himself was not changed into bones and flesh, but came in the flesh. For what John said, ‘The Word was made flesh 4725 ,’ has this meaning, as we may see by a similar passage; for it is written in Paul: ‘Christ has become a curse for us 4726 .’ And just as He has not Himself become a curse, but is said to have done so because He took upon Him the curse on our behalf, so also He has become flesh not by being changed into flesh, but because He assumed on our behalf living flesh, and has become Man. For to say ‘the Word became flesh,’ is equivalent to saying ‘the Word has become man;’ according to what is said in Joel: ‘I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all flesh 4727 ;’ for the promise did not extend to the irrational animals, but is for men, on whose account the Lord is become Man. As then this is the sense of the above text, they all will reasonably condemn themselves who have thought that the flesh derived from Mary existed before her, and that the Word, prior to her, had a human soul, and existed in it always even before His coming. And they too will cease who have said that the Flesh was not accessible to death, but belonged to the immortal Nature. For if it did not die, how could Paul deliver to the Corinthians ‘that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures 4728 ,’ or how did He rise at all if He did not also die? Again, they will blush deeply who have even entertained the possibility of a Tetrad instead of a Triad resulting, if it were said that the Body was derived from Mary. For if (they argue) we say the Body is of one Essence with the Word, the Triad remains a Triad; for then the Word imports no foreign element into it; but if we admit that the Body derived from Mary is human, it follows, since the Body is foreign in Essence, and the Word is in it, that the addition of the Body causes a Tetrad instead of a Triad.
9. When they argue thus, they fail to perceive the contradiction in which they involve themselves. For even though they say that the Body is not from Mary, but is coessential with the Word, yet none the less (the very point they dissemble, to avoid being credited with their real opinion) this on their own premises can be proved to involve a Tetrad. For as the Son, according to the Fathers, is coessential with the Father, but is not the Father Himself, but is called coessential, as Son with Father, so the Body, which they call coessential with the Word, is not the Word Himself, but a distinct entity. But if so, on their own shewing, their Triad will be a Tetrad 4729 . For the true, really perfect and indivisible Triad is not accessible to addition as is the Triad imagined by these persons. And how do these remain Christians who imagine another God in addition to the true one? For, once again, in their other fallacy one can see how great is their folly. For if they think because it is contained and stated in the Scriptures, that the Body of the Saviour is human and derived from Mary, that a Tetrad is substituted for a Triad, as though the Body created an addition, they go very far wrong, so much so as to make the creature equal to the Creator, and suppose that the Godhead can receive an addition. And they have failed to perceive that the Word is become Flesh, not by reason of an addition to the Godhead, but in order that the flesh may rise again. Nor did the Word proceed from Mary that He might be bettered, but that He might ransom the human race. How then can they think that the Body, ransomed and quickened by the Word, made an addition in respect of Godhead to the Word that had quickened it? For on the contrary, a great addition has accrued to the human Body itself from the fellowship and union of the Word with it. For instead of mortal it is become immortal; and, though an animal 4730 body, it is become spiritual, and though made from earth it entered the heavenly gates. The Triad, then, although the Word took a body from Mary, is a Triad, being inaccessible to addition or diminution; but it is always perfect, and in the Triad one Godhead is recognised, and so in the Church one God is preached, the Father of the Word.
10. For this reason they also will henceforth keep silence, who once said that He who proceeded from Mary is not very Christ, or Lord, or God. For if He were not God in the Body, how came He, upon proceeding from Mary, straightway to be called ‘Emmanuel, which is being interpreted God with us 4731 ?’ Why again, if the Word was not in the flesh, did Paul write to the Romans ‘of whom is Christ after the flesh, Who is above all God blessed for ever. Amen 4732 ?’ Let them therefore confess, even they who previously denied that the Crucified was God, that they have erred; for the divine Scriptures bid them, and especially Thomas, who, after seeing upon Him the print of the nails, cried out ‘My Lord and my God 4733 !’ For the Son, being God, and Lord of glory 4734 , was in the Body which was ingloriously nailed and dishonoured; but the Body, while it suffered, being pierced on the tree, and water and blood flowed from its side, yet because it was a temple of the Word was filled full of the Godhead. For this reason it was that the sun, seeing its creator suffering in His outraged body, withdrew its rays and darkened the earth. But the body itself being of mortal nature, beyond its own nature rose again by reason of the Word which was in it; and it has ceased from natural corruption, and, having put on the Word which is above man, has become incorruptible.
11. But with regard to the imagination of some, who say that the Word came upon one particular man, the Son of Mary, just as it came upon each of the Prophets, it is superfluous to discuss it, since their madness carries its own condemnation manifestly with it. For if He came thus, why was that man born of a virgin, and not like others of a man and woman? For in this way each of the saints also was begotten. Or why, if the Word came thus, is not the death of each one said to have taken place on our behalf, but only this man’s death? Or why, if the Word sojourned among us in the case of each one of the prophets, is it said only in the case of Him born of Mary that He sojourned here ‘once at the consummation of the ages 4735 ?’ Or why, if He came as He had come in the saints of former times, did the Son of Mary alone, while all the rest had died without rising as yet, rise again on the third day? Or why, if the Word had come in like manner as He had done in the other cases, is the Son of Mary alone called Emmanuel, as though a Body filled full of the Godhead were born of her? For Emmanuel is interpreted ‘God with us.’ Or why, if He came thus, is it not said that when each of the saints ate, drank, laboured, and died, that He (the Word) ate, drank, laboured, and died, but only in the case of the Son of Mary. For what that Body suffered is said to have been suffered by the Word. And while we are merely told of the others that they were born, and begotten, it is said in the case of the Son of Mary alone that ‘The Word was made Flesh.’
12. This proves that while to all the others the Word came, in order that they might prophesy, from Mary the Word Himself took flesh, and proceeded forth as man; being by nature and essence the Word of God, but after the flesh man of the seed of David, and made of the flesh of Mary, as Paul said 4736 . Him the Father pointed out both in Jordan and on the Mount, saying, ‘This is My beloved Son in whom I am well pleased 4737 .’ Him the Arians denied, but we recognising worship, not dividing the Son and the Word, but knowing that the Son is the Word Himself, by Whom all things are made, and by Whom we were redeemed. And for this reason we wonder how any contention at all has arisen among you about things so clear. But thanks to the Lord, much as we were grieved at reading your memoranda, we were equally glad at their conclusion. For they departed with concord, and peacefully agreed in the confession of the pious and orthodox faith. This fact has induced me, after much previous consideration, to write these few words; for I am anxious lest by my silence this matter should cause pain rather than joy to those whose concord occasions joy to ourselves. I therefore ask your piety in the first place, and secondly those who hear, to take my letter in good part, and if anything is lacking in it in respect of piety, to set that right, and inform me. But if it is written, as from one unpractised in speech, below the subject and imperfectly, let all allow for my feebleness in speaking. Greet all the brethren with you. All those with us greet you; may you live in good health in the Lord, beloved and truly longed for.
Footnotes
570:4700Of Epictetus, bishop of Corinth, nothing else is known. This letter reflects the uncertainty, which attended the victory of the Nicene Creed, as to the relation of the Historical Christ to the Eternal Son. The questions raised at Corinth were those which troubled the Eastern Church generally, and which came to a head in the system of Apollinarius, whose distinctive tenet, however, is not mentioned in this letter. Persons anxious to place the Nicene doctrine in intelligible connection with the matter of the Gospel Narrative had debated the question before Epictetus, and with deference to his ruling. Their tentative solutions (§2 infr.) fall into two classes, both of which, in attempting to solve the problem, proceed upon the assumption incidentally combated by Athan., that the Manhood of Christ was a Hypostasis or Person, which if invested with Divine attributes, would introduce a fourth hypostatic entity into the Trinity. To avoid this, one class identified the Logos and the ῎Ανθρωπος, either by assuming that the Logos was changed into flesh, or that the flesh was itself non-natural and of the Divine Essence. The other class excluded the Man Jesus from the Trinity, explaining His relation to God on the lines of Photinus or the later Nestorians. Both alternatives are already glanced at (supr. p. 485) by the Council of 362. In the present case, both classes of suggestions seem to have been made tentatively and bona fide (§12). The letter must have been written before the two books against Apollinarianism, which (if genuine) fall about 372. Its more exact date depends on the identification of the Councils referred to in §1 (νῦν γενομένων), and is therefore very doubtful. At any rate Apollinarianism proper is not alluded to, and Apollinarius is said to have expressed to Serapion of Thmuis his high opinion of our Letter (see Letter 54, note 1). It was much quoted in the Christological controversies of the next 80 years, e.g. by the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, by Theodoret, Cyril, and Leo the Great (see Migne xxvi. 1050; Bright, Later Treatises, pp. 43 sq., and D.C.B. s.v. Epictetus and Apollinaris the younger).
570:4701Are these those referred to in the letter to Ruf., and held a.d. 362–3, or are they to be identified with one or other of those held under Damasus (see Introd. to ad Afros.)?
570:4702Ps. cxv. 4.
570:4703Hab. ii. 15, LXX.
570:4704Isa. ii. 3; Mic. iv. 2.
571:4705Rom. i. 3.
571:4706This opinion seems to belong to that next to be mentioned, the two, however, are separately dealt with below, cc. 10 and 11.
571:4707Rom. i. 30.
571:4708ἕτερον πρὸς ἕτερον σημαίνετε
571:4709Letter 61, §3.
572:4710Heb. ii. 16.
572:4711Heb. ii. 16.
572:4712Isa. vii. 14.
572:4713Luke i. 27.
572:4714Luke 11.27.
572:4715Luke 2.23.
572:4716Mal. iii. 6.
572:4717Heb. xiii. 8.
572:47181 Pet. iii. 19.
572:4719Mark xv. 46.
572:4720John xviii. 23.
572:4721Isa. l. 6.
572:47222 Pet. i. 4, above, p. 65, note 5.
572:47231 Cor. xv. 53.
573:4724Luke xxiv. 39.
573:4725Joh. i. 14.
573:4726Gal. iii. 13.
573:4727Joel ii. 28.
573:47281 Cor. xv. 3.
573:4729The argument rests on the principle that the Trinity is a trinity of Persons, not of Essences: the opponents implicitly tax the Nicene doctrine with the consequence that if truly man, Christ is a distinct Personality from the Son.
574:4730ψυχικόν.
574:4731Matt. i. 23.
574:4732Rom. ix. 5.
574:4733John xx. 28.
574:47341 Cor. ii. 8.
574:4735Heb. ix. 26.
574:4736Cf. Rom. 1:3, Gal. 4:4.
574:4737Matt. 3:17, Matt. 17:5Matt. iii. 17, and xvii. 5.
Letter LX.—To Adelphius 4738 , Bishop and Confessor: against the Arians.
We have read what your piety has written to us, and genuinely approve your piety toward Christ. And above all we glorify God, Who has given you such grace as not only to have right opinions, but also, so far as that is possible, not to be ignorant of the devices 4739 of the devil. But we marvel at the perversity of the heretics, seeing that they have fallen into such a pit of impiety that they no longer retain even their senses, but have their understanding corrupted on all sides. But this attempt is a plot of the devil, and an imitation of the disobedient Jews. For as the latter, when refuted on all sides, kept devising excuses to their own hurt, if only they could deny the Lord and bring upon themselves what was prophesied against them, in like manner these men, seeing themselves proscribed on all hands, and perceiving that their heresy has become abominable to all, prove themselves ‘inventors of evil things 4740 ,’ in order that, not ceasing their fightings against the truth, they may remain consistent and genuine adversaries of Christ. For whence has this new mischief of theirs sprung forth? How have they even ventured to utter this new blasphemy against the Saviour? But the impious man, it seems, is a worthless object, and truly ‘reprobate concerning the Faith 4741 .’ For formerly, while denying the Godhead of the only-begotten Son of God, they pretended at any rate to acknowledge His coming in the Flesh. But now, gradually going from bad to worse, they have fallen from this opinion of theirs, and become Godless on all hands, so as neither to acknowledge Him as God, nor to believe that He has become man. For if they believed this they would not have uttered such things as your piety has reported against them.
2. You, however, beloved and most truly longed-for, have done what befitted the tradition of the Church and your piety toward the Lord, in refuting, admonishing, and rebuking such men. But since, instigated by their father the devil, ‘they knew not nor understood,’ as it is written, ‘but go on still in darkness 4742 ,’ let them learn from your piety that this error of theirs belongs to Valentinus and Marcion, and to Manichæus, of whom some substituted [the idea of] Appearance for Reality, while the others, dividing what is indivisible, denied the truth that ‘the Word was made Flesh, and dwelt among us 4743 .’ Why then, as they hold with those people, do they not also take up the heritage of their names? For it is reasonable, as they hold their error, to have their names as well, and for the future to be called Valentinians, Marcionists, and Manichæans. Perhaps even thus, being put to shame by the ill savour of the names, they may be enabled to perceive into what a depth of impiety they have fallen. And it would be within our rights not to answer them at all, according to the apostolic advice 4744 : ‘A man that is heretical, after a first and second admonition refuse, knowing that such an one is perverted, and sinneth, being self-condemned;’ the more so, in that the Prophet says about such men: ‘The fool shall utter foolishness, and his heart shall imagine vain things 4745 .’ But since, like their leader, they too go about like lions seeking whom among the simple they shall devour 4746 , we are compelled to write in reply to your piety, that the brethren being once again instructed by your admonition may still further reprobate the vain teaching of those men.
3. We do not worship a creature. Far be the thought. For such an error belongs to heathens and Arians. But we worship the Lord of Creation, Incarnate, the Word of God. For if the flesh also is in itself a part of the created world, yet it has become God’s body. And we neither divide the body, being such, from the Word, and worship it by itself 4747 , nor when we wish to worship the Word do we set Him far apart from the Flesh, but knowing, as we said above, that ‘the Word was made flesh,’ we recognise Him as God also, after having come in the flesh. Who, accordingly, is so senseless as to say to the Lord: ‘Leave the Body that I may worship Thee;’ or so impious as to join the senseless Jews in saying, on account of the Body, ‘Why dost Thou, being a man, make Thyself God 4748 ?’ But the leper was not one of this sort, for he worshipped God in the Body, and recognised that He was God, saying, ‘Lord, if Thou wilt Thou canst make me clean 4749 .’ Neither by reason of the Flesh did he think the Word of God a creature: nor because the Word was the maker of all creation did he despise the Flesh which He had put on. But he worshipped the Creator of the universe as dwelling in a created temple, and was cleansed. So also the woman with an issue of blood, who believed, and only touched the hem of His garment, was healed 4750 , and the sea with its foaming waves heard the incarnate Word, and ceased its storm 4751 , while the man blind from birth was healed by the fleshly spitting of the Word 4752 . And, what is greater and more startling (for perhaps this even offended those most impious men), even when the Lord was hanging upon the actual cross (for it was His Body and the Word was in it), the sun was darkened and the earth shook, the rocks were rent, and the vail of the temple rent, and many bodies of the saints which slept arose.
4. These things then happened, and no one doubted, as the Arians now venture to doubt, whether one is to believe the incarnate Word; but even from beholding the man, they recognised that He was their maker, and when they heard a human voice, they did not, because it was human, say that the Word was a creature. On the contrary, they trembled, and recognised nothing less than that it was being uttered from a holy Temple. How then can the impious fail to fear lest ‘as they refused to have God in their knowledge, they may be given up to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not fitting 4753 ?’ For Creation does not worship a creature. Nor again did she on account of His Flesh refuse to worship her Lord. But she beheld her maker in the Body, and ‘in the Name of Jesus every knee’ bowed, yea and ‘shall bow, of things in heaven and things on earth and things under the earth, and every tongue shall confess,’ whether the Arians approve or no, ‘that Jesus is Lord, to the Glory of God the Father 4754 .’ For the Flesh did not diminish the glory of the Word; far be the thought: on the contrary, it was glorified by Him. Nor, because the Son that was in the form of God took upon Him the form of a servant 4755 was He deprived of His Godhead. On the contrary, He is thus become the Deliverer of all flesh and of all creation. And if God sent His Son brought forth from a woman, the fact causes us no shame but contrariwise glory and great grace. For He has become Man, that He might deify us in Himself, and He has been born of a woman, and begotten of a Virgin, in order to transfer to Himself our erring generation 4756 , and that we may become henceforth a holy race, and ‘partakers of the Divine Nature,’ as blessed Peter wrote 4757 . And ‘what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh 4758 .’
5. Seeing then that Flesh was taken by the Word to deliver all men, raise all from the dead, and make redemption for sins, must not they appear ungrateful, and be worthy of all hatred, who make light of the Flesh, as well as those who on account of it charge the Son of God with being a thing created or made? For they as good as cry to God and say: ‘Send not Thine Only-begotten Son in the Flesh, cause Him not to take flesh of a virgin, lest He redeem us from death and sin. We do not wish Him to come in the body, lest He should undergo death on our behalf: we do not desire the Word to be made flesh, lest in it He should become our Mediator to gain access to thee, and we so inhabit the heavenly mansions. Let the gates of the heavens be shut lest Thy Word consecrate for us the road thither through the veil, namely His Flesh 4759 .’ These are their utterances, vented with diabolical daring, by the error they have devised. For they who do not wish to worship the Word made flesh, are ungrateful for His becoming man. And they who divide the Word from the Flesh do not hold that one redemption from sin has taken place, or one destruction of death. But where at all will these impious men find the Flesh which the Saviour took, apart from Him, that they should even venture to say ‘we do not worship the Lord with the Flesh, but we separate the Body, and worship Him alone.’ Why, the blessed Stephen saw in the heavens the Lord standing on [God’s] right hand 4760 , while the Angels said to the disciples, ‘He shall so come in like manner as ye beheld Him going into heaven 4761 :’ and the Lord Himself says, addressing the Father, ‘I will that where I am, they also may be with Me 4762 .’ And surely if the Flesh is inseparable from the Word, does it not follow that these men must either lay aside their error, and for the future worship the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, or, if they do not worship or serve the Word Who came in the Flesh, be cast out on all sides, and count no longer as Christians but either as heathens, or among the Jews.
6. Such then, as we have above described, is the madness and daring of those men. But our faith is right, and starts from the teaching of the Apostles and tradition of the fathers, being confirmed both by the New Testament and the Old. For the Prophets say: ‘Send out Thy Word and Thy Truth 4763 ,’ and ‘Behold the Virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which is being interpreted God with us 4764 .’ But what does that mean, if not that God has come in the Flesh? While the Apostolic tradition teaches in the words of blessed Peter, ‘Forasmuch then as Christ suffered for us in the Flesh;’ and in what Paul writes, ‘Looking for the blessed hope and appearing of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who gave Himself for us that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a people for His own possession, and zealous of good works 4765 .’ How then has He given Himself, if He had not worn flesh? For flesh He offered, and gave Himself for us, in order that undergoing death in it, ‘He might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the devil 4766 .’ Hence also we always give thanks in the name of Jesus Christ, and we do not set at nought the grace which came to us through Him. For the coming of the Saviour in the flesh has been the ransom and salvation of all creation. So then, beloved and most longed-for, let what I have said put in mind those who love the Lord, while as to those who have imitated the behaviour of Judas, and deserted the Lord to join Caiaphas, let them by these things be taught better, if maybe they are willing, if maybe they are ashamed. And let them know that in worshipping the Lord in the flesh we do not worship a creature, but, as we said above, the Creator Who has put on the created body.
7. But we should like your piety to ask them this. When Israel was ordered to go up to Jerusalem to worship at the temple of the Lord, where was the ark, ‘and above it the Cherubim of glory overshadowing the Mercy-seat 4767 ,’ did they do well or the opposite? If they did ill, how came it that they who despised this law were liable to punishment? for it is written that if a man make light of it and go not up, he shall perish from among the people 4768 . But if they did well, and in this proved well-pleasing to God, are not the Arians, abominable and most shameful of any heresy, many times worthy of destruction, in that while they approve the former People for the honour paid by them to the Temple, they will not worship the Lord Who is in the flesh as in a temple? And yet the former temple was constructed of stones and gold, as a shadow. But when the reality came, the type ceased from thenceforth, and there did not remain, according to the Lord’s utterance, one stone upon another that was not broken down 4769 . And they did not, when they saw the temple of stones, suppose that the Lord who spoke in the temple was a creature; nor did they set the Temple at nought and retire far off to worship. But they came to it according to the Law, and worshipped the God who uttered His oracles from the Temple. Since then this was so, how can it be other than right to worship the Body of the Lord, all-holy and all-reverend as it is, announced as it was by the archangel Gabriel, formed by the Holy Spirit, and made the Vesture of the Word? It was at any rate a bodily hand that the Word stretched out to raise her that was sick of a fever 4770 : a human voice that He uttered to raise Lazarus from the dead 4771 ; and, once again, stretching out His hands upon the Cross, He overthrew the prince of the power of the air, that now works 4772 in the sons of disobedience, and made the way clear for us into the heavens.
8. Therefore he that dishonours the Temple dishonours the Lord in the Temple; and he that separates the Word from the Body sets at nought the grace given to us in Him. And let not the most impious Arian madmen suppose that, since the Body is created, the Word also is a creature, nor let them, because the Word is not a creature, disparage His Body. For their error is matter for wonder, in that they at once confuse and disturb everything, and devise pretexts only in order to number the Creator among the creatures.
But let them listen. If the Word were a creature, He would not assume the created body to quicken it. For what help can creatures derive from a creature that itself needs salvation? But since the Word being Creator has Himself made the creatures, therefore also at the consummation of the ages 4773 He put on the creature, that He as creator might once more consecrate it, and be able to recover it. But a creature could never be saved by a creature, any more than the creatures were created by a creature, if the Word was not creator. Accordingly let them not lie against the divine Scriptures nor give offence to simple brethren; but if they are willing let them change their mind in their turn, and no longer worship the creature instead of God, Who made all things. But if they wish to abide by their impieties, let them alone take their fill of them, and let them gnash their teeth like their father the devil, because the Faith of the Catholic Church knows that the Word of God is creator and maker of all things; and we know that while ‘in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God 4774 ,’ now that He has become also man for our salvation we worship Him, not as though He had come in the body equalising Himself with it, but as Master, assuming the form of the servant, and Maker and Creator coming in a creature in order that, in it delivering all things, He might bring the world nigh to the Father, and make all things to be at peace, things in heaven and things on the earth. For thus also we recognise His Godhead, even the Father’s, and worship His Incarnate Presence, even if the Arian madmen burst themselves in sunder.
Greet all that love the Lord Jesus Christ. We pray that you may be well, and remember us to the Lord, beloved and truly most longed-for. If need be this is to be read to Hieracas 4775 the presbyter.
Footnotes
575:4738Adelphius is named in the ‘Tome’ (above, p. 486), as bishop of Onuphis. Previously he had been exiled by the Arians to the Thebaid (above, pp. 297, &c.). Hence in the title of this letter he is styled ‘Confessor.’ The letter (Migne xxvi, 1072) is directed against the Arian Christology. Although Ath. treats it (§1) as a ‘new blasphemy,’ it had been held by the Arians from the first; Epiph. Anc. 33, traces it back to Lucian; but doubtless it had by this time been brought more to the front in their teaching. We know that it occupied a prominent place in the Eunomian system. (References in Dorner III. i. 3.) After briefly refuting the doctrinal error, Athanasius turns to the Arian charge of creature-worship brought against the Nicene doctrine. Not forgetting to remind them that their own doctrine was really open to this charge, Ath. points out at greater length that the object of Catholic worship is not the human nature of Christ as such, but the Word Incarnate; and that the human Saviour is worshipped because He is the Word Himself. The date proposed by Montfaucon is adopted, though there is nothing to fix it absolutely. Its style closely resembles that of the writings of the ‘third Exile.’ (See also Bright, Later Tr., p. 61.)
575:47392 Cor. ii. 11.
575:4740Rom. i. 30.
575:47412 Tim. iii. 8.
575:4742Ps. lxxxii. 5.
575:4743John i. 14.
575:4744Titus 3:10, 11.
575:4745Isa. xxxii. 6, LXX.
575:47461 Pet. v. 8.
575:4747As some modern devotions at least tend to do.
575:4748John x. 33.
575:4749Matt. viii. 2.
576:4750Matt. ix. 20.
576:4751Matt. 8.26.
576:4752John ix. 6.
576:4753Rom. i. 28.
576:4754Phil. 2:10, 11.
576:4755Phil. 2:6, 7.
576:4756πλανηθεῖσαν γέννησιν.
576:47572 Pet. i. 4.
576:4758Rom. viii. 3.
576:4759Heb. x. 20.
576:4760Acts vii. 55.
576:4761Acts 1.11.
576:4762John xvii. 24.
577:4763Ps. xliii. 3.
577:4764Matt. 1:23, Isa. 7:14Matt. i. 23, and Isa. vii. 14.
577:4765Titus 2:13, 14.
577:4766Heb. ii. 14.
577:4767Heb. ix. 5.
577:4768Cf. Lev. 17:9, Num. 9:13.
577:4769Matt. xxiv. 2.
577:4770Mark i. 31.
577:4771Joh. xi. 43.
577:4772Eph. ii. 2. Athan. here omits the τοῦ πνεύματος, thus increasing the difficulty of the gen. particp.
577:4773Heb. ix. 26.
578:4774John i. 1.
578:4775Perhaps the ‘Hierax’ of pp. 257, 297, 560, above.
Letter LXI.—Letter to Maximus. (Written about 371 a.d.)
To our beloved and most truly longed-for son, Maximus 4776 , philosopher, Athanasius greeting in the Lord.
Having read the letter now come from you, I approve your piety: but, marvelling at the rashness of those ‘who understand neither what they say nor whereof they confidently affirm 4777 ,’ I had really decided to say nothing. For to reply upon matters which are so plain and which are clearer than light, is simply to give an excuse for shamelessness to such lawless men. And this we have learned from the Saviour. For when Pilate had washed his hands, and acquiesced in the false accusation of the Jews of that day, the Lord answered him no more, but rather warned his wife in a dream, so that He that was being judged might be believed to be God not in word, but in power. While after vouchsafing Caiaphas no reply to his folly, He Himself by his promise 4778 brought all over to knowledge. Accordingly for some time I delayed, and have reluctantly yielded to your zeal for the truth, in view of the argumentativeness of men without shame. And I have dictated nothing beyond what your letter contains, in order that the adversary may from henceforth be convinced on the points to which he has objected, and may ‘keep his tongue from evil and his lips that they speak no guile 4779 .’ And would that they would no longer join the Jews who passed by of old in reproaching Him that hung upon the Tree: ‘If thou be the Son of God save Thyself 4780 .’ But if even after this they will not give in, yet do you remember the apostolic injunction, and ‘a man that is heretical after a first and second admonition refuse, knowing that such an one is perverted and sinneth being self-condemned 4781 .’ For if they are Gentiles, or of the Judaisers, who are thus daring, let them, as Jews, think the Cross of Christ a stumbling-block, or as Gentiles, foolishness 4782 . But if they pretend to be Christians let them learn that the crucified Christ is at once Lord of Glory, and the Power of God and Wisdom of God 4783 .
2. But if they are in doubt whether He is God at all, let them reverence Thomas, who handled the Crucified and pronounced Him Lord and God 4784 . Or let them fear the Lord Himself, who said, after washing the feet of the disciples: ‘Ye call Me Lord and Master 4785 , and ye say well, for so I am.’ But in the same body in which He was when he washed their feet, He also carried up our sins to the Tree 4786 . And He was witnessed to as Master of Creation, in that the Sun withdrew his beams and the earth trembled and the rocks were rent, and the executioners recognised that the Crucified was truly Son of God. For the Body they beheld was not that of some man, but of God, being in which, even when being crucified, He raised the dead. Accordingly it is no good venture of theirs to say that the Word of God came into a certain holy man; for this was true of each of the prophets and of the other saints, and on that assumption He would clearly be born and die in the case of each one of them. But this is not so, far be the thought. But once for all ‘at the consummation of the ages 4787 , to put away sin’ ‘the Word was made flesh 4788 ’ and proceeded forth from Mary the Virgin, Man after our likeness, as also He said to the Jews, ‘Wherefore seek ye to kill Me, a man that hath told you the truth 4789 ?’ And we are deified not by partaking of the body of some man, but by receiving the Body of the Word Himself.
3. And at this also I am much surprised, how they have ventured to entertain such an idea as that the Word became man in consequence of His Nature. For if this were so, the commemoration of Mary would be superfluous. 4790 For neither does Nature know of a Virgin bearing apart from a man. Whence by the good pleasure of the Father, being true God, and Word and Wisdom of the Father by nature, He became man in the body for our salvation, in order that having somewhat to offer 4791 for us He might save us all, ‘as many as through fear of death were all their life-time subject to bondage. 4792 ’ For it was not some man that gave Himself up for us; since every man is under sentence of death, according to what was said to all in Adam, ‘earth thou art and unto earth thou shalt return. 4793 ’ Nor yet was it any other of the creatures, since every creature is liable to change. But the Word Himself offered His own Body on our behalf that our faith and hope might not be in man, but that we might have our faith in God the Word Himself. Why, even now that He is become man we behold His Glory, ‘glory as of one only-begotten of His Father—full of grace and truth. 4794 ’ For what He endured by means of the Body, He magnified as God. And while He hungered in the flesh, as God He fed the hungry. And if anyone is offended by reason of the bodily conditions, let him believe by reason of what God works. For humanly He enquires where Lazarus is laid, but raises him up divinely. Let none then laugh, calling Him a child, and citing His age, His growth, His eating, drinking and suffering, lest while denying what is proper for the body, he deny utterly also His sojourn among us. And just as He has not become Man in consequence of His nature, in like manner it was consistent that when He had taken a body He should exhibit what was proper to it, lest the imaginary theory of Manichæus should prevail. Again it was consistent that when He went about in the body, He should not hide what belonged to the Godhead, lest he of Samosata should find an excuse to call Him man, as distinct in person from God the Word.
4. Let then the unbelievers perceive this, and learn that while as a Babe He lay in a manger, He subjected the Magi and was worshipped by them; and while as a Child He came down to Egypt, He brought to nought the hand-made objects of its idolatry 4795 : and crucified in the flesh, He raised the dead long since turned to corruption. And it has been made plain to all that not for His own sake but for ours He underwent all things, that we by His sufferings might put on freedom from suffering and incorruption 4796 , and abide unto life eternal.
5. This then I have concisely dictated, following, as I said above, the lines of your own letter, without working out any point any further but only mentioning what relates to the Holy Cross, in order that the despisers may be taught better upon the points where they were offended, and may worship the Crucified. But do you thoroughly persuade the unbelievers; perhaps somehow they may come from ignorance to knowledge, and believe aright. And even though what your own letter contains is sufficient, yet it is as well to have added what I have for the sake of reminder in view of contentious persons; not so much in order that being refuted in their venturesome statements they may be put to shame, as that being reminded they may not forget the truth. For let what was confessed by the Fathers at Nicæa prevail. For it is correct, and enough to overthrow every heresy however impious, and especially that of the Arians which speaks against the Word of God, and as a logical consequence profanes His Holy Spirit. Greet all who hold aright. All that are with us greet you.
Footnotes
578:4776Maximus, probably the Cynic philosopher who plays so strange and grotesque a part in the history of S. Gregory Nazianzen’s tenure of the see of Constantinople (the identification is questioned by Bright, p. 72, but without very cogent reasons), was the son of Alexandrian parents, persons of high social standing, who had suffered much for the Faith. He himself was an ardent opponent of Arianism and heathenism, and was banished under Valens (further particulars in Dict. Gr. and Rom. Biogr. s.v. Maximus Alexandrinus). The present letter compliments him on his success in refuting heretics, some of whom advocated the Arian Christology; others the doctrine of Paul of Samosata and Photinus. The Epistle has much in common with those to Epictetus and Adelphius; Montfaucon’s date for it is adopted. (See Migne xxvi. 1085; Bright, Lat. Tr., p. 72.)
578:47771 Tim. i. 7.
578:4778Mark xv. 5; Matt. xxvi. 64; xxvii. 19
578:4779Ps. xxxiv. 13.
578:4780Matt. xxvii. 40; Luke xxviii. 37.
578:4781Titus 3:10, 11.
578:47821 Cor. i. 23.
578:4783Cf. 1 Cor. 1:24, 1 Cor. 2:81 Cor. i. 24, and ii. 8.
578:4784John xx. 28.
578:4785Ath. quotes John xiii. 13 in this, the order of several mss. and later fathers, both here and elsewhere.
578:47861 Pet. ii. 24.
578:4787Heb. ix. 26.
578:4788John i. 14.
578:4789John 8.40.
579:4790Cf. Ad Epict. 5 (supr. p. 572.)
579:4791Cf. Heb. viii. 3
579:4792Heb. 2.15.
579:4793Gen. iii. 19, LXX.
579:4794John i. 14 b.
579:4795Cf. de Incarn. 36. 4.
579:4796Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 53.
Letter LXII.—To John and Antiochus. 4797
Athanasius to John and Antiochus, our beloved sons and fellow-presbyters in the Lord, greeting.
I was glad to receive your letter just now, the more so as you wrote from Jerusalem. I thank you for informing me about the brethren that there assembled, and about those who wish, on account of disputed points, to disturb the simple. But about these things let the Apostle charge them not to give heed to those who contend about words, and seek nothing else than to tell and hear some new thing 4798 . But do you, having your foundation sure, even Jesus Christ our Lord, and the confession of the fathers concerning the faith, avoid those who wish to say anything more or less than that, and rather aim at the profit of the brethren, that they may fear God and keep His commandments, in order that both by the teaching of the fathers, and by the keeping of the commandments, they may be able to appear well-pleasing to the Lord in the day of judgment. But I have been utterly astonished at the boldness of those who venture to speak against our beloved Basil the bishop, a true servant of God. For from such vain talk they can be convicted of not loving even the confession of the fathers.
Greet the brethren. They that are with me greet you. I pray that ye may be well in the Lord, beloved and much-desired sons.
Footnotes
579:4797Of John and Antiochus nothing is known, unless the latter is the later bishop of Ptolemais and enemy of Chrysostom. Both men seem to belong to the class of well-meaning mischief-makers, given to retailing invidious stories. Hence the polite reserve of our little note (Migne xxvi. 115, and its laconic dismissal of the gossip about Basil, the new bishop of the Cappadocian Cæsarea (supr. p. 449). The main interest of this and the following letter, which seem to date from the winter 371–372, consists in the testimony of the high esteem of Athanasius for Basil, as well as his indifference to words where no essential principle was involved. The two recipients of this letter either lived or were visitors at Jerusalem. On Basil’s difficulties at this time, see D.C.B. i. 288 a, 293, and on his relations with Athan., cf. Prolegg. ch. ii. §10.
579:47982 Tim. ii. 14; Acts xvii. 21.
Letter LXIII.—Letter to the Presbyter Palladius 4799 .
To our beloved son Palladius, presbyter, Athanasius the Bishop greeting in the Lord.
I was glad to receive also the letter written by you alone, the more so that you breathe orthodoxy in it, as is your wont. And having learnt not for the first time, but long ago, the reason of your staying at present with our beloved Innocent 4800 , I am pleased with your piety. Since then you are acting as you are, write and let me know how are the brethren there, and what the enemies of the truth think about us. But whereas you have also told me of the monks at Cæsarea, and I have learned from our beloved Dianius 4801 that they are vexed, and are opposing our beloved bishop Basil, I am glad you have informed me, and I have pointed out 4802 to them what is fitting, namely that as children they should obey their father, and not oppose what he approves. For if he were suspected as touching the truth, they would do well to combat him. But if they are confident, as we all are, that he is a glory to the Church, contending rather on behalf of the truth and teaching those who require it, it is not right to combat such an one, but rather to accept with thanks his good conscience. For from what the beloved Dianius has related, they appear to be vexed without cause. For he, as I am confident, to the weak becomes weak to gain the weak 4803 . But let our beloved friends look at the scope of his truth, and at his special purpose 4804 , and glorify the Lord Who has given such a bishop to Cappadocia as any district must pray to have. And do you, beloved, be good enough to point out to them the duty of obeying, as I write. For this is at once calculated to render them well disposed toward their father, and will preserve peace to the churches. I pray that you may be well in the Lord, beloved son.
Footnotes
580:4799On the general subject and date of this letter see note 1 to Letter 62. Of Palladius, who is clearly a resident at Cæsarea, nothing further is known. The tone of this letter is more confiding than that of the previous one. (Migne ib. 1167.)
580:4800Perhaps a bishop in the neighbourhood of Cæsarea. See D.C.B. s.v. Innocentius (4).
580:4801Namesake of a predecessor of Basil, otherwise unknown.
580:4802The letter here referred to is lost. The monks in question had raised a cry against Basil on account of the reserve with which he spoke of the Divine Personality of the Holy Spirit. (See supr. p. 481.)
580:48031 Cor. ix. 22.
580:4804οἰκονομίαν
Letter LXIV.—To Diodorus (fragment).
To my lord, son, and most beloved fellow-minister Diodorus [bishop of Tyre] 4805 , Athanasius greeting in the Lord.
I thank my Lord, Who is everywhere establishing His doctrine, and chiefly so by means of His own sons, such as actual fact shews you to be. For before your Reverence wrote, we knew how great grace has been brought to pass in Tyre by means of your perseverance. And we rejoice with you that by your means Tyre also has learned the right word of piety. And I indeed took an opportunity of writing to you, longed-for and beloved: but I marvel at your not having replied to my letter. Be not then slow to write at once, knowing that you give me refreshment, as a son to his father, and make me exceeding glad, as a herald of truth. And enter upon no controversy with the heretics, but overcome their argumentativeness with silence, their ill-will with courtesy. For thus your speech shall be ‘with grace, seasoned with salt 4806 ,’ while they [will be judged] by the conscience of all.…
Footnotes
580:4805This fragment (Migne xxvi. 1261) is given by Facundus, Def. Tr. Cap. iv. 2, who claims it as addressed to Diodorus of Tarsus, the famous Antiochene confessor and master of Chrysostom and Theodore. Unfortunately this is impossible, as Diodore became bishop of Tarsus not before 378, i.e. after Athan. was dead. The letter itself decides for Diodorus of Tyre, whom Paulinus of Antioch had quite unwarrantably ordained to this see (cf. Rufin, H. E. ii. 21). Whether (as has been held on the authority of Rufinus) Diodorus, or (as Le Quien, Or. Chr. ii. 865 sq. holds) Zeno, the nominee of Meletius, was first in the field in the unseemly scramble, is doubtful. Zeno is already bishop in 365 (Soz. vi. 12); the date of the appointment of Diodorus, whose claim is at any rate no better than that of Paulinus himself, is quite uncertain (see also Prolegg. ch. ii. §§9, 10). Diodorus was the friend and correspondent of Epiphanius, and of Timothy, bishop of Alexandria, second from Athanasius. Facundus confuses him in these particulars also with his namesake of Tarsus, but the mistake is thoroughly sifted by Tillemont, Mem. viii. pp. 238, 712. The letter is important, along with Letter 56, and the correspondence of S. Basil, as illustrating the attitude of Athanasius with regard to the unhappy schism of Antioch.
580:4806Col. iv. 6.
Memorandum.—On other Letters ascribed to Athanasius.
The above Collection of Letters is complete upon the principle stated in the Introduction (supr., p. 495). But one or two fragments have been excluded which may be specified here.
(1.) Fragment of a letter ‘to Eupsychius;’ probably the Nicene Father referred to Ep. Æg. 8, (cf. D.C.B. ii. 299 (4)). The Greek is given by Montf. in Ath. Opp. 1. p. 1293 (Latin, ib. p. 1287). It was cited in Conc. Nic. II. Act vi., but although it has affinities with Orat. ii. 8 (‘high-priestly dress’), it has the appearance of a polemical argument against Monophysitism. (Migne xxvi. 1245.)
(2.) ‘To Epiphanius’ (Migne xxvi. 1257). Against certain, who contentiously follow the Jews in celebrating Easter. (From ‘Chron. Pasch. pag. 4 postremæ editionis.’)
(3.) Fragments of an ‘Epistola ad Antiochenos’ (not our ‘Tomus,’ supr., p. 483): also a polemic against Monophysitism, and almost Nestorian in doctrine: ‘Jesus Christus…non est Ipse’ [i.e. ante sæcula et in sæcula, Heb. xiii. 8], and ‘duas personas’ asserted of Christ. From Facundus, who says the letter was written against the Apollinarians, and who gives it on the authority of Peter, Ath.’s successor (Migne xxvi. 1259).
(4.) ‘Ad Eusebium, Lucinianum, et socios.’ (In Migne xxvi. 1325 sq., from Mai, Script. Vet. 11. 583 sq.) A minute fragment. Cf. supr., Letter 55, notes 1, 7.
(5.) Spurious letters (in Migne xxviii.) to Jovian, to Castor (2), to a ‘bishop of the Persians,’ and to and from popes Liberius, Marcus, Julius and Felix (made up out of late and spurious decretals, &c., &c.).
Indexes
Index of Scripture References
Genesis
1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:6 1:6-11 1:9 1:11 1:14-18 1:20 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:26 1:28 1:31 2:3 2:5 2:15 2:16 2:17 3 3:9 3:12 3:15 3:19 3:19 3:19 4:1 4:12 4:12 4:16 5:3 6:2 6:2 7:1 9:27 11:5 14:14 14:14 15:1 15:1 15:8 18:21 19:24 19:24 19:24 19:26 21:5 22:2 22:12 22:15 25:8 25:27 26:13 26:24 27 27:2 27:29 27:37 28:3 28:4 28:15 31:5 31:7 32:11 32:26 32:30 32:30 32:31 32:31 32:31 42:21 48:5 48:15 48:16 49:3 49:3 49:10 49:14
Exodus
3:2-6 3:10 3:13 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:15 3:16 4:12 4:12 4:13 8:26 12:2 12:5 12:7 12:8 12:9 12:11 12:23 12:41 12:41 12:43 12:43-48 12:46 12:47 14:14 14:21 15 15:1 15:1 15:9 15:9 19:8 19:9 19:13 19:13 19:16 20:3 20:4 20:13 21:13 21:17 21:17 21:17 21:17 21:17 23:1 23:14 23:26 24:2 29:5 33:11 33:20 33:23 34:6 34:6
Leviticus
9:7 9:7 11:13 17:9 23:26 23:29 25:21 25:21 26:12 26:12
Numbers
3 6:25 7 9:2 9:13 10:1 10:2 10:8 10:8 10:9 10:10 11 12 17 18 21 24:5 24:5-17 24:6 26 28:2
Deuteronomy
4:4 4:4 4:7 4:19 4:24 4:24 4:32 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:4 6:5 6:7 6:13 6:16 7:8 9:3 12:11 12:13 12:14 13:1-3 13:4 13:18 16:1 16:1 16:1 16:1 17:6 18:15 18:15 21:15 21:15 21:15 21:23 28:66 28:66 28:66 28:66 30:14 32:4 32:4 32:6 32:6 32:6 32:6 32:6 32:6 32:6 32:8 32:17 32:18 32:20 32:20 32:39 32:39 32:39 32:39 32:39 32:49 34:6
Joshua
1:6 1:6 2:1 5:13 7:20 10:12 23:14 24:23
Judges
11:34 13:16 19 19:29 19:29
1 Samuel
2:6 2:27 5 6 12:5 12:5 13:9 15 15:35 16:12 16:14 21:13 22:2 22:9 22:18 26:9 26:10 26:11 26:21
2 Samuel
6:23 15:13 18:24
1 Kings
1:11 1:19 1:26 8:27 8:27 8:59 8:59 10:24 12:32 12:33 13:2 18:15 18:15 19:4-8 21:10 21:18 21:20
2 Kings
1:10 3:11 5:8 5:15 5:26 6:13-17 6:16 6:17 9:35 9:36 17:9 19:35 20:18
Ezra
3:6
Esther
3:9 4:16 9:20-28 9:21
Job
1 1 1:2 1:2 1:21 2 2:7 5:23 5:26 7:1 14:4 14:4 14:16 14:17 14:26 16:14 18:5 18:5 18:14 38:17 38:17 38:17 40:8 40:9 40:16 40:19-24 40:19-24 40:24 41:1 41:1 41:5 41:13 41:13 41:18 41:19 41:20 41:27
Psalms
1:1 1:1 1:1 1:2 1:5 1:5 1:6 1:16 2:1 2:1 2:1 2:1 2:4 2:6 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:18 2:18 2:23 2:24 2:25 2:25 2:26-28 3 3 4 4:4 4:4 4:5 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:24 4:25 4:26 4:34 5:3 6:6 7:3 7:4 7:20 7:20 9:6 9:9 9:9 9:14 9:14 9:15 9:17 10:1 10:1 10:1 10:1 10:1 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 10:3 11:7 12:1 12:6 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:1 14:2 14:7 15:3 15:3 15:4 15:4-7 15:5 15:8 15:16 15:17 15:18 15:18 16:3 16:8 16:10 16:10 16:12 16:13 16:15 16:15 16:16 16:16 17:3 17:4 17:15 18:1 18:2 18:6 18:7 18:9 18:10 18:13 18:17 18:24 18:27 18:27 18:29 18:29 18:44 18:45 18:45 19:1 19:1 19:1 19:1 19:3 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:14 19:14 19:14 19:20 19:43 19:44 19:62 19:73 19:73 19:73 19:89 19:89 19:90 19:91 19:91 19:101 19:107 19:143 19:164 20:1 20:2 20:7 20:7 22:9 22:16 22:22 22:32 23:4 24:3 24:6 24:7 24:7 24:7 24:7 24:7 24:10 25:1 25:1 25:15 26:2 27:1 27:1 27:3 30:3 30:9 30:12 31:7 31:7 31:8 31:15 31:24 32:9 32:9 32:14 32:15 33:1 33:1 33:4 33:6 33:6 33:6 33:6 33:9 33:9 34 34:1 34:13 34:21 35:8 35:9 35:16 35:28 36:1 36:9 36:9 36:9 36:9 37:6 37:15 37:40 38:8 38:8 38:12 38:14 38:14 39:2 39:6 40 40:6 41:9 42:1 42:4 42:4 43:3 43:3 43:4 44:5 44:5 44:17 44:17 44:20 44:22 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:1 45:6 45:6 45:7 45:7 45:7 45:7 45:7 45:8 45:8 45:8 45:8 45:8 45:13 45:13 45:14 46:7 46:7 46:8 47:7-9 48:5 48:5 48:5 49:3 49:10 49:11 49:12 50:1 50:3 50:6 50:14 50:16 50:16 50:16 50:16 50:23 51:10 51:11 51:12 51:12 51:13 52 53:1 53:3 54:1 54:7 55:4 55:15 55:15 56:11 57:3 57:4 57:4 59:6 59:14 59:15 60:11 60:12 63:1 63:2 63:6 63:11 66:11 66:12 68:1 68:5 69:26 71:3 72:1 72:5 72:17 73:20 73:23 73:24 74:2 74:6 74:11 74:14 76:1 76:1 76:1 77:10 78:25 81:3 81:3 81:3 82:1 82:5 82:6 82:6 82:6 83:1 83:6 84:7 84:10 84:70 85:8 86:8 86:8 86:8 86:16 87:1-3 87:2 87:4 88:7 89:6 89:6 89:7 89:17 89:18 89:47 90:2 90:10 90:14 90:17 91:8 94:11 94:17 95:1 95:1 97:1 104:24 104:24 110:3 110:3 110:3 110:3 110:3 111:2 115:3 115:18 118 118 119:148 120:5 125:1 132:14 135 135:6 143:5 143:5
Proverbs
1:5 1:5 1:6 1:6 1:7 1:23 2:13 2:14 3:19 3:19 3:19 3:19 3:19 4:1 4:23 5:3 5:22 5:22 7:22 7:22 7:23 8:2 8:9 8:10 8:11 8:12 8:12 8:14 8:14 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22 8:22-30 8:23 8:23 8:23 8:23 8:24-26 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:25 8:27 8:27 8:27 8:27 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:30 8:31 9:1 9:1 9:1 9:1 9:1-5 9:6 9:17 9:17 9:18 9:18 10:3 10:20 10:27 11:26 12:5 12:6 12:6 12:7 12:10 12:11 12:11 12:20 13:3 13:13 14:15 14:16 14:24 15:1 15:13 15:13 15:19 15:28 16:13 16:13 18:1 18:1 18:3 18:3 18:3 19:5 19:5 19:27 20:13 20:14 20:17 20:23 20:28 21:1 21:26 22:28 22:28 23:1 23:4 23:32 24:9 24:9 24:15 25:2 25:7 25:7 25:18 25:25 26:10 28:28 29:7 29:12 30:8 30:11 30:15 30:15 30:19
Ecclesiastes
3:2 3:7 4:8 5:8 5:9 7:17 7:23 7:24 7:26 7:29 7:29 8:1 9:12 10:8 10:20 12:14
Song of Solomon
1:6 1:7 2 3:1 3:2 5:2 6:1 8:1
Isaiah
1 1 1 1 1 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:4 1:6 1:10 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:11 1:12 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:22 1:22 1:22 1:22 2:3 2:3 2:4 3:9 3:9 3:9 3:10 3:10 3:10 5:1 5:7 5:11 5:20 5:20 6 6:5 6:8 6:9 7:14 7:14 7:14 7:14 7:14 7:14 8:4 8:4 9:5 9:6 9:6 9:6 9:6 9:6 10:14 10:14 11:1 11:5 11:8 11:9 11:9 11:9 11:10 14:12 14:14 14:14 14:27 14:27 19:1 22:13 22:13 22:14 23:2 25:8 26:9 26:10 26:13 26:20 26:20 26:20 32:6 32:6 35:3 38:18 38:19 38:20 39:7 40:8 40:18 40:28 40:28 40:28 40:29 42:2 42:8 42:8 42:8 42:12 44:6 44:6 44:6 44:9 44:23 44:24 44:24 45:5 45:14 47:6 48:11 48:13 48:22 48:22 49:5 49:5 49:8 49:13 50:6 50:6 50:6 51:16 52 52:5 52:11 52:11 53 53:3 53:4 53:4 53:4 53:5 53:7 53:7 53:7 53:7 53:8 53:8 54:13 54:13 55:6 55:7 56:4 56:5 58:5 58:9 58:11 59:3 59:4 59:4 59:5 59:9-11 60:8 61:1 61:1 61:8 63:1 63:9 64:4 65:1 65:2 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:2 66:3 66:3
Jeremiah
1:5 1:5 1:5 1:5 2:1 2:12 2:13 2:13 2:18 3:3 4:3 4:3 5:8 5:8 5:30 6:16 6:20 6:20 7:18 7:21 7:22 7:22 7:22 7:23 7:28 7:34 7:34 9:2 9:2 9:3 9:3 9:10 11:19 13:23 14:10 15:5 15:18 15:18 17:10 17:11 17:12 17:13 20:9 20:9 20:12 22:10 23:18 23:22 23:23 23:29 25:10 31:22 31:22 31:34 48:10
Lamentations
3:27 4:6 4:6 4:20
Ezekiel
3:12 9:4 11:13 16:25 16:48 16:48 18:23 18:26 18:32 28:2 34:2 34:2 44
Daniel
3:18 3:25 3:25 4:3 4:19 6:5 6:11 6:11 6:13 7:5 7:7 7:13 7:14 7:25 9:24 9:24 9:27
Hosea
4:12 6:3 6:6 7:13 7:15 8:7 9:4 11:1
Joel
1:7 2:15 2:17 2:17 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:25 2:28 2:28 2:28 2:32
Amos
5:16
Micah
4:2 7:18 7:18
Nahum
1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15
Habakkuk
2:5 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:15
Zechariah
1:3 1:12 2:10 2:10 8:19
Malachi
1:2 1:3 1:11 1:11 1:11 2:10 3:3 3:6 3:6 3:6 3:6 3:6 4:2 4:2
Matthew
1 1:17 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:23 1:25 1:25 2:13 3:3 3:7 3:7 3:9 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:17 4:3 4:3 4:7 4:10 4:10 4:10 4:11 4:19 4:20 4:23 5:6 5:8 5:8 5:10 5:11 5:12 5:15 5:21-44 5:22 5:28 5:36 5:48 5:48 6:6 6:7 6:7 6:9 6:30 6:31 6:33 6:34 7:2 7:6 7:6 7:6 7:13 7:15 7:15 7:22 7:25 7:25 8:2 8:26 8:29 8:29 8:31 9:3 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:13 9:20 9:20 9:24 9:36 10:8 10:16 10:17 10:22 10:22 10:23 10:23 10:23 10:29 10:29 10:29 10:40 10:40 10:40 10:40 10:40 10:40 11:13 11:25 11:25 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:27 11:28 11:28 11:28 11:29 11:29 12:8 12:15 12:19 12:19 12:28 12:28 12:32 12:32 12:34 12:34 12:36 12:40 12:43-45 13:8 13:21 13:22 13:25 13:52 14:13 14:28 15:3 15:4 15:11 15:13 15:13 15:19 15:26 15:28 16:13 16:13 16:16 16:16 16:16 16:16 16:16 16:16 16:17 16:18 16:22 16:23 16:23 16:23 16:24 16:24 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:5 17:20 18:6 18:6 18:6 18:19 18:20 18:20 18:24 19:4 19:4 19:4 19:6 19:21 19:27 20:16 20:22 20:23 20:28 20:32 21:2 21:19 21:33 21:37 22:12 22:12 22:12 22:14 22:21 22:21 22:29 22:29 22:29 22:29 22:29 23:19 23:34 24:2 24:3 24:24 24:24 24:25 24:31 24:35 24:39 24:42 24:42 24:42 24:42 24:44 25:1-12 25:11 25:13 25:21 25:21 25:21 25:21 25:21 25:23 25:23 25:26 25:26-30 25:27 25:27 25:31-36 25:34 25:34 25:34 25:34 25:35 25:40 25:45 26:2 26:17 26:26 26:26-28 26:28 26:38 26:39 26:39 26:39 26:39 26:39 26:39 26:41 26:41 26:41 26:45 26:64 26:64 26:65 27:24 27:40 27:42 27:45 27:46 27:46 27:46 27:52 27:53 27:54 27:54 27:60 28:5 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:18 28:19 28:19 28:19 28:19 28:19 28:19 28:20 28:20
Mark
1 1 1:7-11 1:24 1:24 1:31 2 2 2:11 4:17 4:20 4:20 4:37-41 4:37-41 5 6:38 6:38 8:22 8:29 8:38 9 10:21 10:28 10:45 11:13 12:25 12:29 12:29 12:29 13:9 13:31 13:32 13:32 13:32 13:32 13:32 13:32 13:32 13:32 15 15 15 15:5 15:34 15:46 18 18 18 19 20 22 22 22 23 24 24 25 26 26 27 29 29 30 30 31 339 339 351 351
Luke
1 1:1 1:1 1:2 1:13 1:27 1:35 1:41 2:1 2:23 2:52 2:52 2:52 2:52 2:52 2:52 2:52 2:52 2:52 2:61 3:7 4:3 4:8 4:18 4:30 4:30 4:41 5:24 5:24 6:1 6:36 6:36 6:36 6:49 7:48 7:48 9:27 9:62 10:16 10:18 10:18 10:19 10:19 10:19 10:20 10:22 10:22 10:22 10:22 10:22 11:2 11:9 11:13 11:15 11:27 11:49 12:4 12:12 12:20 12:29 12:33 12:40 12:40 12:49 13:16 13:21 13:25 13:32 14:15 14:15 15:7 15:17 16:8 16:19 17:2 17:15 17:19 17:21 17:21 18:2 18:7 18:12 18:19 18:19 19:23 19:23 20:13 21:8 21:8 21:15 21:33 22:15 22:15 22:16 22:28-30 22:29 22:30 22:31 23:28 23:43 23:43 24 24:1 24:5 24:11 24:39 24:39 24:42 24:43 28:37
John
1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1 1:1-3 1:1-3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:8 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:10 1:12 1:12 1:12 1:12 1:12-17 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:14 1:15 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:17 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:22 1:45 2:4 2:4 2:19 2:25 3:2 3:3 3:5 3:16-19 3:17 3:17 3:17 3:18 3:19 3:31 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:35 3:36 4:14 4:20 4:20 4:24 4:26 4:34 5:16 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:18 5:19 5:19 5:19 5:22 5:22 5:23 5:23 5:23 5:23 5:23 5:25 5:26 5:26 5:26 5:30 5:36 5:37 5:39 5:39 5:39 5:46 5:46 6:4 6:6 6:30 6:35 6:37 6:38 6:38 6:38-40 6:42 6:44 6:44 6:45 6:45 6:46 6:46 6:46 6:48 6:48-51 6:51 6:51 6:51 6:53 6:62-64 6:63 6:63 6:67 6:68 6:68 6:69 7:6 7:17 7:30 7:37 7:37 7:37 7:37 7:37 7:37 7:37 7:37 7:37 7:38 7:38 7:38 7:39 7:46 8:12 8:12 8:35 8:36 8:36 8:40 8:40 8:42 8:43 8:44 8:44 8:44 8:44 8:44 8:56 8:56 8:58 8:58 8:58 8:58 8:58 8:59 9 9:6 9:28 9:29 9:32 9:39 10:15 10:15 10:16 10:17 10:18 10:18 10:18 10:18 10:18 10:29 10:29 10:29 10:29 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:30 10:32-38 10:33 10:33 10:33 10:33 10:35 10:35 10:36 10:37 10:37 10:38 10:38 10:38 10:38 10:38 11:14 11:25 11:34 11:34 11:34 11:35 11:43 11:47 11:50 11:53 11:54 12:13 12:27 12:27 12:27 12:27 12:27 12:28 12:28 12:28 12:32 12:34 12:45 12:46 12:46-48 12:47 13:12 13:13 13:13 13:18 13:20 13:21 13:31 14:2 14:3 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:6 14:8 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9 14:9-13 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:10 14:11 14:11 14:16 14:20 14:23 14:23 14:23 14:26 14:27 14:28 14:28 14:28 14:29 14:30 14:48 14:48 15:1 15:20 15:22 15:26 15:26 15:26 16:7 16:13 16:14 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:15 16:23 16:25 16:28 16:28 16:33 16:33 16:33 17:1 17:1 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:3 17:4 17:5 17:5 17:7 17:7-9 17:8 17:10 17:10 17:11 17:17 17:18 17:19 17:20-23 17:21 17:21 17:22 17:22 17:24 18:4 18:5 18:5 18:5 18:9 18:12 18:23 18:37 19:15 19:15 19:15 19:38 19:39 19:41 20:17 20:17 20:22 20:22 20:22 20:27 20:28 20:28 21:15 22:36 22:45 22:46
Acts
1:1 1:7 1:7 1:11 1:18 1:18 1:18 2:1 2:22 2:22 2:24 2:24 2:36 2:36 2:36 2:36 2:36 2:36 2:38 3:9 3:15 3:20 3:26 4:4 4:10 4:12 4:32 4:35 5 5:29 5:39 5:39 5:39 6 6 7:55 8:4 8:20 8:20 8:27 8:30 8:34 8:37 9:4 9:5 10:26 10:36 10:36 10:38 10:38 10:38 13:22 13:33 14:15 15 17:5 17:21 17:27 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:28 17:30 17:31 20:28 20:29 21:20 23:9 23:11 23:22-24 24:18 24:19 25:16 26:2 26:26
Romans
1:1 1:1 1:2 1:2 1:3 1:3 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:7 1:7 1:7 1:12 1:15 1:17 1:19 1:19-25 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:20 1:21 1:22 1:22 1:23 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:25 1:26 1:26 1:28 1:28 1:28 1:30 1:30 1:30 2:5 2:13 2:16 2:21 2:23 2:24 2:24 3:10 3:21 3:22 3:26 3:26 3:29 3:30 4:20 4:25 5:1-8 5:3 5:3 5:3 5:4 5:5 5:5-8 5:12 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 5:14 6:9 6:14 7:12 7:14 8 8 8:1 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:3 8:4 8:4 8:4 8:9 8:13 8:15 8:17 8:18 8:18 8:19 8:19-21 8:21 8:21 8:22 8:22 8:24 8:25 8:26 8:28 8:29 8:29 8:29 8:29 8:29 8:32 8:33 8:34 8:35 8:35 8:35 8:35 8:35 8:35 8:35 8:35 8:35 8:35 8:37 8:37 8:37 8:37 8:38 8:39 9:3 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:5 9:19 9:19 9:20 9:32 9:33 10:4 10:9 10:9 10:11 10:13 10:13 10:18 10:20 11:7 11:23 11:29 11:32 11:33 11:34 11:34 11:34 11:36 12:11 12:12 12:15 13:7 13:7 13:14 14:1 14:1 14:2 14:10 14:10 15:19 15:19 15:28 16:18 16:22
1 Corinthians
1:1 1:4 1:5 1:5 1:7 1:8 1:10 1:10 1:21 1:21 1:21 1:21 1:23 1:23 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:24 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 1:30 2:4 2:4 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:8 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:16 3:1 3:2 3:10 3:11 3:12 3:16 3:16 4:1 4:4 4:4 4:5 4:6 4:6 4:16 5:3 5:4 5:4 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:7 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:8 5:13 6:10 6:13 6:17 6:18 6:20 7:1 7:2 7:5 7:5 7:7 7:17 7:18 7:27 8:5 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:6 8:8 8:9 9:16 9:22 9:24-27 9:27 9:27 10:4 10:13 10:23 11:1 11:1 11:1 11:1 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:2 11:3 11:7 11:7 11:7 11:9 11:12 11:25 11:27 12:4 12:4 12:26 13:9 13:9 13:12 14:9 14:25 14:25 14:33 15 15 15:3 15:3 15:3 15:3 15:3-4 15:4 15:5 15:9 15:9 15:10 15:20 15:21 15:21 15:22 15:25 15:28 15:28 15:28 15:31 15:32 15:33 15:53 15:53 15:53 15:53 15:53 15:55 16:22 16:23
2 Corinthians
1:10 1:23 2:11 2:11 2:11 2:11 2:15 2:17 2:17 3:2 3:2 3:16 3:17 3:17 4:10 4:10 4:11 4:11 4:11 4:11 4:11 4:13 4:14 4:17 5:4 5:10 5:10 5:13-15 5:14 5:14 5:16 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:18 5:19 5:21 6:1 6:2 6:2 6:11 6:11 6:12 6:13 6:14 6:14 6:14 6:14 6:15 6:16 6:16 6:16 6:17 7:1 7:6 10:15 11:3 11:3 11:27 11:33 12:2 12:2 12:4 12:4 12:9 12:10 12:10 12:21 13:5 13:14
Galatians
1:8 1:8 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:9 1:16 1:24 2 2:5 2:5 2:6 2:13 2:20 2:20 3:11 3:13 3:13 3:13 3:13 3:16 3:19 3:23 3:24 4:4 4:4 4:4 4:6 4:6 4:6 4:8 4:10 4:10 4:11 4:19 5:13 5:15 5:22 5:25 6:6 6:15 6:17
Ephesians
1:3 1:3-5 1:5 1:10 1:10 1:13 1:13 1:14 1:20 1:20 2:2 2:2 2:2 2:4 2:5 2:10 2:10 2:14 2:14 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:19 3:15 3:15 3:15 3:18 4:3 4:4 4:5 4:5 4:10 4:13 4:14 4:20-24 4:22 4:22-24 4:24 4:26 4:30 5:1 5:2 5:14 5:14 5:25 5:27 6:11 6:12 6:12 6:12 6:13 6:14 6:15 6:15 6:15 9 69 223 266
Philippians
1:13 1:29 2:5-11 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6 2:6-8 2:6-8 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:8 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:10 2:11 2:11 2:26 3:13 3:13 3:13 3:13 3:13 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:14 3:15 3:20 3:20 3:21 4:5 4:6 4:12 4:13
Colossians
1:12 1:12-17 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15 1:15-17 1:15-18 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:16 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:17 1:18 1:18 1:18 1:20 2 2 2:3 2:5 2:9 2:9 2:9 2:14 2:15 2:15 2:15 3:4 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:5 3:17 4:6
1 Thessalonians
2:19 3:11 4:13 5:16 5:16-18 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:17 5:18 5:18 5:18 5:19 5:23 5:24
2 Thessalonians
2:1 2:1 2:2 2:3 2:4 2:8 2:8 2:8 3:10
1 Timothy
1:4 1:7 1:7 1:7 1:7 1:8 1:10 1:15 1:17 1:17 1:19 1:19 1:19 1:20 2:5 2:7 2:7 2:7 2:9 3:2 3:2 3:8 3:16 3:16 3:16 4:1 4:1 4:1 4:1 4:2 4:2 4:4 4:6 4:6 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:7 4:8 4:8 4:12 4:14 4:14 4:14 4:14 4:15 5:16 5:23 6:5 6:5 6:10 6:15
2 Timothy
1:8-10 1:10 1:10 1:13 2:8 2:8 2:13 2:14 2:16 2:17 2:17 2:17 2:17 2:18 2:18 2:18 2:19 3:8 3:11 3:11 3:12 3:12 3:12 3:13 3:14 3:14 3:15 3:16 3:17 4:2 4:6 4:7 4:7 4:8 4:8
Titus
1:8 1:12 1:13 1:14 1:14 1:15 2:2 2:8 2:13 2:14 3:8 3:10 3:10 3:11 3:11 3:11
Philemon
1:10
Hebrews
1:1 1:1 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:2 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:3 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:6 1:6 1:6 1:6 1:6 1:7 1:10 1:12 1:14 2:1-3 2:7 2:9 2:9 2:10 2:12 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14 2:14-18 2:15 2:15 2:15 2:16 2:16 3:1 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:2 3:5 3:6 3:6 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:12 4:13 4:13 4:14 5:13 5:14 5:14 6:4 6:18 6:20 6:20 7:19 7:19 7:22 8:3 9:1 9:5 9:10 9:10 9:10 9:13 9:14 9:26 9:26 9:26 9:26 9:26 9:27 10:1 10:20 10:20 10:20 10:20 10:24 10:29 10:29 11:3 11:3 11:3 11:6 11:6 11:16 11:17 11:32 11:37 11:38 12:1 12:18-23 12:23 12:29 12:29 13:4 13:4 13:8 13:8 13:8 13:8 13:8 13:8 13:14
James
1:2 1:8 1:12 1:14 1:15 1:17 1:18 1:20 1:20 1:21 2:7 5:13
1 Peter
1:7 1:12 1:13 1:25 2:21-23 2:22 2:23 2:24 2:24 2:24 3:19 3:22 4:1 4:1 4:1 4:1 4:19 5:8 5:8 5:8
2 Peter
1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:4 1:17 2:22 2:22 2:22 3:16
1 John
1:1 1:1 1:2 2:7 2:13 2:13 2:20 2:23 2:23 3:2 3:5 3:8 3:8 3:24 3:24 4:1 4:1 4:9 4:13 4:15 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20 5:20
2 John
1:10 1:10
Revelation
1:4 1:5 1:8 1:8 3:14 3:14 3:14 4:8 8:9 18:6 19:13 22:9 22:13-17
Tobit
4:18 12:7
Judith
9 13:8 15
Wisdom of Solomon
1:5 1:11 1:11 2:12 2:12 2:12 2:21 2:23 3:57 6:18 6:24 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:25 7:27 7:27 9:2 13:5 13:5 14:12 14:12 14:12 14:21 14:21
Baruch
3:12 3:12 3:12 3:35 3:37 3:37 4:20 4:22 6
1 Esdras
4:36 4:40 4:41
2 Esdras
7:28 7:29
Sirach
1:9 1:10 1:25 4:24 4:28 7:5 7:5 15:9 15:9 15:9 18:17 30:4
Index of Greek Words and Phrases
Index of Pages of the Print Edition
i iii v vi vii viii xi xii xiii xiv xv xvi xvii xviii xix xx xxi xxii xxiii xxiv xxv xxvi xxvii xxviii xxix xxx xxxi xxxii xxxiii xxxiv xxxv xxxvi xxxvii xxxviii xxxix xl xli xlii xliii xliv xlv xlvi xlvii xlviii xlix l li lii liii liv lv lvi lvii lviii lix lx lxi lxii lxiii lxiv lxv lxvi lxvii lxviii lxix lxx lxxi lxxii lxxiii lxxiv lxxv lxxvi lxxvii lxxviii lxxix lxxx lxxxi lxxxii lxxxiii lxxxiv lxxxv lxxxvi lxxxvii lxxxviii lxxxix xc xci 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581
Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Ser. II, Vol. IV, part 3 of 3. . Hermetic Cloud, https://hermeticcloud.com/library/nicene-and-post-nicene-fathers-ser-ii-vol-iv-part-3/. Public-domain text reproduced in full; markup only.