THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS WRITINGS - VOLUME 22
Athanasius of Alexandria: On the Incarnation and the Arian Controversy
c. AD 318 – 360

SermonIndex · sermonindex.net/books/

Texts are public domain except where marked in Sources and Credits. Modern English versions released under CC BY-SA 4.0.

============================================================

INTRODUCTION TO THIS VOLUME
===========================

HOW THIS BOOK IS ARRANGED

This is the twenty-second volume of a series that gathers the writings of the early Church
in order of date, from the generation after the apostles down to the eighth century. This
volume holds Athanasius of Alexandria, On the Incarnation and the Arian Controversy, from
the period about AD 318 – 360.

Within each work the text is divided into chapters and numbered sections, so that any
passage can be found again and cited. The small bold figures in the text are the section
numbers.

THE TRANSLATIONS

The text is in English only. Wherever a modern English version has been prepared for
SermonIndex it is used here; otherwise the book prints an older public-domain translation.
In both cases the wording is the translator’s own: older translations have not been
altered beyond dividing them into sections. The sources for every work are listed at the
back of the book, together with the licence under which each text is released. The modern
English version prepared for SermonIndex is used for On the Incarnation of the Word
(Athanasius of Alexandria); the other works are printed in older public-domain
translations.

Short notes by the translator appear at the foot of the page of the modern English
versions. They explain a difficult word, name a person or place, point to a parallel
elsewhere, or say where the modern English departs from the earlier translation. They are
numbered afresh for each work.

SCRIPTURE REFERENCES

In the works printed in modern English, passages that quote or clearly echo the Bible are
marked in brackets at the end of the section. These references are an aid to the reader,
not a complete list: some parallels are not marked, and a marked passage may be a loose
quotation or an echo rather than an exact match. The older translations are not marked in
this way. The Scripture Index at the end of the book lists the marked references and the
pages on which they are found.

IN THIS VOLUME

Athanasius was bishop of Alexandria from AD 328 until his death in AD 373, and he was sent
into exile five times for his defence of the faith of Nicaea. His writings include his
early work On the Incarnation, his long answers to the Arians, his letters, and the Life
of Antony.

Against the Heathen and On the Incarnation of the Word are two parts of one work. They are
traditionally dated to about AD 318, though some scholars place them later.

DATES AND AUTHORSHIP

Dates are approximate and are debated by scholars. Each work begins with a short
introduction that states what is known about its author and its date, and what is
uncertain.


AGAINST THE HEATHEN
===================

AGAINST THE HEATHEN Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

PART 1

§1. Introduction:-The Purpose of the Book a Vindication of Christian Doctrine, and
Especially of the Cross, Against the Scoffing Objection of Gentiles. The Effects of This
Doctrine Its Main Vindication.

1 The knowledge of our religion and of the truth of things is independently manifest
rather than in need of human teachers, for almost day by day it asserts itself by facts,
and manifests itself brighter than the sun by the doctrine of Christ. 2. Still, as you
nevertheless desire to hear about it, Macarius , come let us as wemay be able set forth a
few points of the faith of Christ: able though you are to find it out from the divine
oracles, but yet generously desiring to hear from others as well. 3. For although the
sacred and inspired Scriptures are sufficient to declare the truth,-while there are other
works of our blessed teachers compiled for this purpose, if he meet with which a man will
gain some knowledge of the interpretation of the Scriptures, and be able to learn what he
i wishes to know,-still, as we have not at present in our hands the compositions of our
teachers, we must communicate in writing to you what we learned from them,-the faith,
namely, of Christ the Saviour; lest any should hold cheap the doctrine taught among us, or
think faith. in Christ unreasonable. For this is what the Gentiles traduce and scoff at,
and laugh loudly at us, insisting on the one fact of the Cross of Christ;

2 and it is just here that one must pity their want of sense, because when they traduce
the Cross of Christ they do not see that its power has filled all the world, and that by
it the effects of the knowledge of God are made manifest to all. 4. For they would not
have scoffed at such a fact, had they, too, been men who genuinely gave heed to His divine
Nature. On the contrary, they in their turn would have recognised this man as Saviour of
the world, and that the Cross has been not a disaster, but a healing of Creation. 5. For
if after the Cross all idolatry was overthrown, while every manifestation of demons is
driven away by this Sign , and Christ alone is worshipped and the Father known through
Him, and, while gainsayers are put to shame, He daily invisibly wins over the souls of
these gainsayers ,-how, one might fairly ask them, is it still open to us to regard the
matter as human, instead of confessing that He Who ascended the Cross is Word of God and
Saviour of the World? But these men seem to me quite as bad as one who should traduce the
sun when covered by clouds, while yet wondering at his light, seeing how the whole of
creation is illu mined by him. 6.

3 For as the light is noble, and the sun, the chief cause of light, is nobler still, so,
as it is a divine thing for the whole world to be filled with his knowledge, it follows
that the orderer and chief cause of such an achievement is God and the Word of God. 7. We
speak then as lies within our power, first refuting the ignorance of the unbelieving; so
that what is false being refuted, the truth may then shine forth of itself, and that you
yourself, friend, may be reassured that you have believed what is true, and in coming to
know Christ have not been deceived. Moreover, I think it becoming to discourse to you, as
a lover of Christ, about Christ, since I am sure that you rate faith in and knowledge of
Him above anything else whatsoever.

§2. Evil No Part of the Essential Nature of Things. The Original Creation and Constitution
of Than in Grace and in the Knowledge of God.

4 In the beginning wickedness did not exist. Nor indeed does it exist even now in those
who are holy, nor does it in any way belong to their nature. But men later on began to
contrive it and to elaborate it to their own hurt. Whence also they devised the invention
of idols, treating what was not as though it were. 2. For God Maker of all and King of
all, that has His Being beyond all substance and human discovery, inasmuch as He is good
and exceeding. noble, made, through His own Word our Saviour Jesus Christ, the human race
after His own image, and constituted man able to see and know realities by means of this
assimilation to Himself, giving him also a conception and knowledge even of His own
eternity, in order that, preserving his nature intact, he might not ever either depart
from his idea of God, nor recoil from the communion of the holy ones; but having the grace
of Him that gave it, having also God's own power from the Word of the Father, he might
rejoice and have fellowship with the Deity, living the life of immortality unharmed and
truly blessed. For having nothing to hinder his knowledge of the Deity, he ever beholds,
by his purity, the Image of the Father, God the Word, after Whose image he himself is
made.

5 He is awe-struck as he contemplates that Providence which through the Word extends to
the universe, being raised above the things of sense and every bodily appearance, but
cleaving to the divine and thought-perceived things in the heavens by the power of his
mind. 3. For when the mind of men does not hold converse with bodies, nor has mingled with
it from without aught of their lust, but is wholly above them, dwelling with itself as it
was made to begin with, then, transcending the things of sense and all things human, it is
raised up on high; and seeing the Word, it sees in Him also the Father of the Word, taking
pleasure in contemplating Him, and gaining renewal by its desire toward Him; 4. exactly as
the first of men created, the one who was named Adam in Hebrew, is described in the Holy
Scriptures as having at the beginning had his mind to God-ward in a freedom unembarrassed
by shame, and as associating with the holy ones in that contemplation of things perceived
by the mind which he enjoyed in the place where he was-the place which the holy Moses
called in figure a Garden. So purity of soul is sufficient of itself to reflect God, as
the Lord also says, "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God."

§3. The Decline of Man from the Above Condition, Owing to His Absorption in Material
Things.

6 Thus then, as we have said, the Creator fashioned the race of men, and thus meant it to
remain. But men, making light of better things, and holding back from apprehending them,
began to seek in preference things nearer to themselves. 2. But nearer to themselves were
the body and its senses; so that while removingtheir mind from the things perceived by
thought,they began to regard themselves; and so doing, and holding to the body and the
other things of sense, and deceived as it were in their own surroundings, they fell into
lust of themselves, preferring what was their own to the contemplation of what belonged to
God. Having then made themselves at home in these things, and not being willing to leave
what was so near to them, they entangled their soul with bodily pleasures, vexed and
turbid with all kind of lusts, while they wholly forgot the power they originally had from
God. 3. But the truth of this one may see from the man who was first made, according to
what the holy Scriptures tell us of him. For he also, as long as he kept his mind to God,
and the contemplation of God, turned away from the contemplation of the body. But when, by
counsel of the serpent, he departed from the consideration of God, and began to regard
himself, then they not only fell to bodily lust, but knew that they were naked, and
knowing, were ashamed.

7 But they knew that they were naked, not so much of clothing as that they were become
stripped of the contemplation of divine things, and had transferred their understanding to
the contraries. For having departed from the consideration of the one and the true,
namely, God, and from desire of Him, they had thenceforward embarked in divers lusts and
in those of the several bodily senses. 4. Next, as is apt to happen, having formed a
desire for each and sundry, they began to be habituated to these desires, so that they
were even afraid to leave them: whence the soul became subject to cowardice and alarms,
and pleasures and thoughts of mortality. For not being willing to leave her lusts, she
fears death and her separation from the body. But again, from lusting, and not meeting
with gratification, she learned to commit murder and wrong. We are then led naturally to
shew, as best we can, how she does this.

§4. The Gradual Abasement of the Saul from Truth to Falsehood by the Abuse of Her Freedom
of Choice.

8 Having departed from the contemplation of the things of thought, and using to the full
the several activities of the body, and being pleased with the contemplation of the body,
and seeing that pleasure is good for her, she was misled and abused the name of good, and
thought that pleasure was the very essence of good: just as though a man out of his mind
and asking for a sword to use against all he met, were to think that soundness of mind. 2.
But having fallen in love with pleasure, she began to work it out in various ways. For
being by nature mobile, even though she have turned away from what is good, yet she does
not lose her mobility. She moves then, no longer according to virtue or so as to see God,
but imagining false things, she makes a novel use of her power, abusing it as a means to
the pleasures she has devised, since she is after all made with power over herself. 3. For
she is able, as on the one hand to incline to what is good, so on the other to reject it;
but in rejecting the good she of course entertains the thought of what is opposed to it,
for she cannot at all cease from movement, being, as I said before, mobile by nature. And
knowing her own power over herself, she sees that she is able to use the members of her
body in either direction, both toward what is, or toward what is not. 4.

9 But good is, while evil is not; by what is, then, I mean what is good, inasmuch as it
has its pattern in God Who is. But by what is not I mean what is evil, in so far as it
consists in a false imagination in the thoughts of men. For though the body has eyes so as
to see Creation, and by its entirely harmonious construction to recognise the Creator; and
ears to listen to the divine oracles and the laws of God ; and hands both to perform works
of necessity and to raise to God in prayer; yet the soul, departing from the contemplation
of what is good and from moving in its sphere, wanders away and moves toward its
contraries. 5. Then seeing, as I said before, and abusing her power, she has perceived
that she can move the members of the body also in an opposite way: and so, instead of
beholding the Creation, she turns the eye to lusts, shewing that she has this power too;
and thinking that by the mere fact of moving she is maintaining her own dignity, and is
doing no sin in doing as she pleases; not knowing that she is made not merely to move, but
to move in the fight direction. For this is why an apostolic utterance assures us "All
things are lawful, but not all things are expedient ."

§5. Evil, Then, Consists Essentially in the Choice of What is Lower in Preference to What
is Higher.

10 But the audacity of men, having regard not to what is expedient and becoming, but to
what is possible for it, began to do the contrary; whence, moving their hands to the
contrary, it made them commit murder, and led away their hearing to disobedience, and
their other members to adultery instead of to lawful procreation ; and the tongue, instead
of right speaking, to slander and insult and perjury; the hands again, to stealing and
striking fellow-men; and the sense of smell to many sorts of lascivious odours; the feet,
to be swift to shed blood, and the belly to drunkenness and insatiable gluttony . 2. All
of which things are a vice and sin of the soul: neither is there any cause of them at all,
but only the rejection of better things. 11 For just as if a charioteer , having mounted
his chariot on the race-course, were to pay no attention to the goal, toward which he
should be driving, but, ignoring this, simply were to drive the horse as he could, or in
other words as he would, and often drive against those he met, and often down steep
places, rushing wherever he impelled himself by the speed of the team, thinking that thus
running he has not missed the goal,-for he regards the running only, and does not see that
he has passed wide of the goal ;-so the soul too, turning from the way toward God, and
driving the members of the body beyond what is proper, or rather, driven herself along
with them by her own doing, sins and makes mischief for herself, not seeing that she has
strayed from the way, and has swerved from the goal of truth, to which the Christ-bearing
man, the blessed Paul, was looking when he said, "I press on toward the goal unto the
prize of the high calling of Christ Jesus : so that the holy man, making the good his
mark, never did what was evil.

§6. False Views of the Nature of Evil: Viz., that Evil is Something in the Nature of
Things, and Has Substantive Existence. (A) Heathen Thinkers: (Evil Resides in Matter).
Their Refutation. (B) Heretical Teachers: (Dualism). Refutation from Scripture.

12 Now certain of the Greeks, having erred from the right way, and not having known
Christ, have ascribed to evil a substantive and independent existence. In this they make a
double mistake: either in denying the Creator to be maker of all things, if evil had an
independent subsistence and being of its own; or again, if they mean that He is maker of
all things, they will of necessity admit Him to be maker of evil also. For evil, according
to them, is included among existing things. 2. But this must appear paradoxical and
impossible. For evil does not come from good, nor is it in, or the result of, good, since
in that case it would not be good, being mixed in its nature or a cause of evil. 3. But
the sectaries, who have fallen away from the teaching of the Church, and made shipwreck
concerning the Faith , they also wrongly think that evil has a substantive existence. But
they arbitrarily imagine another god besides the true One, the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and that he is the unmade producer of evil and the head of wickedness, who is also
artificer of Creation. But these men one can easily refute, not only from the divine
Scriptures, but also from the human understanding itself, the very source of these their
insane imaginations. 4. To begin with, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ says in His own
gospels confirming the words of Moses : "The Lord God is one;

13 and "I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earths . But if God is one, and at the
same time Lord of heaven and earth, how could there be another God beside Him? or what
room will there be for the God whom they suppose, if the one true God fills all things in
the compass of heaven and earth? or how could there be another creator of that, whereof,
according to the Saviour's utterance, the God and Father of Christ is Himself Lord. 5.
Unless indeed they would say that it were, so to speak, in an equipoise, and the evil god
capable of getting the better of the good God. But if they say this, see to what a pitch
of impiety they descend. For when powers are equal, the superior and better cannot be
discovered. For if the one exist even if the other will it not, both are equally strong
and equally weak equally, because the very existence of either is a defeat of the other's
will: weak, because what happens is counter to their wills: for while the good God exists
in spite of the evil one, the evil god exists equally in spite of the good.

§7. Refutation of Dualism Front Reason. Impossibility of Two Gods. The Truth as to Evil is
that Which the Church Teaches : that It Originates, and Resides, in the Perverted Choice
of the Darkened Soul.

14 More especially, they are exposed to the following reply. If visible things are the
work of the evil god, what is the work of the good God? for nothing is to be seen except
the work of the Artificer. Or what evidence is there that the good God exists at all, if
there are no works of His by which He may be known? for by his works the artificer is
known. 2. Or how could two principles exist, contrary one to another: Or what is it that
divides them, for them to exist apart? For it is impossible for them to exist together,
because they are mutually destructive. But neither can the one be included in the other,
their nature being unmixed and unlike. Accordingly that which divides them will evidently
be of a third nature, and itself God. But of what nature could this third something be?
good or evil? It will be impossible to determine, for it cannot be of the nature of both.
3. This conceit of theirs, then, being evidently rotten, the truth of the Church's
theology must be manifest: that evil has not from the beginning been with God or in God,
nor has any substantive existence; but that men, in default of the vision of good, began
to devise and imagine for themselves what was not, after their own pleasure. 4.

15 For as if a man, when the sun is shining, and the whole earth illumined by his light,
were to shut fast his eyes and imagine darkness where no darkness exists, and then walk
wandering as if in darkness, often falling and going down steep places, thinking it was
dark and not light,-for, imagining that he sees, he does not see at all; -so, too, the
soul of man, shutting fast her eyes, by which she is able to see God, has imagined evil
for herself, and moving therein, knows not that, thinking she is doing something, she is
doing nothing. For she is imagining what is not, nor is she abiding in her original
nature; but what she is is evidently the product of her own disorder. 5. For she is made
to see God, and to be enlightened by Him; but of her own accord in God's stead she has
sought corruptible things and darkness, as the Spirit says somewhere in writing, "God made
man upright, but they have sought out many inventions . Thus it has been then that men
from the first discovered and contrived and imagined evil for themselves. But it is now
time to say how they came down to the madness of idolatry, that you may know that the
invention of idols is wholly due, not to good but to evil. But what has its origin in evil
can never be pronounced good in any point,-being evil altogether.

§8. The Origin of Idolatry is Similar. The Soul, Materialised by Forgetting God, and
Engrossed in Earthly Things, Makes Them into Gods. The Rate of Men Descends into a
Hopeless Depth as Decision and Superstition.

16 Now the soul of mankind, not satisfied with the devising of evil, began by degrees to
venture upon what is worse still. For having experience of diversities of pleasures, and
girt about with oblivion of things divine; being pleased moreover and having in view the
passions of the body, and nothing but things present and opinions about them, ceased to
think that anything existed beyond what is seen, or that anything was good save things
temporal and bodily; so turning away and forgetting that she was in the image of the good
God, she no longer, by the power which is in her, sees God the Word after whose likeness
she is made; but having departed from herself, imagines and feigns what is not. 2. For
hiding, by the complications of bodily lusts, the mirror which, as it were, is in her, by
which alone she had the power of seeing the Image of the Father, she no longer sees what a
soul ought to behold, but is carried about by everything, and only sees the things which
come under the senses. Hence, weighted with all fleshly desire, and distracted among the
impressions of these things, she imagines that the God Whom her understanding has
forgotten is to be found in bodily and sensible things, giving to things seen the name of
God, and glorifying only those things which she desires and which are pleasant to her
eyes. 3. Accordingly, evil is the cause which brings idolatry in its train;

17 for men, having learned to contrive evil, which is no reality in itself, in like manner
feigned for themselves as gods beings that had no real existence. Just, then, as though a
man had plunged into the deep, and no longer saw the light, nor what appears by light,
because his eyes are turned downwards, and the water is all above him; and, perceiving
only the things in the deep, thinks that nothing exists beside them, but that the things
he sees are the only true realities; so the men of former time, having lost their reason,
and plunged into the lusts and imaginations of carnal things, and forgotten the knowledge
and glory of God, their, reasoning being dull, or rather following unreason, made gods for
themselves of things seen, glorifying the creature rather than the Creator , and deifying
the works rather than the Master, God, their Cause and Artificer. 4. But just as,
according to the above simile, men who plunge into the deep, the deeper they go down,
advance into darker and deeper places, so it is with mankind. For they did not keep to
idolatry in a simple form, nor did they abide in that with which they began; but the
longer they went on in their first condition, the more new superstitions they invented:
and, not satiated with the first evils, they again filled themselves. with others,
advancing further in utter shamefulness, and surpassing themselves in impiety.

18 But to this the divine Scripture testifies when it says, "When the wicked cometh unto
the depth of evils, he despiseth ."

§9. The Various Developments of Idolatry: Worship of the Heavenly Bodies, the Elements,
Natural Objects, Fabulous Creatures, Personified Lusts, Men Living and Dead. The Case of
Antinous, and of the Deified Emperors.

19 For now the understanding of mankind leaped asunder from God; and going lower in their
ideas and imaginations, they gave the honour due to God first to the heaven and the sun
and moon and the stars, thinking them to be not only gods, but also the causes of the
other gods lower than themselves . Then, going yet lower in their dark imaginations, they
gave the name of gods to the upper aether and the air and the things in the air. Next,
advancing further in evil, they came to celebrate as gods the elements and the principles
of which bodies are composed, heat and cold and dryness and wetness. 2. But just as they
who have fallen fiat creep in the slime like land-snails, so the most impious of mankind,
having fallen lower and lower from the idea of God, then set up as gods men, and the forms
of men, some still living, others even after their death. Moreover, counselling and
imagining worse things still, they transferred the divine and supernatural name of God at
last even to stones and stocks, and creeping things both of land and water, and irrational
wild beasts, awarding to them every divine honour, and turning from the true and only real
God, the Father of Christ. 3. But would that even there the audacity of these foolish men
had stopped short, and that they had not gone further yet in impious self-confusion.

20 For to such a depth have some fallen in their understanding, to such darkness of mind,
that they have even devised for themselves, and made gods of things that have no existence
at all, nor any place among things created. For mixing up the rational with the
irrational, and combining things unlike in nature, they worship the result as gods, such
as the dog-headed and snake-headed and ass-headed gods among the Egyptians, and the ram-
headed Ammon among the Libyans. While others, dividing apart the portions of men's bodies,
head, shoulder, hand, and foot, have set up each as gods and deified them, as though their
religion were not satisfied with the whole body in its integrity. 4. But others, straining
impiety to the utmost, have deified the motive of the invention of these things and of
their own wickedness, namely, pleasure and lust, and worship them, such as their Eros, and
the Aphrodite at Paphos. While some of them, as if vying with them in depravation, have
ventured to erect into gods their rulers or even their sons, either out of honour for
their princes, or from fear of their tyranny, such as the Cretan Zeus, of such renown
among them, and the Arcadian Hermes;

21 and among the Indians Dionysus, among the Egyptians Isis and Osiris and Horus, and in
our own time Antinous, favourite of Hadrian, Emperor of the Romans, whom, although men
know he was a mere man, and not a respectable man, but on the contrary, full of
licentiousness, yet they worship for fear of him that enjoined it. For Hadrian having come
to sojourn in the land of Egypt, when Antinous the minister of his pleasure died, ordered
him to be worshipped; being indeed himself in love with the youth even after his death,
but for all that offering a convincing exposure of himself, and a proof against all
idolatry, that it was discovered among men for no other reason than by reason of the lust
of them that imagined it. According as the wisdom of God testifies beforehand when it
says, "The devising of idols was the beginning of fornication ." 5. And do not wonder, nor
think what we are saying hard to believe, inasmuch as it is not long since, even if it be
not still the case that the Roman Senate vote to those emperors who have ever ruled them
from the beginning, either all of them, or such as they wish and decide, a place among the
gods, and decree them to be worshipped .

22 For those to whom they are hostile, they treat as enemies and call men, admitting their
real nature, while those who are popular with them they order to be worshipped on account
of their virtue, as though they had it in their own power to make gods, though they are
themselves men, and do not profess to be other than mortal. 6. Whereas if they are to make
gods, they ought to be themselves gods; for that which makes must needs be better than
that which it makes, and he that judges is of necessity in authority over him that is
judged, while he that gives, at any rate that which he has, confers a layout, just as, of
course, every king, in giving as a favour what he has to give, is greater and in a higher
position than those who receive. If then they decree whomsoever they please to be gods,
they ought first to be gods themselves. But the strange thing is this, that they
themselves by dying as men, expose the falsehood of their own vote concerning those
deified by them.

§10. Similar Human Origin of the Greek Gods, by Decree of Theseus. The Process by Which
Mortals Became Deified.

23 But this custom is not a new one, nor did it begin from the Roman Senate: on the
contrary, it had existed previously from of old, and was formerly practised for the
devising of idols.For the gods renowned from of old among the Greeks, Zeus, Poseidon,
Apollo, Hephaestus, Hermes, and, among females, Hera and Demeter and Athena and Artemis,
were de-creed the title of gods by the order of Theseus, of whom Greek history tells us ;
and so the men who pass such decrees die like men and are mourned for, while those in
whose favour they are passed are worshipped as gods. What a height of inconsistency and
madness! knowing who passed the decree, they pay greater honour to those who are the
subjects of it. 2. And would that their idolatrous madness had stopped short at males, and
that they had not brought down the title of deity to females. For even women, whom it is
not safe to admit to deliberation about public affairs, they worship and serve with the
honour due to God, such as those enjoined by Theseus as above stated, and among the
Egyptians Isis and the Maid and the Younger one , and among others Aphrodite. For the
names of the others I do not consider it modest even to mention, full as they are of all
kind of grotesqueness. 3. For many, not only in ancient times but in our own also, having
lost their beloved ones, brothers and kinsfolk and wives;

24 and many women who had lost their husbands, all of whom nature proved to be mortal men,
made representations of them and devised sacrifices, and consecrated them; while later
ages, moved by the figure and the brilliancy of the artist, worshipped them as gods, thus
failing into inconsistency with nature . For whereas their parents had mourned for them,
not regarding them as gods (for had they known them to be gods they would not have
lamented them as if they had perished; for this was why they represented them in an image,
namely, because they not only did not think them gods, but did not believe them to exist
at all, and in order that the sight of their form in the image might console them for
their being no more), yet the foolish people pray to them as gods and invest them with the
honour of the true God. 4. For example, in Egypt, even to this day, the death-dirge is
celebrated for Osiris and Horus and Typho and the others. And the caldrons at Dodona, and
the Corybantes in Crete, prove that Zeus is no god but a man, and a man born of a cannibal
father. And, strange to say, even Plato, the sage admired among the Greeks, with all his
vaunted understanding about God, goes down with Socrates to Peiraeus to worship Artemis, a
figment of man's art.

§11. The Deeds of Heathen Deities, and Particularly of Zeus.

25 But of these and such like inventions of idolatrous madness, Scripture taught us
beforehand long ago, when it said , "The devising of idols was the beginning of
fornication, and the invention of them, the corruption of life. For neither were they from
the beginning, neither shall they be for ever. For the vainglory of men they entered into
the world, and therefore shall they come shortly to an end. For a father afflicted with
untimely mourning when he hath made an image of his child soon taken away, now honoured
him as a god which was then a dead man, and delivered to those that were under him
ceremonies and sacrifices. Thus in process of time an ungodly custom grown strong was kept
as a law. And graven images were worshipped by the commands of kings. Whom men could not
honour in presence because they dwelt afar off, they took the counterfeit of his visage
from afar, and made an express image of the king whom they honoured, to the end that by
this their forwardness they might flatter him that was absent as if he were present. Also
the singular diligence of the artificer did help to set forward the ignorant to more
superstition: for he, peradventure, willing to please one in authority, forced all his
skill to make the resemblance of the best fashion: and so the multitude, allured by the
grace of the work, took him now for a god, which a little before was but honoured as a
man:

26 and this was an occasion to deceive the world, for men serving either calamity or
tyranny, did ascribe unto stones and stocks the incommunicable Name." 2. The beginning and
devising of the invention of idols having been, as Scripture witnesses, of such sort, it
is now time to shew thee the refutation of it by proofs derived not so much from without
as from these men's own opinions about the idols. For to begin at the lowest point, if one
were to take the actions of them they call gods, one would find that they were not only no
gods, but had been even of men the most contemptible. For what a thing it is to see the
loves and licentious actions of Zeus in the poets! What a thing to hear of him, on the one
hand carrying off Ganymede and committing stealthy adulteries, on the other in panic and
alarm lest the walls of the Trojans should be destroyed against his intentions! What a
thing to see him in grief at the death of his son Sarpedon, and wishing to succour him
without being able to do so, and, when plotted against by the other so-called gods,
namely, Athena and Hera and Poseidon, succoured by Thetis, a woman, and by Aegaeon of the
hundred hands, and overcome by pleasures, a slave to women, and for their sakes running
adventures in disguises consisting of brute beasts and creeping things and birds;

27 and again, in hiding on account of his father's designs upon him, or Cronos bound by
him, or him again mutilating his father! Why, is it fitting to regard as a god one who has
perpetrated such deeds, and who stands accused of things which not even the public laws of
the Romans allow those to do who are merely men?

§12. Other Shameful Actions Ascribed to Heathen Deities. All Prove that They are But Men
at Former Times, and Not Even Good Men.

28 For, to mention a few instances out of many to avoid prolixity, who that saw his
lawless and corrupt conduct toward Semele, Leda, Alcmene, Artemis, Leto, Maia, Europe,
Danae, and Antiope, or that saw what he ventured to take in hand with regard to his own
sister, in having the same woman as wife and sister, would not scorn him and pronounce him
worthy of death? For not only did he commit adultery, but he deified and raised to heaven
those born of his adulteries, contriving the deification as a veil for his lawlessness:
such as Dionysus, Hera-cles, the Dioscuri, Hermes, Perseus, and Soteira. 2. Who, that sees
the so-called gods at irreconcileable strife among themselves at Troy on account of the
Greeks and Trojans, will fail to recognise their feebleness, in that because of their
mutual jealousies they egged on even mortals to strife? Who, that sees Ares and Aphrodite
wounded by Diomed, or Hera and Aidoneus from below the earth, whom they call a god,
wounded by Heracles, Dionysus by Perseus, Athena by Areas, and Hephaestus hurled down and
going lame, will not recognise their real nature, and, while refusing to call them gods,
be assured (when he hears that they are corruptible and passible) that they are nothing
but men , and feeble men too, and admire those that inflicted the wounds rather than the
wounded? 3.

29 Or who that sees the adultery of Ares with Aphrodite, and Hephaestus contriving a snare
for the two, and the other so-called gods called by Hephaestus to view the adultery, and
coming and seeing their licentiousness, would not laugh and recognise their worthless
character? Or who would not laugh at beholding the drunken folly and misconduct of
Heracles toward Omphale? For their deeds of pleasure, and their unconscionable loves, and
their divine images in gold, silver, bronze, iron, stone, and wood, we need not seriously
expose by argument, since the facts are abominable in themselves, and are enough taken
alone to furnish proof of the deception; so that one's principal feeling is pity for those
deceived about them. 4. For, hating the adulterer who tampers with a wife of their own,
they are not ashamed to deify the teachers of adultery; and refraining from incest
themselves they worship those who practise it; and admitting that the corrupting of
children is an evil, they serve those who stand accused of it and do not blush to ascribe
to those they call gods things which the laws forbid to exist even among men.

§13. The Folly of Image Worship and Its Dishonour to Art.

30 Again, in worshipping things of wood and stone, they do not see that, while they tread
under foot and burn what is in no way different, they call portions of these materials
gods. And what they made use of a little while ago, they carve and worship in their folly,
not seeing, nor at all considering that they are worshipping, not gods, but the carver's
art. 2. For so long as the stone is uncut and the wood unworked, they walk upon the one
and make frequent use of the other for their own purposes, even for those which are less
honourable. But when the artist has invested them with the proportions of his own skill,
and impressed upon the material the form of man or woman, then, thanking the artist, they
proceed to worship them as gods, having bought them from the carver at a price. Often,
moreover, the image-maker, as though forgetting the work he has done himself, prays to his
own productions, and calls gods what just before he was paring and chipping. 3. But it
were better, if need to admire these things, to ascribe it to the art of the skilled
workman, and not to honour productions in preference to their producer. For it is not the
material that has adorned the art, but the art that has adorned and deified the material.

31 Much juster were it, then, for them to worship the artist than his productions, both
because his existence was prior to that of the gods produced by art, and because they have
come into being in the form he pleased to give them. But as it is, setting justice aside,
and dishonouring skill and art, they worship the products of skill and art, and when the
man is dead that made them, they honour his works as immortal, whereas if they did not
receive daily attention they would certainly in time come to a natural end. 4. Or how
could one fail to pity them in this also, in that seeing, they worship them that cannot
see, and hearing, pray to them that cannot hear, and born with life and reason, men as
they are, call gods things which do not move at all, but have not even life, and,
strangest of all, in that they serve as their masters beings whom they themselves keep
under their own power? Nor imagine that this is a mere statement of mine, nor that I am
maligning them; for the verification of all this meets the eyes, and whoever wishes to do
so may see the like.

§14. Image Worship Condemned by Scripture.

32 But better testimony about all this is furnished by Holy Scripture, which tells us
beforehand when it says , "Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men's hands. Eyes
have they and will not see; a mouth have they and will not speak; ears have they and will
not hear; noses have they and will not smell; hands have they and will not handle; feet
have they and will not walk; they will not speak through their throat. Like unto them be
they that make them. Nor have they escaped prophetic censure; for there also is their
refutation, where the Spirit says , "they shall be ashamed that have formed a god, and
carved all of them that which is vain: and all by whom they were made are dried up: and
let the deaf ones among men all assemble and stand up together, and let them be confounded
and put to shame together; for the carpenter sharpened iron, and worked it with an adze,
and fashioned it with an auger, and set it up with the arm of his strength: and he shall
hunger and be faint, and drink no water.

33 For the carpenter chose out wood, and set it by a rule, and fashioned it with glue, and
made it as the form of a man and as the beauty of man, and set it up in his house, wood
which he had cut from the grove and which the Lord planted, and the rain gave it growth
that it might be for men to burn, and that he might take thereof and warm himself, and
kindle, and bake bread upon it, but the residue they made into gods, and worshipped them,
the half whereof they had burned in the fire. And upon the half thereof he roasted flesh
and ate and was filled, and was warmed and said: `It is pleasant to me, because I am
warmed and have seen the fire.' But the residue thereof he worshipped, saying, `Deliver me
for thou an my god.' They knew not nor understood, because their eyes were dimmed that
they could not see, nor perceive with their heart; nor did he consider in his heart nor
know in his understanding that he had burned half thereof in the fire, and baked bread
upon the coals thereof, and roasted flesh and eaten it, and made the residue thereof an
abomination, and they worship it. Know that their heart is dust and they are deceived, and
none can deliver his soul. Behold and will ye not say, `There is a lie in my right hand?'"
2.

34 How then can they fail to be judged godless by all, who even by the divine Scripture
are accused of impiety? or how can they be anything but miserable, who are thus openly
convicted of worshipping dead things instead of the truth? or what kind of hope have they?
or what kind of excuse could be made for them, trusting in things without sense or
movement, which they reverence in place of the true God?

§15. The Details About the Gods Conveyed in the Representations of Them by Poets and
Artists Shew that They are Without Life, and that They are Not Gods, Nor Even Decent Men
and Women.

35 For would that the artist would fashion the gods even without shape, so that they might
not be open to so manifest an exposure of their lack of sense. For they might have cajoled
the perception of simple folk to think the idols had senses, were it not that they possess
the symbols of the senses, eyes for example and noses and ears and hands and mouth,
without any gesture of actual perception and grasp of the objects of sense. But as a
matter of fact they have these things and have them not, stand and stand not, sit and sit
not. For they have not the real action of these things, but as their fashioner pleased, so
they remain stationary, giving no sign of a god, but evidently mere inanimate objects, set
there by man's art. 2. Or would that the heralds and prophets of these false gods, poets I
mean and writers, had simply written that they were gods, and not also recounted their
actions as an exposure of their godlessness and scandalous life. For by the mere name of
godhead they might have filched away the truth, or rather have caused the mass of men to
err from the truth. But as it is, by narrating the loves and im-moralities of Zeus, and
the corruptions of youths by the other gods, and the voluptuous jealousies of the females,
and the fears and acts of cowardice and other wickednesses, they merely convict themselves
of narrating not merely about no gods, but not even about respectable men, but on the
contrary, of telling tales about shameful persons far removed from what is honourable.

36 §16. Heathen Arguments in Palliation of the Above : and (I) `The Poets are Responsible
for These Unedifying Tales.' But are the Names and Existence of the Gods Any Better
Authenticated? Both Stand or Fall Together. Either the Actions Must Be Defended or the
Deity of the Gods Given Up. And the Heroes are Not Credited with Acts Inconsistent with
Their Nature, As, on This Plea, the Gods are. 37 But perhaps, as to all this, the impious
will appeal to the peculiar style of poets, saying that it is the peculiarity of poets to
feign what is not, and, for the pleasure of their hearers, to tell fictitious tales; and
that for this reason they have composed the stories about gods. But this pretext of
theirs, even more than any other, will appear to be superficial from what they themselves
think and profess about these matters. 2. For if what is said in the poets is fictitious
and false, even the nomenclature of Zeus, Cronos, Hera, Ares and the rest must be false.
For perhaps, as they say, even the names are fictitious, and, while no such being exists
as Zeus, Cronos, or Ares, the poets feign their existence to deceive their hearers. But if
the poets feign the existence of unreal beings, how is it that they worship them as though
they existed? 3. Or perhaps, once again, they will say that while the names are not
fictitious, they ascribe to them fictitious actions. But even this is equally precarious
as a defence. For if they made up the actions, doubtless also they made up the names, to
which they attributed the actions. Or if they tell the truth about the names, it follows
that they tell the truth about the actions too.

38 In particular, they who have said in their tales that these are gods certainly know how
gods ought to act, and would never ascribe to gods the ideas of men, any more than one
would ascribe to water the properties of fire; for fire burns, whereas the nature of water
on the contrary is cold. 4. If then the actions are worthy of gods, they that do them must
be gods; but if they are actions of men, and of disreputable men, such as adultery and the
acts mentioned above, they that act in such ways must be men and not gods. For their deeds
must correspond to their natures, so that at once the actor may be made known by his act,
and the action may be ascertainable from his nature. So that just as a man discussing
about water and fire, and declaring their action, would not say that water burned and fire
cooled, nor, if a man were discoursing about the sun and the earth, would he say the earth
gave light, while the sun was sown with herbs and fruits, but if he were to say so would
exceed the utmost height of madness, so neither would their writers, and especially the
most eminent poet of all, if they really knew that Zeus and the others were gods, invest
them with such actions as shew them to be not gods, but rather men, and not sober men. 5.

39 Or if, as poets, they told falsehoods, and you are maligning them, why did they not
also tell falsehoods about the courage of the heroes, and feign feebleness in the place of
courage, and courage in that of feebleness? For they ought in that case, as with Zeus and
Hera, so also to slanderously accuse Achilles of want of courage, and to celebrate the
might of Thersites, and, while charging Odysseus with dulness, to make out Nestor a
reckless person, and to narrate effeminate actions of Diomed and Hector, and manly deeds
of Hecuba. For the fiction and falsehood they ascribe to the poets ought to extend to all
cases. But in fact, they kept the truth for their men, while not ashamed to tell
falsehoods about their so-called gods. 6. And as some of them might argue, that they are
telling falsehoods about their licentious actions, but that in their praises, when they
speak of Zeus as father of gods, and as the highest, and the Olympian, and as reigning in
heaven, they are not inventing but speaking truthfully; this is a plea which not only
myself, but anybody can refute. For the truth will be clear, in opposition to them, if we
recall our previous proofs. For while their actions prove them to be men, the panegyrics
upon them go beyond the nature of men. The two things then are mutually inconsistent; for
neither is it the nature of heavenly beings to act in such ways, nor can any one suppose
that persons so acting are gods.

§17. The Truth Probably Is, that the Scandalous Tales are True, While the Divine
Attributes Ascribed to Them are Due to the Flattery of the Poets.

40 What inference then is left to us, save that while the panegyrics are false and
flattering, the actions told of them are true? And the truth of this one can ascertain by
common practice. For nobody who pronounces a panegyric upon anyone accuses his conduct at
the same time, but rather, if men's actions are disgraceful, they praise them up with
panegyrics, on account of the scandal they cause, so that by extravagant praise they may
impose upon their hearers, and hide the misconduct of the others. 2. Just as if a man who
has to pronounce a panegyric upon someone cannot find material for it in their conduct or
in any personal qualities, on account of the scandal attaching to these, he praises them
up in another manner, flattering them with what does not belong to them, so have their
marvellous poets, put out of countenance by the scandalous actions of their so-called
gods, attached to them the superhuman title, not knowing that they cannot by their
superhuman fancies veil their human actions, but that they will rather succeed in shewing,
by their human shortcomings, that the attributes of God do not fit them. 3. And I am
disposed to think that they have recounted the passions and the actions of the gods even
in spite of themselves. For since they were endeavouring to invest with what Scripture
calls the incommunicable name and honour of God them that are no gods but mortal men, and
since this venture of theirs was great and impious, for this reason even against their
will they were forced by truth to set forth the passions of these persons, so that their
passions recorded in the writings concerning them might be in evidence for all posterity
as a proof that they were no gods.

§18. Heathen Defence Continued. (2) `The Gods are Worshipped for Having Invented the Arts
of Life.' But This is a Human and Natural, Not a Divine, Achievement. And Why, on This
Principle, are Not All Inventors Deified?

41 What defence, then, what proof that these are real gods, can they offer who hold this
superstition? For, by what has been said just above, our argument has demonstrated them to
be men, and not respectable men. But perhaps they will turn to another argument, and
proudly appeal to the things useful to life discovered by them, saying that the reason why
they regard them as gods is their having been of use to mankind. For Zeus is said to have
possessed the plastic art, Poseidon that of the pilot, Hephaestus the smith's, Athena that
of weaving, Apollo that of music, Artemis that of hunting, Hera dressmaking, Demeter
agriculture, and others other arts, as those who inform us about them have related. 2. But
men ought to ascribe them and such like arts not to the gods alone but to the common
nature of mankind, for by observing nature men discover the arts. For even common parlance
calls art an imitation of nature. If then they have been skilled in the arts they pursued,
that is no reason for thinking them gods, but rather for thinking them men; for the arts
were not their creation, but in them they, like others, imitated nature. 3. For men having
a natural capacity for knowledge according to the definition laid down concerning them,
there is nothing to surprise us if by human intelligence, and by looking of themselves at
their own nature and coming to know it, they have hit upon the arts.

42 Or if they say that the discovery of the arts entitles them to be proclaimed as gods,
it is high time to proclaim as gods the discoverers of the other arts on the same grounds
as the former were thought worthy of such a title. For the Phoenicians invented letters,
Homer epic poetry, Zeno of Elea dialectic, Corax of Syracuse rhetoric Aristaeus bee-
keeping, Triptolemus the sowing of corn, Lycurgus of Sparta and Solon of Athens laws;
while Palamedes discovered the arrangement of letters, and numbers, and measures and
weights. And others imparted various other things useful for the life of mankind,
according to the testimony of our historians. 4. If then the arts make gods, and because
of them carved gods exist, it follows, on their shewing, that those who at a later date
discovered the other arts must be gods. Or if they do not deem these worthy of divine
honour, but recognise that they are men, it were but consistentnot to give even the name
of gods to Zeus, Hera, and the others, but to believe that they too have been human
beings, and all the more so, inasmuch as they were not even respectable in their day; just
as by the very fact of sculpturing their form in statues they shew that they are nothing
else but men.

§19. The Inconsistency of Image Worship. Arguments in Palliation. (1) TheDivine Nature
Must Be Expressed in a Visible Sign. (2) the Image a Means of Supernatural Communications
to Men Through Angels.

43 For what other form do they give them by sculpture but that of men and women and of
creatures lower vet and of irrational nature, all manner of birds, beasts both tame and
wild, and creeping things, whatsoever land and sea and the whole realm of the waters
produce? For men having fallen into the unreasonableness of their passions and pleasures,
and unable to see anything beyond pleasures and lusts of the flesh, inasmuch as they keep
their mind in the midst of these irrational things, they imagined the divine principle to
be in irrational things, and carved a number of gods to match the variety of their
passions. 2. For there are with them images of beasts and creeping things and birds, as
the interpreter of the divine and true religion says, "They became vain in their
reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they
became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of an image
of corruptible man, and of birds and four-footed beasts and creeping things, wherefore God
gave them up unto vile passions. For having previously infected their soul, as I said
above, with the irrationalities of pleasures, they then came down to this making of gods;
and, once fallen, thenceforward as though abandoned in their rejection of God, thus they
wallow in them, and portray God, the Father of the Word, in irrational shapes. 3.

44 As to which those who pass for philosophers and men of knowledge among the Greeks,
while driven to admit that their visible gods are the forms and figures of men and of
irrational objects, say in defence that they have such things to the end that by their
means the deity may answer them and be made manifest; because otherwise they could not
know the invisible God, save by such statues and rites. 4. While those who profess to give
still deeper and more philosophical reasons than these say, that the reason of idols being
prepared and fashioned is for the invocation and manifestation of divine angels and
powers, that appearing by these means they may teach men concerning the knowledge of God;
and that they serve as letters for men, by referring to which they may learn to apprehend
God, from the manifestation of the divine angels effected by their means. Such then is
their mythology,-for far be it from us to call it a theology. But if one examine the
argument with care, he will find that the opinion of these persons also, not less than
that of those previously spoken of, is false.

§20. But Where Does This Supposed Virtue of the Image Reside? in the Material, or in the
Form, or in the Maker's Skill? Untenability of All These Views.

45 For one might reply to them, bringing the case before the tribunal of truth, How does
God make answer or become known by such objects? Is it due to the matter of which they
consist, or to the form which they possess? For if it be due to the matter, what need is
there of the form, instead of God manifesting Himself through all matter without exception
before these things were fashioned? And in vain have they built their temples to shut in a
single stone, or stock, or piece of gold, when all the world is full of these substances.
2. But if the superadded form be the cause of the divine manifestation, what is the need
of the material, gold and the rest, instead of God manifesting Himself by the actual
natural animals of which the images are the figures? For the opinion held about God would
on the same principle have been a nobler one, were He to manifest Himself by means of
living animals, whether rational or irrational, instead of being looked for in things
without life or motion. 3. Wherein they commit the most signal impiety against themselves.
For while they abominate and turn from the real animals, beasts, birds, and creeping;
things, either because of their ferocity or because of their dirtiness, yet they carve
their forms in stone, wood, or gold, and make them gods. But it would be better for them
to worship the living things themselves, rather than to worship their figures in stone. 4.

46 But perhaps neither is the case, nor is either the material or the form the cause of
the divine presence, but it is only skilful art that summons the deity, inasmuch as it is
an imitation of nature. But if the deity communicates with the inmates on account of the
art, what need, once more, of the material, since the art resides in the men? For if God
manifests Himself solely because of the art, and if for this reason the images are
worshipped as gods, it would be right to worship and serve the men who are masters of the
art, inasmuch as they are rational also, and have the skill in themselves.

§21. The Idea of Communications Through Angels Involves Yet Wilder Inconsistency, Nor Does
It, Even If True, Justify the Worship of the Image.

47 But as to their second and as they say pro-founder defence, one might reasonably add as
follows. If these things are made by you, ye Greeks, not for the sake of a self-
manifestation of God Himself, but for the sake of a presence there of angels, why do you
rank the images by which ye invoke the powers as superior and above the powers invoked?
For ye carve the figures for the sake of the apprehension of God, as ye say, but invest
the actual images with the honour and title of God, thus placing yourselves in a profane
position. 2. For while confessing that the power of God transcends the littleness of the
images, and for that reason not venturing to invoke God through them, but only the lesser
powers, ye yourselves leap over these latter, and have bestowed on stocks and stones the
title of Him, whose presence ye feared, and call them gods instead of stones and men's
workmanship, and worship them. For even supposing them to serve you, as ye falsely say, as
letters for the contemplation of God, it is not right to give the signs greater honour
than that which they signify. For neither if a man were to write the emperor's name would
it be without risk to give to the writing more honour than to the emperor; on the
contrary, such a man incurs the penalty of death; while the, writing is fashioned by the
skill of the writer. 3.

48 So also yourselves, had ye your reasoning power in full strength, would not reduce to
matter so great a revelation of the Godhead: but neither would ye have given to the image
greater honour than to the man that carved it. For if there be any truth in the plea that,
as letters, they indicate the manifestation of God, and are therefore, as indications of
God, worthy to be deified, yet far more would it be right to deify the artist who carved
and engraved them, as being far more powerful and divine than they, inasmuch as they were
cut and fashioned according to his will. If then the letters are worthy of admiration,
much more does the writer exceed them in wonder, by reason of his art and the skill of his
mind. If then it be not fitting to think that they are gods for this reason, one must
again interrogate them about the madness concerning the idols, demanding from them the
justification for their being in such a form.

§22. The Image Cannot Represent the True Form Ofgod, Else God Would Be Corruptible.

49 For if the reason of their being thus fashioned is, that the Deity is of human form,
why do they invest it also with the forms of irrational creatures? Or if the form of it is
that of the latter, why do they embody it also in the images of rational creatures? Or if
it be both at once, and they conceive God to be of the two combined, namely, that He has
the forms both of rational and of irrational, why do they separate what is joined
together, and separate the images of brutes and of men, instead of always carving it of
both kinds, such as are the fictions in the myths, Scylla, Charybdis, the Hippocentaur,
and the dog-headed Anubis of the Egyptians? For they ought either to represent them solely
of two natures in this way, or, if they have a single form, not to falsely represent them
in the other as well. 2. And again, if their forms are male, why do they also invest them
with female shapes? Or if they are of the latter, why do they also falsify their forms as
though they were males? Or if again they are a mixture of both, they ought not to be
divided, but both ought to be combined, and follow the type of the so-called
hermaphrodites, so that their superstition should furnish beholders with a spectacle not
only of impiety and calumny, but of ridicule as well. 2.

50 And generally, if they conceive the Deity to be corporeal, so that they contrive for it
and represent belly and hands and feet, and neck also, and breasts and the other organs
that go to make man, see to what impiety and godlessness their mind has come down, to have
such ideas of the Deity. For it follows that it must be capable of all other bodily
casualties as well, of being cut and divided, and even of perishing altogether. But these
and like things are not properties of God, but rather of earthly bodies. 3. For while God
is incorporeal and incorruptible, and immortal needing nothing for any purpose, these are
both corruptible, and are shapes of bodies, and need bodily ministrations, as we said
before . For often we see images which have grown old renewed, and those which time, or
rain, or some or other of the animals of the earth have spoiled, restored. In which
connexion one must condemn their folly, in that they proclaim as gods things of which they
themselves are the makers, and themselves ask salvation of objects which they themselves
adorn with their arts to preserve them from corruption, and beg that their own wants may
be supplied by beings which they well know need attention from themselves, and are not
ashamed to call lords of heaven and all the earth creatures whom they shut up in small
chambers.

§23. The Variety of Idolatrous Cults Proves that They are False.

51 But not only from these considerations may one appreciate their godlessness, but also
from their discordant opinions about the idols themselves. For if they be gods according
to their assertion and their speculations, to which of them is one to give allegiance, and
which of them is one to judge to be the higher, so as either to worship God with
confidence, or as they say to recognise the Deity by them without ambiguity? For not the
same beings are called gods among all; on the contrary, for every nation almost there is a
separate god imagined. And there are cases of a single district and a single town being at
internal discord about the superstition of their idols. 2. The Phoenicians, for example,
do not know those who are called gods among the Egyptians, nor do the Egyptians worship
the same idols as the Phoenicians have. And while the Scythians reject the gods of the
Persians, the Persians reject those of the Syrians. But the Pelasgians also repudiate the
gods in Thrace, while the Thracians know not those of Thebes. The Indians moreover differ
from the Arabs, the Arabs from the Ethiopians, and the Ethiopians from the Arabs in their
idols. And the Syrians worship not the idols of the Cilicians, while the Cappadocian
nation call gods beings different from these. And while the Bithynians have adopted
others, the Armenians have imagined others again. And what need is there for me to
multiply examples?

52 The men on the continent worship other gods than the islanders, while these latter
serve other gods than those of the main lands. 3. And, in general, every city and village,
not knowing the gods of its neighbours, prefers its own, and deems that these alone are
gods. For concerning the abominations in Egypt there is no need even to speak, as they are
before the eyes of all: how the cities have religions which are opposite and incompatible,
and neighbours always make a point of worshipping the opposite of those next to them : so
much so that the crocodile, prayed to by some, is held in abomination by their neighbours,
while the lion, worshipped as a god by others, their neighbours, so far from worshipping,
slay, if they find it, as a wild beast; and the fish, consecrated by some people, is used
as food in another place. And thus arisefights and riots and frequent occasions of
bloodshed, and every indulgence of the passions among them. 4. And strange to say,
according to the statement of historians, the very Pelasgians, who learned from the
Egyptians the names of the gods, do not know the gods of Egypt, but worship others
instead. And, speaking generally, all the nations that are infatuated with idols have
different opinions and religions, and consistency is not to be met with in any one case.
Nor is this surprising. 5. For having fallen from the contemplation of the one God, they
have come down to many and diverse objects ;

53 and having turned from the Word of the Father, Christ the Saviour of all, they
naturally have their understanding wandering in many directions. And just as men who have
turned from the sun and are come into dark places go round by many pathless ways, and see
not those who are present, while they imagine those to be there who are not, and seeing
see not; so they that have turned from God and whose soul is darkened, have their mind in
a roving state, and like men who are drunk and cannot see, imagine what is not true.

§24. The So-Called Gods of One Place are Used as Victims in Another.

54 This, then, is no slight proof of their real godlessness. For, the gods for every city
and country being many and various, and the one destroying the god of the other, the whole
of them are destroyed by all. For those who are considered gods by some are offered as
sacrifices and drink-offerings to the so-called gods of others, and the victims of some
are conversely the gods of others. So the Egyptians serve the ox, and Apis, a calf, and
others sacririce these animals to Zeus. For even if they do not sacrifice the very animals
the others have consecrated, yet by sacrificing their fellows they seem to offer the same.
The Libyans have for god a sheep which they call Ammon, and in other nations this animal
is slain as a victim to many gods. 2. The Indians worship Dionysus, using the name as a
symbol for wine, and others pour out wine as an offering to the other gods. Others honour
rivers and springs, and above all the Egyptians pay especial honour to water, calling them
gods. And yet others, and even the Egyptians who worship the waters, use them to wash off
the dirt from others and from themselves, and ignominiously throw away what is used. While
nearly the whole of the Egyptian system of idols consists of what are victims to the gods
of other nations, so that they are scorned even by those others for deifying what are not
gods, but, both with others and even among themselves, propitiatory offerings and victims.

§25. Human Sacrifice. Its Absurdity. Its Prevalence. Its Calamitous Results.

55 But some have been led by this time to such a pitch of irreligion and folly as to slay
and to offer in sacrifice to their false gods even actual men, whose figures and forms the
gods are. Nor do they see, wretched men, that the victims they are slaying are the
patterns of the gods they make and worship, and to whom they are offering the men. For
they are offering, one may say, equals to equals, or rather, the higher to the lower; for
they are offering living creatures to dead, and rational beings to things without motion.
2. For the Scythians who are called Taurians offer in sacrifice to their Virgin, as they
call her, survivors from wrecks, and such Greeks as they catch, going thus far in impiety
against men of their own race, and thus exposing the savagery of their gods, in that those
whom Providence has rescued from danger andfrom the sea, they slay, almost fighting
against Providence; because they frustrate the kindnessof Providence by their own brutal
character. But others, when they are returned victorious from war, thereupon dividing
their prisoners into hundreds, and taking a man from each, sacrifice to Ares the man they
have picked out from each hundred. 3. Nor is it only Scythians who commit these
abominations on account of the ferocity natural to them as barbarians: on the contrary,
this deed is a special result of the wickedness connected with idols and false gods.

56 For the Egyptians used formerly to offer victims of this kind to Hera, and the
PhOenicians and Cretans used to propitiate Cronos in their sacrifices of children. And
even the ancient Romans used to worship Jupiter Latiarius, as he wascalled, with human
sacrifices, and some in oneway, some in another, but all without exception committed and
incurred the pollution: they incurred it by the mere perpetration of themurderous deeds,
while they polluted their owntemples by filling them with the smoke of such sacrifices. 4.
This then was the ready source of numerous evils to mankind. For seeing that their false
gods were pleased with these things, they forthwith imitated their gods with like
misdoings, thinking that the imitation of superior beings, as they considered them, was a
credit to themselves. Hence mankind was thinned by murders of grown men and children, and
by licence of all kinds. For nearly every city is full of licentiousness of all kinds, the
result of the savage character of its gods; nor is there one of sober life in the idols'
temples save only he whose licentiousness is witnessed to by them all .

§26. The Moral Corruptions of Paganism All Admittedly Originated with the Gods.

57 Women, for example, used to sit out in old days in the temples of Phoenicia,
consecrating to the gods there the hire of their bodies, thinking they propitiated their
goddess by fornication, and that they would procure her favour by this. While men, denying
their nature, and no longer wishing to be males, put on the guise of women, under the idea
that they are thus gratifying and honouring the Mother of their so-called gods. But all
live along with the basest, and vie with the worst among them-serves, and as Paul said,
the holy minister of Christ : "For their women changed the natural use into that which is
against nature: and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in
their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness." 2. But acting in this
and in like ways, they admit and prove that the life of their so-called gods was of the
same kind. For from Zeus they have learned corruption of youth and adultery, from
Aphrodite fornication, from Rhea licentiousness, from Ares murders, and from other gods
other like things, which the laws punish and from which every sober man turns away. Does
it then remain fit to consider them gods who do such things, instead of reckoning them,
for the licentiousness of their ways, more irrational than the brutes? Is it fit to
consider their worshippers human beings, instead of pitying them as more irrational than
the brutes, and more soul-less than inanimate things? For had they considered the
intellectual part of their soul they would not have plunged headlong into these things,
nor have denied the true God, the Father of Christ.

58 §27. The Refutation of Popular Paganism Bring Taken as Conclusive, We Come to the
Higher Farm of Nature-Worship. How Nature Witnesses to God by the Mutual Dependence of All
Her Parts, Which Forbid Us to Think of Any One of Them as the Supreme God. This Shewn at
Length. 59 But perhaps those who have advanced beyond these things, and who stand in awe
of Creation, being put to shame by these exposures of abominations, will join in
repudiating what is readily condemned and refuted on all hands, but will think that they
have a well-grounded and unanswerable opinion, namely, the worship of the universe and of
the parts of the universe. 2. For they will boast that they worship and serve, not mere
stocks and stones and forms of men and irrational birds and creeping things and beasts,
but the sun and moon and all the heavenly universe, and the earth again, and the entire
realm of water: and they will say that none can shew that these at any rate are not of
divine nature, since it is evident to all, that they lack neither life nor reason, but
transcend even the nature of mankind, inasmuch as the one inhabit the heavens, the other
the earth. 3. It is worth while then to look into and examine these points also; for here,
too, our argument will find that its proof against them holds true. But before we look, or
begin our demonstration, it suffices that Creation almost raises its voice against them,
and points to God as its Maker and Artificer, Who reigns over Creation and over all
things, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; Whom the would-be philosophers turn from
to worship and deify the Creation which proceeded from Him, which yet itself worships and
confesses the Lord Whom they deny on its account. 4.

60 For if men are thus awestruck at the parts of Creation and think that they are gods,
they might well be rebuked by the mutual dependence of those parts; which moreover makes
known, and witnesses to, the Father of the Word, Who is the Lord and Maker of these parts
also, by the unbroken law of their obedience to Him, as the divine law also says: "The
heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth His handiwork ." 5. But the
proof of all this is not obscure, but is clear enough in all conscience to those the eyes
of whose understanding are not wholly disabled. For if a man take the parts of Creation
separately, and consider each by itself,-as for example the sun by itself alone, and the
moon apart, and again earth and air, and heat and cold, and the essence of wet and of dry,
separating them from their mutual conjunction,-he will certainly find that not one is
sufficient for itself but all are in need of one another's assistance, and subsist by
their mutual help. For the Sun is carried round along with, and is contained in, the whole
heaven, and can never go beyond his own orbit, while the moon and other stars testify to
the assistance given them by the Sun: while the earth again evidently does not yield her
crops without rains, which in their turn would not descend to earth without the assistance
of the clouds;

61 but not even would the clouds ever appear of themselves and subsist, without the air.
And the air is warmed by the upper air, but illuminated and made bright by the sun, not by
itself. 6. And wells, again, and rivers will never exist without the earth; but the earth
is not supported upon itself, but is set upon the realm of the waters, while this again is
kept in its place, being bound fast at the centre of the universe. And the sea, and the
great ocean that flows outside round the whole earth, is moved and borne by winds wherever
the force of the winds dashes it. And the winds in their turn originate, not in
themselves, but according to those who have written on the subject, in the air, from the
burning heat and high temperature of the upper as compared with the lower air, and blow
everywhere through the latter. 7. For as to the four elements of which the nature of
bodies is composed, heat, that is, and cold, wet and dry, who is so perverted in his
understanding as not to know that these things exist indeed in combination, but if
separated and taken alone they tend to destroy even one another according to the
prevailing power of the more abundant element? For heat is destroyed by cold if it be
present in greater quantity, and cold again is put away by the power of heat, and what is
dry, again, is moistened by wet, and the latter dried by the former.

§28. But Neither Can the Cosmic Organism Be God. For that Would Make God Consist of
Dissimilar Parts, and Subject Him to Possible Dissolution.

62 How then can these things be gods, seeing that they need one another's assistance? Or
how is it proper to ask anything of them when they too ask help for themselves one from
another? For if it is an admitted truth about God that He stands in need of nothing, but
is self-sufficient and self-contained, and that in Him all things have their being, and
that He ministers to all rather than they to Him, how is it right to proclaim as gods the
sun and moon and other parts of creation, which are of no such kind, but which even stand
in need of one another's help? 2. But, perhaps,if divided and taken by themselves, our
opponents themselves will admit that they are dependent, the demonstration being an ocular
one. But they will combine all together, as constituting a single body, and will say that
the whole is God. For the whole once put together, they will no longer need external help,
but the whole will be sufficient for itself and independent in all respects; so at least
the would-be philosophers will tell us, only to be refuted here once more. 3. Now this
argument, not one whir less than those previously dealt with, will demonstrate their
impiety coupled with great ignorance. For if the combination of the parts makes up the
whole, and the whole is combined out of the parts, then the whole consists of the parts,
and each of them is a portion of the whole.

63 But this is very far removed from the conception of God. For God is a whole and not a
number of parts, and does not consist of diverse elements, but is Himself the Maker of the
system of the universe. For see what impiety they utter against the Deity when they say
this. For if He consists of parts, certainly it will follow that He is unlike Himself, and
made up of unlike parts. For if He is sun, He is not moon, and if He is moon, He is not
earth, and if He is earth, He cannot be sea: and so on, taking the parts one by one, one
may discover the absurdity of this theory of theirs. 4. But the following point, drawn
from the observation of our human body, is enough to refute them. For just as the eye is
not the sense of hearing, nor is the latter a hand: nor is the belly the breast, nor again
is the neck a foot, but each of these has its own function, and a single body is composed
of these distinct parts,-having its parts combined for use, but destined to be divided in
course of time when nature, that brought them together, shall divide them at the will of
God, Who so ordered it;-thus (but may He that is above pardon the argument ), if they
combine the parts of creation into one body and proclaim it God, it follows, firstly, that
He is unlike Himself, as shewn above;

64 secondly, that He is destined to be divided again, in accordance with the natural
tendency of the parts to separation.

§29. The Balance of Powers in Nature Shews that It is Not God, Either Collectively, or in
Parts.

65 And in yet another way one may refute their godlessness by the light of truth. For if
God is incorporeal and invisible and intangible by nature, how do they imagine God to be a
body, and worship with divine honour things which we both see with our eyes and touch with
our hands? 2. And again, if what is said of God hold true, namely, that He is almighty,
and that while nothing has power over Him, He has power and rule over all, how can they
who deify creation fail to see that it does not satisfy this definition of God? For when
the sun is under the earth, the earth's shadow makes his light invisible, while by day the
sun hides the moon by the brilliancy of his light. And hail ofttimes injures the fruits of
the earth, while fire is put out if an overflow of water take place. And spring makes
winter give place, while summer will not suffer spring to outstay its proper limits, and
it in its turn is forbidden by autumn to outstep its own season. 3. If then they were
gods, they ought not to be defeated and obscured by one another, but always to co-exist,
and to discharge their respective functions simultaneously. Both by night and by day the
sun and the moon and the rest of the band of stars ought to shine equally together, and
give their light to all, so that all things might be illumined by them.

66 Spring and summer and autumn and winter ought to go on without alteration, and
together. The sea ought to mingle with the springs, and furnish their drink to man in
common. Calms and windy blasts ought to take place at the same time. Fire and water
together ought to furnish the same service to man. For no one would take any hurt from
them, if they are gods, as our opponents say, and do nothing for hurt, but rather all
things for good. 4. But if none of these things are possible, because of their mutual
incompatibility, how does it remain possible to give to these things, mutually
incompatible and at strife, and unable to combine, the name of gods, or to worship them
with the honours due to God? How could things naturally discordant give peace to others
for their prayers, and become to them authors of concord? It is not then likely that the
sun or the moon, or any other part of creation, still less statues in stone, gold, or
other material, or the Zeus, Apollo, and the rest, who are the subject of the poet's
fables, are true gods: this our argument has shewn. But some of these are parts of
creation, others have no life, others have been mere mortal men. Therefore their worship
and deification is no part of religion, but the bringing in of godlessness and of all
impiety, and a sign of a wide departure from the knowledge of the one true God, namely the
Father of Christ. 5.

67 Since then this is thus proved, and the idolatry of the Greeks is shewn to be full of
all ungodliness, and that its introduction has been not for the good, but for the ruin, of
human life ;-come now, as our argument promised at the outset, let us, after having
confuted error, travel the way of truth, and behold the Leader and Artificer of the
Universe, the Word of the Father, in order that through Him we may apprehend the Father,
and that the Greeks may know how far they have separated themselves from the truth.


AGAINST THE HEATHEN
===================

AGAINST THE HEATHEN continued

PART 2

§30. The Soul of Man, Being Intellectual, Can Know God of Itself, If It Be True to Its Own
Nature.

1 The tenets we have been speaking of have been proved to be nothing more than a false
guide for life; but the way of truth will aim at reaching the real and true God. But for
its knowledge and accurate comprehension, there is need of none other save of ourselves.
Neither as God Himself is above all, is the road to Him afar off or outside ourselves, but
it is in us and it is possible to find it from ourselves, in the first instance, as Moses
also taught, when he said : "The word" of faith "is within thy heart. Which very thing the
Saviour declared and confirmed, when He said: "The kingdom of God is within you ." 2. For
having in ourselves faith, and the kingdom of God, we shall be able quickly to see and
perceive the King of the Universe, the saving Word of the Father. And let not the Greeks,
who worship idols, make excuses, nor let any one else simply deceive himself, professing
to have no such road and therefore finding a pretext for his godlessness. 3. For we all
have set foot upon it, and have it, even if not all are willing to travel by it, but
rather to swerve from it and go wrong, because of the pleasures of life which attract them
from without. And if one were to ask, what road is this? I say that it is the soul of each
one of us, and the intelligence which resides there.

2 For by it alone can God be contemplated and perceived. 4. Unless, as they have denied
God, the impious men will repudiate having a soul; which indeed is more plausible than the
rest of what they say, for it is unlike men possessed of an intellect to deny God, its
Maker and Artificer. It is necessary then, for the sake of the simple, to shew briefly
that each one of mankind has a soul, and that soul rational; especially as certain of the
sectaries deny this also, thinking that man is nothing more than the visible form of the
body. This point once proved, they will be furnished in their own persons with a clearer
proof against the idols.

§31. Proof of the Existence of the Rational Soul. (1) Difference of Man from the Brutes.
(2) Man's Flower of Objective Thought. Thought is to Sense as the Musician to His
Instrument. The Phenomena of Dreams Bear This Out.

3 Firstly, then, the rational nature of the soul is strongly confirmed by its difference
from irrational creatures. For this is why common use gives them that name, because,
namely, the race of mankind is rational. 2. Secondly, it is no ordinary proof, that man
alone thinks of things external to himself, and reasons about things not actually present,
and exercises reflection, and chooses by judgment the better of alternative reasonings.
For the irrational animals see only what is present, and are impelled solely by what meets
their eye, even if the consequences to them are injurious, while man is not impelled
toward what he sees merely, but judges by thought what he sees with his eyes. Often for
example his impulses are mastered by reasoning; and his reasoning is subject to after-
reflection. And every one, if he be a friend of truth, perceives that the intelligence of
mankind is distinct from the bodily senses. 3. Hence, because it is distinct, it acts as
judge of the senses, and while they apprehend their objects, the intelligence
distinguishes, recollects, and shews them what is best. For the sole function of the eye
is to see, of the ears to hear, of the mouth to taste, of the nostrils to apprehend
smells, and of the hands to touch. But what one ought to see and hear, what one ought to
touch, taste and smell, is a question beyond the senses, and belonging to the soul and to
the intelligence which resides in it.

4 Why, the hand is able to take hold of a sword-blade, and the mouth to taste poison, but
neither knows that these are injurious, unless the intellect decide. 4. And the case, to
look at it by aid of a simile, is like that of a well-fashioned lyre in the hands of a
skilled musician. For as the strings of the lyre have each its proper note, high, low, or
intermediate, sharp or otherwise, yet their scale is indistinguishable and their time not
to be recognized, without the artist. For then only is the scale manifest and the time
right, when he that is holding the lyre strikes the strings and touches each in tune. In
like manner, the senses beingdisposed in the body like a lyre, when the skilled
intelligence presides over them, then too the soul distinguishes and knows what it is
doing and how it is acting. 5. But this alone is peculiar to mankind, and this is what is
rational in the soul of mankind, by means of which it differs from the brutes, and shews
that it is truly distinct from what is to be seen in the body. Often, for example, when
the body is lying on the earth, man imagines and contemplates what is in the heavens.
Often when the body is quiet , and at rest and asleep, man moves inwardly, and beholds
what is outside himself, travelling to other countries, walking about, meeting his
acquaintances, and often by these means divining and forecasting the actions of the day.

5 But to what can this be due save to the rational soul, in which man thinks of and
perceives things beyond himself?

§32. (3) The Body Cannot Originate Such Phenomena ; And in Fact the Action of the Rational
Soul is Seen in Its Over-Ruling the Instincts of the Bodily Organs.

6 We add a further point to complete our demonstration for the benefit of those who
shamelessly take refuge in denial of reason. How is it, that whereas the body is mortal by
nature, man reasons on the things of immortality, and often, where virtue demands it,
courts death? Or how, since the body lasts but for a time, does man imagine of things
eternal, so as to despise what lies before him, and desire what is beyond? The body could
not have spontaneously such thoughts about itself, nor could it think upon what is
external i to itself. For it is mortal and lasts but for a time. And it follows that that
which thinks what is opposed to the body and against its nature must be distinct in kind.
What then can this be, save a rational and immortal soul? For it introduces the echo of
higher things, not outside, but within the body, as the musician does in his lyre. 2. Or
how again, the eye being naturally constituted to see and the ear to hear, do they turn
from some objects and choose others? For who is it that turns away the eye from seeing? Or
who shuts off the ear from hearing, its natural function? Or who often hinders the palate,
to which it is natural to taste things, from its natural impulse? Or who withholds the
hand from its natural activity of touching something, or turns aside the sense of smell
from its normal exercise ?

7 Who is it that thus acts against the natural instincts of the body? Or how does the
body, turned from its natural course, turn to the counsels of another and suffer itself to
be guided at the beck of that other? Why, these things prove simply this, that the
rational soul presides over the body. 3. For the body is not even constituted to drive
itself, but it is carried at the will of another, just as a horse does not yoke himself,
but is driven by his master. Hence laws for human beings to practise what is good and to
abstain from evil-doing, while to the brutes evil remains unthought of and undiscerned,
because they lie outside rationality and the process of understanding. I think then that
the existence of a rational soul in man is proved by what we have said.

§33. The Soul Immortal. Proved by (1) Its Being Distinct from the Body, (2) Its Being the
Source of Motion, (3) Its Power to Go Beyond the Body in Imagination and Thought.

8 But that the soul is made immortal is a further point in the Church's teaching which you
must know, to show how the idols are to be overthrown. But we shall more directly arrive
at a knowledge of this from what we know of the body, and from the difference between the
body and the soul. For if our argument has proved it to be distinct from the body, while
the body is by nature mortal, it follows that the soul is immortal, because it is not like
the body. 2. And again, if as we have shewn, the soul moves the body and is not moved by
other things, it follows that the movement of the soul is spontaneous, and that this
spontaneous movement goes on after the body is laid aside in the earth. If then the soul
were moved by the body, it would follow that the severance of its motor would involve its
death. But if the soul moves the body also, it follows all the more that it moves itself.
But if moved by itself , it follows that it outlives the body. 3. For the movement of the
soul is the same thing as its life, just as, of course, we call the body alive when it
moves, and say that its death takes place when it ceases moving. But this can be made
clearer once for all from the action of the soul in the body.

9 For if even when united and coupled with the body it is not shut in or commensurate with
the small dimensions of the body, but often , when the body lies in bed, not moving, but
in death-like sleep, the soul keeps awake by virtue of its own power, and transcends the
natural power of the body, and as though travelling away from the body while remaining in
it, imagines and beholds things above the earth, and often even holds converse with the
saints and angels who are above earthly and bodily existence, and approaches them in the
confidence of the purity of its intelligence; shall it not all the more, when separated
from the body at the time appointed by God Who coupled them together, have its knowledge
of immortality more clear? For if even when coupled with the body it lived a life outside
the body, much more shall its life continue after the death of the body, and live without
ceasing by reason of God Who made it thus by His own Word, our Lord Jesus Christ. 4. For
this is the reason why the soul thinks of and bears in mind things immortal and eternal,
namely, because it is itself immortal. And just as, the body being mortal, its senses also
have mortal things as their objects, so, since the soul contemplates and beholds immortal
things, it follows that it is immortal and lives for ever.

10 For ideas and thoughts about immortality never desert the soul, but abide in it, and
are as it were the fuel in it which ensures its immortality. This then is why the soul has
the capacity for beholding God, and is its own way thereto, receiving not from without but
from herself the knowledge and apprehension of the Word of God. 11 §34. The Soul, Then, If
Only It Get Rid of the Stains of Sin is Able to Know God Directly, Its Own Rational Nature
Imaging Back the Word of God, After Whose Image It Was Created. But Even If It Cannot
Pierce the Cloud Which Sin Draws Over Its Vision, It is Confronted by the Witness of
Creation to God. 12 We repeat then what we said before, that just as men denied God, and
worship things without soul, so also in thinking they have not a rational soul, they
receive at once the punishment of their folly, namely, to be reckoned among irrational
creatures: and so, since as though from lack of a soul of their own they superstitiously
worship soulless gods, they are worthy of pity and guidance. 2. But if they claim to have
a soul, and pride themselves on the rational principle, and that rightly, why do they, as
though they had no soul, venture to go again st reason, and think not as they ought, but
make themselves out higher even than the Deity? For having a soul that is immortal and
invisible to them, they make a likeness of God in things visible and mortal. Or why, in
like manner as they have departed from God, do they not betake themselves to Him again?
For they are able, as they turned away their understanding from God, and feigned as gods
things that were not, in like manner to ascend with the intelligence of their soul, and
turn back to God again. 3.

13 But turn back they can, if they lay aside the filth of all lust which they have put on,
and wash it away persistently, until they have got rid of all the foreign matter that has
affected their soul, and can shew it in its simplicity as it was made, that so they may be
able by it to behold the Word of the Father after Whose likeness they were originally
made. For the soul is made after the image and likeness of God, as divine Scripture also
shews, when it says in the person of Gods : "Let us make man after our Image and likeness.
Whence also when it gets rid of all the filth of sin which covers it and retains only the
likeness of the Image in its purity, then surely this latter being thoroughly brightened,
the soul beholds as in a mirror the Image of the Father, even the Word, and by His means
reaches the idea of the Father, Whose Image the Saviour is. 4. Or, if the soul's own
teaching is insufficient, by reason of the external things which cloud its intelligence,
and prevent its seeing what is higher, yet it is further possible to attain to the
knowledge of God from the things which are seen, since Creation, as though in written
characters, declares in a loud voice, by its order and harmony, its own Lord and Creator.

PART 3

§35. Creation a Revelation of God; Especially in the Order and Harmony Pervading the
Whole.

1 For God, being good and loving to mankind, and caring for the souls made by Him,-since
He is by nature in visible and incomprehensible, having His being beyond all created
existence , for which reason the race of mankind was likely to miss the way to the
knowledge of Him, since they are made out of nothing while He is unmade,-for this cause
God by His own Word gave the Universe the Order it has, in order that since He is by
nature invisible, men might be enabled to know Him at any rate by His works . For often
the artist even when not seen is known by his works. 2. And as they tell of Phidias the
Sculptor that his works of art by their symmetry and by the proportion of their parts
betray Phidias to those who see them although he is not there, so by the order of the
Universe one ought to perceive God its maker and artificer, even though He be not seen
with the bodily eyes. For God did not take His stand upon His invisible nature (let none
plead that as an excuse) and leave Himself utterly unknown to men; but as I said above, He
so ordered Creation that although He is by nature invisible He may yet be known by His
works. 3. And I say this not on my own authority, but on the strength of what I learned
from hen who have spoken of God, among them Paul, who thus writes to the Romans :

2 "for the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being
understood by the things that are made; while to the Lycaonians he speaks out and says :
"We also are men of like passions with you, and bring you good tidings, to turn from these
vain things unto a Living God, Who made the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that
in them is, Who in the generations gone by suffered all nations to walk in their own ways.
And yet He left not Himself without witness, in that lie did good, and gave you from
heaven rains and fruitful seasons, filling your hearts with food and gladness." 4. For who
that sees the circle of heaven and the course of the sun and the moon, and the positions
and movements of the other stars, as they take place in opposite and different directions,
while yet in their difference all with one accord observe a consistent order, can resist
the conclusion that these are not ordered by themselves, but have a maker distinct from
themselves who orders them? or who that sees the sun rising by day and the moon shining by
night, and waning and waxing without variation exactly according to the same number of
days, and some of the stars running their courses and with orbits various and manifold,
while others move without wandering, can fail to perceive that they certainly have a
creator to guide them?

§36. This the More Striking, If We Consider the Opposing Forces Out of Which This Order is
Produced.

3 Who that sees things of opposite nature combined, and in concordant harmony, as for
example fire mingled with cold, and dry with wet, and that not in mutual conflict, but
making up a single body, as it were homogeneous, can resist the inference that there is
One external to these things that has united them? Who that sees winter giving place to
spring and spring to summer and summer to autumn, and that these things contrary by nature
(for the one chills, the other burns, the one nourishes the other destroys), yet all make
up a balanced result beneficial to mankind,-can fail to perceive that there is One higher
than they, Who balances and guides them all, even if he see Him not? 2. Who that sees the
clouds supported in air, and the weight of the waters bound up in the clouds, can but
perceive Him that binds them up and has ordered these things so? Or who that sees the
earth, heaviest of all things by nature, fixed upon the waters, and remaining unmoved upon
what is by nature mobile, will fail to understand that there is One that has made and
ordered it, even God?

4 Who that sees the earth bringing forth fruits in due season, and the rains from heaven,
and the flow of rivers, and springing up of wells, and the birth of animals from unlike
parents, and that these things take place not at all times but at determinate seasons,-and
in general, among things mutually unlike and contrary, the balanced and uniform order to
which they conform,-can resist the inference that there is one Power which orders and
administers them, ordaining things well as it thinks fit? 4. For left to themselves they
could not subsist or ever be able to appear, on account of their mutual contrariety of
nature. For water is by nature heavy, and tends to flow downwards, while the clouds are
light and belong to the class of things which tend to soar and mount upwards. And yet we
see water, heavy as it is, borne aloft in the clouds. And again, earth is very heavy,
while water on the other hand is relatively light; and yet the heavier is supported upon
the lighter, and the earth does not sink, but remains immoveable. And male and female are
not the same, while yet they unite in one, and the result is the generation from both of
an animal like them. And to cut the matter short, cold is opposite to heat, and wet fights
with dry, and yet they come together and are not at variance, but they agree, and produce
as their result a single body, and the birth of everything.

§37. The Same Subject Continued.

5 Things then of conflicting and opposite nature would not have reconciled themselves,
were there not One higher and Lord over them to unite them, to Whom the elements
themselves yield obedience as slaves that obey a master. And instead of each having regard
to its own nature and fighting with its neighbour, they recognise the Lord Who has united
them, and are at concord one with another, being by nature opposed, but at amity by the
will of Him that guides them. 2. For if their mingling into one were not due to a higher
authority, how could the heavy mingle and combine with the light, the wet with the dry,
the round with the straight, fire with cold, or sea with earth, or the sun with the moon,
or the stars with the heaven, and the air with the clouds, the nature of each being
dissimilar to that of the other? For there would be great strife among them, the one
burning, the other giving cold; the heavy dragging downwards, the light in the contrary
direction and upwards; the sun giving light while the air diffused darkness: yes, even the
stars would have been at discord with one another, since some have their position above,
others beneath, and night would have refused to make way for day, but would have persisted
in remaining to fight and strive against it. 3.

6 But if this were so, we should consequently see not an ordered universe, but disorder,
not arrangement but anarchy, not a system, but everything out of system, not proportion
but disproportion. For in the general strife and conflict either all things would be
destroyed, or the prevailing principle alone would appear. And even the latter would shew
the disorder of the whole, for left alone, and deprived of the help of the others, it
would throw the whole out of gears just as, if a single hand and foot were left alone,
that would not preserve the body in its integrity. 4. For what sort of an universe would
it be, if only the sun appeared, or only the moon went her course, or there were only
night, or always day? Or what sort of harmony would it be, again, if the heaven existed
alone without the stars, or the stars without the heaven? Or what benefit would there be
if there were only sea, or if the earth were there alone without waters and without the
other parts of creation? Or how could man, or any animal, have appeared upon earth, if the
elements were mutually at strife, or if there were one that prevailed, and that one
insufficient for the composition of bodies. For nothing in the world could have been
composed of heat, or cold, or wet, or dry, alone, but all would have been without
arrangement or combination.

7 But not even the one element which appeared to prevail would have been able to subsist
without the assistance of the rest: for that is how each subsists now.

§38. The Unity of God Shewn by the Harmonyof the Order of Nature.

8 Since then, there is everywhere not disorder but order, proportion and not
disproportion, not disarray but arrangement, and that in an order perfectly harmonious, we
needs must infer and be led to perceive the Master that put together and compacted all
things, and produced harmony in them. For though He be not seen with the eyes, yet from
the order and harmony of things contrary it is possible to perceive their Ruler, Arranger,
and King. 2. For in like manner as if we saw a city, consisting of many and diverse
people, great and small, rich and poor, old and young, male and female, in an orderly
condition, and its inhabitants, while different from one another, yet at unity among
themselves, and not the rich set against the poor, the great against the small, nor the
young against the old, but all at peace in the enjoyment of equal rights,-if we saw this,
the inference surely follows that the presence of a ruler enforces concord, even if we do
not see him; (for disorder is a sign of absence of rule, while order shews the governing
authority: for when we see the mutual harmony of the members in the body, that the eye
does not strive with the hearing, nor is the hand at variance with the foot, but that each
accomplishes its service without variance, we perceive from this that certainly there is a
soul in the body that governs these members, though we see it not);

9 so in the order and harmony of the Universe, we needs must perceive God the governor of
it all, and that He is one and not many. 3. So then this order of its arrangement, and the
concordant harmony of all things, shews that the Word, its Ruler and Governor, is not
many, but One. For if there were more than one Ruler of Creation, such an universal order
would not be maintained, but all things would fall into confusion because of their
plurality, each one biasing the whole to his own will, and striving with the other. For
just as we said that polytHe ism was atHe ism, so it follows that the rule of more than
one is the rule of none. For each one would cancel the rule of the other, and none would
appear ruler, but there would be anarchy everywhere. But where no ruler is, there disorder
follows of course. 4. And conversely, the single order and concord of the many and diverse
shewsthat the ruler too is one.

10 For just as though one were to hear from a distance a lyre, composed of many diverse
strings, and marvel at the concord of its symphony, in that itssound is composed neither
of low notes exclusively, nor high nor intermediate only, but all combine their sounds in
equal balance,-and would not fail to perceive from this that the lyre was not playing
itself, nor even being struck by more persons than one, but that there was one musician,
even if he did not see him, who by his skill combined the sound of each string into the
tuneful symphony; so, the order of the whole universe being perfectly harmonious, and
there being no strife of the higher against the lower or the lower against the higher, and
all things making up one order, it is consistent to think that the Ruler and King of all
Creation is one and not many, Who by His own light illumines and gives movement to all.

§39. Impossibility of a Plurality of Gods.

11 For we must not think there is more than one ruler and maker of Creation: but it
belongs to correct and true religion to believe that its Artificer is one, while Creation
herself dearly points to this. For the fact that there is one Universe only and not more
is a conclusive proof that its Maker is one. For if there were a plurality of gods, there
would necessarily be also more universes than one. For neither were it reasonable for more
than one God to make a single universe, nor for the one universe to be made by more than
one, because of the absurdities which would result from this. 2. Firstly, if the one
universe were made by a plurality of gods, that would mean weakness on the part of those
who made it, because many contributed to a single result; which would be a strong proof of
the imperfect creative skill of each. For if one were sufficient, the many would not
supplement each other's deficiency. But to say that there is any deficiency in God is not
only impious, but even beyond all sacrilege. For even among men one would not call a
workman perfect if he were unable to finish his work, a single piece, by himself and
without the aid of several others. 3.

12 But if, although each one was able to accomplish the whole, yet all worked at it in
order to claim a share in the result, we have the laughable conclusion that each worked
for reputation, test he should be suspected of inability. But, once more, it is most
grotesque to ascribe vainglory to gods. 4. Again, if each one were sufficient for the
creation of the whole, what need of more than one one being self-sufficient for the
universe? Moreover it would be evidently impious and grotesque, to make the thing created
one, while the creators were many and different, it being a maxim of science that what is
one and complete is higher than things that are diverse. 5. And this you must know, that
if the universe had been made by a plurality of gods, its movements would be diverse and
inconsistent. For having regard to each one of its makers, its movements would be
correspondingly different But such difference again, as was said before, would involve
disarray and general disorder; for not even a ship will sail aright if she be steered by
many, unless one pilot hold the tiller , nor will a lyre struck by many produce a tuneful
sound, unless there be one artist who strikes it. 6. Creation, then, being one, and the
Universe one, and its order one, we must perceive that its King and Artificer also is one.

13 For this is why the Artificer Himself made the whole universe one, lest by the
coexistence of more than one a plurality of makers should be supposed; but that as the
work is one, its Maker also may be believed to be One. Nor does it follow from the unity
of the Maker that the Universe must be one, for God might have made others as well. But
because the Universe that has been made is one, it is necessary to believe that its Maker
also is one.

§40. The Rationality and Order of the Universe Proves that It is the Work of the Reason or
Word of God.

14 Who then might this Maker be? for this is a point most necessary to make plain, lest,
from ignorance with regard to him, a man should suppose the wrong maker, and fall once
more into the same old godless error, but I think no one is really in doubt about it. For
if our argument has proved that the gods of the poets are no gods, and has convicted of
error those that deify creation, and in general has shewn that the idolatry of the heathen
is godlessness and impiety, it strictly follows from the elimination of these that the
true religion is with us, and that the God we worship and preach is the only true One, Who
is Lord of Creation and Maker of all existence. 2. Who then is this, save the Father of
Christ, most holy and above all created existence , Who like an excellent pilot, by His
own Wisdom and His own Word, our Lord and Saviour Christ, steers and preserves and orders
all things, and does as seems to Him best? But that is best which has been done, and which
we see taking place, since that is what He wills; and this a man can hardly refuse to
believe. 3. For if the movement of creation were irrational, and the universe were borne
along without plan, a man might fairly disbelieve what we say.

15 But if it subsist in reason and wisdom and skill, and is perfectly ordered throughout,
it follows that He that is over it and has ordered it is none other than the [reason or]
Word of God. 4. But by Word I mean, not that which is involved and inherent in all things
created, which some are wont to call the seminal principle, which is without soul and has
no power of reason or thought, but only works by external art, according to the skill of
him that applies it,-nor such a word as belongs to rational beings and which consists of
syllables, and has the air as its vehicle of expression,-but I mean the living and
powerful Word of the good God, the God of the Universe, the very Word which is God , Who
while different from things that are made, and from all Creation, is the One own Word of
the good Father, Who by His own providence ordered and illumines this Universe. 5. For
being the good Word of the Good Father He produced the order of all things, combining one
with another things contrary, and reducing them to one harmonious order. He being the
Power of God and Wisdom of God causes the heaven to revolve, and has suspended the earth,
and made it fast, though resting upon nothing, by His own nod . Illumined by Him, the sun
gives light to the world, and the moon has her measured period of shining. By reason of
Him the water is suspended in the clouds;

16 the rains shower upon the earth, and the sea is kept within bounds, while the earth
bears grasses and is clothed with all manner of plants. 6. And if a man were incredulously
to ask, as regards what we are saying, if there be a Word of God at all , such an one
would indeed be mad to doubt concerning the Word of God, but yet demonstration is possible
from what is seen, because all things subsist by the Word and Wisdom of God, nor would any
created thing have had a fixed existence had it not been made by reason, and that reason
the Word of God, as we have said.

§41. The Presence of the Word in Nature Necessary, Not Only for Its Original Creation, But
Also for Its Permanence.

17 But though He is Word, He is not, as we said, after the likeness of human words,
composed of syllables; but He is the unchanging Image of His own Father. For men, composed
of parts and made out of nothing, have their discourse composite and divisible. But God
possesses true existence and is not composite, wherefore His Word also has true Existence
and is not composite, but is the one and only-begotten God , Who proceeds in His goodness
from the Father as from a good Fountain, and orders all things and holds them together. 2.
But the reason why the Word, the Word of God, has united Himself with created things is
truly wonderful, and teaches us that the present order of things is none otherwise than is
fitting. For the nature of created things, inasmuch as it is brought into being out of
nothing, is of a fleeting sort, and weak and mortal, if composed of itself only. But the
God of all is good and exceeding noble by nature,-and therefore is kind. For one that is
good can grudge nothing : for which reason he does not grudge even existence, but desires
all to exist, as objects for His loving-kindness. 3.

18 Seeing then all created nature, as far as its own laws were concerned, to be fleeting
and subject to dissolution, lest it should come to this and lest the Universe should be
broken up again into nothingness, for this cause He made all things by His own eternal
Word, and gave substantive existence to Creation, and moreover did not leave it to be
tossed in a tempest in the course of its own nature, lest it should run the risk of once
more dropping out of existence ; but, because He is good He guides and settles the whole
Creation by His own Word, Who is Himself also God, that by the governance and providence
and ordering action of the Word, Creation may have light, and be enabled to abide alway
securely. For it partakes of the Word Who derives true existence from the Father, and is
helped by Him so as to exist, lest that should come to it which would have come but for
the maintenance of it by the Word,-namely, dissolution,-" for He is the Image of the
invisible God, the first-born of all Creation, for through Him and in Him all things
consist, things visible and things invisible, and He is the Head of the Church," as the
ministers of truth teach in their holy writings .

§42. This Function of the Word Described at Length.

19 The holy Word of the Father, then, almighty and all-perfect, uniting with the universe
and having everywhere unfolded His own powers, and having illumined all, both things seen
and things invisible, holds them together and binds them to Himself, having left nothing
void of His own power, but on the contrary quickening and sustaining all things
everywhere, each severally and all collectively; while He mingles in one the principles of
all sensible existence, heat namely and cold and wet and dry, and causes them not to
conflict, but to make up one concordant harmony. 2. By reason of Him and His power, fire
does not fight with cold nor wet with dry, but principles mutually opposed, as if friendly
and brotherly combine together, and give life to the things we see, and form the
principles by which bodies exist. Obeying Him, even God the Word, things on earth have
life and things in the heaven have their order. By reason of Him all the sea, and the
great ocean, move within their proper bounds, while, as we said above, the dry land grows
grasses and is clothed with all manner of diverse plants. And, not to spend time in the
enumeration of particulars, where the truth is obvious, there is nothing that is and takes
place but has been made and stands by Him and through Him, as also the Divine says, "In
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;

20 all things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made." 3. For just as
though some musician, having tuned a lyre, and by his art adjusted the high notes to the
low, and the intermediate notes to the rest, were to produce a single tune as the result,
so also the Wisdom of God, handling the Universe as a lyre, and adjusting things in the
air to things on the earth, and things in the heaven to things in theair, and combining
parts into wholes and moving them all by His beck and will, produces well and fittingly,
as the result, the unity of the universe and of its order, Himself remaining unmoved with
the Father while He moves all things by His organising action, as seems good for each to
His own Father. 4. For what is surprising in His godhead is this, that by one and the same
act of will He moves all things simultaneously, and not at intervals, but all
collectively, both straight and curved, things above and beneath and intermediate, wet,
cold, warm, seen and invisible, and orders them according to their several nature. For
simultaneously at His single nod what is straight moves as straight, what is curved also,
and what is intermediate, follows its own movement; what is warm receives warmth, what is
dry dryness, and all things according to their several nature are quickened and organised
by Him, and He produces as the result a marvellous and truly divine harmony.

§43. Three Similes to Illustrate the Word's Relation to the Universe.

21 And for so great a matter to be understood by an example, let what we are describing be
compared to a great chorus. As then the chorus is composed of different people, children,
women again, and old men, and those who are still young, and, when one, namely the
conductor, gives the sign, each utters sound according to his nature and power, the man as
a man, the child as a child, the old man as an old man, and the young man as a young man,
while all make up a single harmony; 2. or as our soul at one time moves our several senses
according to the proper function of each, so that when some one object is present all
alike are put in motion, and the eye sees, the ear hears, the hand touches, the smell
takes in odour, and the palate tastes,-and often the other parts of the body act too, as
for instance if the feet walk; 3. or, to make our meaning plain by yet a third example, it
is as though a very great city were built, and administered under the presence of the
ruler and king who has built it; for when he is present anti gives orders, and has his eye
upon everything, all obey; some busy themselves with agriculture, others hasten for water
to the aqueducts, another goes forth to procure provisions,-one goes to senate, another
enters the assembly, the judge goes to the bench, and the magistrate to his court.

22 The workman likewise settles to his craft, the sailor goes down to the sea, the
carpenter to his workshop, the physician to his treatment, the architect to his building;
and while one is going to the country, another is returning from the country, and while
some walk about the town others are going out of the town and returning to it again: but
all this is going on and is organised by the presence of the one Ruler, and by his
management: 4. in like manner then we must conceive of the whole of Creation, even though
the example be inadequate, yet with an enlarged idea. For with the single impulse of a nod
as it were of the Word of God, all things simultaneously fall into order, and each
discharge their proper functions, and a single order is made up by them all together.

§44. The Similes Applied to the Whole Universe, Seen and Unseen.

23 For by a nod and by the power of the Divine Word of the Father that governs and
presides over all, the heaven revolves, the stars move, the sun shines, the moon goes her
circuit, and the air receives the sun's light and the aether his heat, and the winds blow:
the mountains are reared on high, the sea is rough with waves, and the living things in it
grow the earth abides fixed, and bears fruit, and man is formed and lives and dies again,
and all things whatever have their life and movement; fire burns, water cools, fountains
spring forth, rivers flow, seasons and hours come round, rains descend, clouds are filled,
hail is formed. snow and ice congeal, birds fly, creeping things go along, water-animals
swim, the sea is navigated, the earth is sown and grows crops in due season, plants grow,
and some are young, some ripening, others in their growth become old and decay, and while
some things are vanishing others are being engendered and are coming to light. 2. But all
these things, and more, which for their number we cannot mention, the worker of wonders
and marvels, the Word of God, giving light and life, moves and orders by His own nod,
making the universe one. Nor does He leave out of Himself even the invisible powers; for
including these also in the universe inasmuch as he is their maker also, He holds them
together and quickens them by His nod and by His providence.

24 And there can be no excuse for disbelieving this. 3. For as by His own providence
bodies grow and the rational soul moves, and possesses life and thought, and this requires
little proof, for we see what takes place,-so again the same Word of God with one simple
nod by His own power moves and holds together both the visible universe and the invisible
powers, allotting to each its proper function, so that the divine powers move in a diviner
way, while visible things move as they are seen to do. But Himself being over all, both
Governor and King and organising power, He does all for the glory and knowledge of His own
Father, so that almost by the very works that He brings to pass He teaches us and says,
"By the greatness and beauty of the creatures proportionably the maker of them is seen ."

§45. Conclusion. Doctrine of Scripture on the Subject of Part I.

25 For just as by looking up to the heaven and seeing its order and the light of the
stars, it is possible to infer the Word Who ordered these things, so by beholding the Word
of God, one needs must behold also God His Father, proceeding from Whom He is rightly
called His Father's Interpreter and Messenger. 2. And this one may see from our own
experience; for if when a word proceeds from men we infer that the mind is its source,
and, by thinking about the word, see with our reason the mind which it reveals, by far
greater evidence and incomparably more, seeing the power of the Word, we receive a
knowledge also of His good Father, as the Saviour Himself says, "He that hath seen Me hath
seen the Father . But this all inspired Scripture also teaches more plainly and with more
authority, so that we in our turn write boldy to you as we do, and you, if you refer to
them, will be able to verify what we say. 3. For an argument when confirmed by higher
authority is irresistibly proved. From the first then the divine Word firmly taught the
Jewish people about the abolition of idols when it said : "Thou shalt not make to thyself
a graven image, nor the likeness of anything that is in the heaven above or in the earth
beneath. But the cause of their abolition another writer declares , saying: "The idols of
the heathen are silver and gold, the works of men's hands:

26 a mouth have they and will not speak, eyes have they. and will not see, ears have they
and will not: hear, noses have they and will not smell, hands have they and will not
handle, feet have they and will not walk. Nor has it passed over in silence the doctrine
of creation; but, knowing well its beauty, lest any attending solely to this beauty should
worship things as if they were gods, instead of God's works, it teaches men firmly
beforehand when it says : "And do not when thou lookest up with thine eyes and seest the
sun and moon and all the host of heaven, go astray and worship them, which the Lord thy
God hath given to all nations under heaven. But He gave them, not to be their gods, but
that by their agency the Gentiles should know, as we have said, God the Maker of them all.
4. For the people of the Jews of old had abundant teaching, in that they had the knowledge
of God not only from the works of Creation, but also from the divine Scriptures. And in
general to draw men away from the error and irrational imagination of idols, He saith :
"Thou shalt have none other gods but Me.

27 Not as if there were other gods does He forbid them to have them, but lest any, turning
from the true God, should begin to make himself gods of what were not, such as those who
in the poets and writers are called gods, though they are none. And the language itself
shews that they are no Gods, when it says, "Thou shalt have none other gods," which refers
only to the future. But what is referred to the future does not exist at the time of
speaking.

§45. Doctrine of Scripture on the Subject of Part 3.

28 Has then the divine teaching, which abolished the godlessness of the heathen or the
idols, passed over in silence, and left the race of mankind to go entirely unprovided with
the knowledge of God? Not so: rather it anticipates their understanding when it says :
"Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God; and again, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God
with all thy heart and with all thy strength ; and again, "Thou shalt worship the Lord thy
God, and Him only shalt thou serve, and shalt cleave to Him." 2. But that the providence
and ordering power of the Word also, over all and toward all, is attested by all inspired
Scripture, this passage suffices to confirm our argument, where men who speak of God say :
"Thou hast laid the foundation of the earth and it abideth. The day con-tinueth according
to Thine ordinance. And again : "Sing to our God upon the harp, that covereth the heaven
with clouds, that pre-pareth rain for the earth, that bringeth forth grass upon the
mountains, and green herb for the service of man, and giveth food to the cattle." 3. But
by whom does He give it, save by Him through Whom all things were made? For the providence
over all things belongs naturally to Him by Whom they were made; and who is this save the
Word of God, concerning Whom in another psalm he says:

29 "By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made, and all the host of them by the Breath
of His mouth. For He tells us that all things were made in Him and through Him. 4.
Wherefore He also persuades us and says , "He spake and they were made, He commanded and
they were created; as the illustrious Moses also at the beginning of his account of
Creation confirms what we say by his narrative , saying: and God said, "let us make man in
our image and after our likeness: for also when He was carrying out the creation of the
heaven and earth and all things, the Father said to Him , "Let the heaven be made," and
"let the waters be gathered together and let the dry land appear," and "let the earth
bring forth herb" and "every green thing: so that one must convict Jews also of not
genuinely attending to the Scriptures. 5. For one might ask them to whom was God speaking,
to use the imperative mood? If He were commanding and addressing the things He was
creating, the utterance would be redundant, for they were not yet in being, but were about
to be made; but no one speaks to what does not exist, nor addresses to what is not yet
made a command to be made.

30 For if God were giving a command to the things that were to be, He must have said, "Be
modal, heaven, and be made, earth, and come forth, green herb, and be created, O man. But
in fact He did not do so; but He gives the command thus: "Let us make man," and "let the
green herb come forth. By which God is proved to be speaking about them to some one at
hand: it follows then that some one was with Him to Whom He spoke when He made all things.
6. Who then could it be, save His Word? For to whom could God be said to speak, except His
Word? Or who was with Him when He made all created Existence, except His Wisdom, which
says : "When He was making the heaven and the earth I was present with Him? But in the
mention of heaven and earth, all created things in heaven and earth are included as well.
7. But being present with Him as His Wisdom and His Word, looking at the Father He
fashioned the Universe, and organised it and gave it order; and, as He is the power of the
Father, He gave all things strength to be, as the Savionr says : "What things soever I see
the Father doing, I also do in like manner. And His holy disciples teach that all things
were made "through Him and unto Him ;" 8.

31 and, being the good Offspring of Him that is good, and true Son, He is the Father's
Power and Wisdom and Word, not being so by participation , nor as if these qualifies were
imparted to Him from without, as they are to those who partake of Him and are made wise by
Him, and receive power and reason in Him; but He is the very Wisdom, very Word, and very
own Power of the Father, very Light, very Truth, very Righteousness, very Virtue, and in
truth His express Image, and Brightness, and Resemblance. And to sum all up, He is the
wholly perfect Fruit of the Father, and is alone the Son, and unchanging Image of the
Father.

§47. Necessity of a Return to the Word If Our Corrupt Nature is to Be Restored.

32 Who then, who can declare the Father by number, so as to discover the powers of His
Word? For like as He is the Father's Word and Wisdom, so too condescending to created
things, He becomes, to impart the knowledge and apprehension of Him that begot Him, His
very Brightness and very Life, and the Door, and the Shepherd, and the Way, and King and
Governor, and Saviour over all, and Light, and Giver of Life, and Providence over all.
Having then such a Son begotten of Himself, good, and Creator, the Father did not hide Him
outof the sight of His creatures, but even day by day reveals Him to all by means of the
organisation and life of all things, which is His work. 2. But in and through Him He
reveals Himself also, as the Saviour says : "I in the Father and the Father in Me: so that
it follows that the Word is in Him that begat Him, and that He that is begotten lives
eternally with the Father. But this being so, and nothing being outside Him, but both
heaven and earth and all that in them is being dependent on Him, yet men in their folly
have set aside the knowledge and service of Him, and honoured things that are not instead
of things that are: and instead of the real and true God deified things that were not,
"serving the creature rather than the Creator ," thus involving themselves in foolishness
and impiety. 3.

33 For it is just as if one were to admire the works more than the workman, and being
awestruck at the public works in the city, were to make light of their builder, or as if
one were to praise a musical instrument but to despise the man who made and tuned it.
Foolish and sadly disabled in eyesight! For how else had they known the building, or ship,
or lyre, had not the ship-builder made it, the architect built it, or the musician
fashioned it? 4. As then he that reasons in such a way is mad, and beyond all madness,
even so affected in mind, I think, are those who do not recognise God or worship His Word,
our Lord Jesus Christ the Saviour of all, through Whom the Father orders, and holds
together all things, and exercises providence over the Universe; having faith and piety
towards Whom, my Christ-loving friend, be of good cheer and of good hope, because
immortality and the kingdom of heaven is the fruit of faith and devotion towards Him, if
only the soul be adorned according to His laws. For just as for them who walk after His
example, the prize is life everlasting, so for those who walk the opposite way, and not
that of virtue, there is great shame, and peril without pardon in the day of judgment,
because although they knew the way of truth their acts were contrary to their knowledge.


ON THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD (CHAPTERS 1–36)
==============================================

ON THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 318–337

A short book by Athanasius, later bishop of Alexandria, on why the eternal Word of God
became man: to renew the image of God in humanity, to defeat death and corruption, and to
bring us back to the knowledge of the Father. It is the second half of a pair with his
Against the Greeks. The date is debated, between about AD 318 and the 330s.

CHAPTER 1

The Subject of This Treatise: the Humiliation and Incarnation of the Word. Presupposes the
Doctrine of Creation, and that by the Word. The Father Has Saved the World by Him Through
Whom He First Made It.

1 In the earlier treatise we gave an adequate account, choosing a few points out of many,
of the error of the pagans about idols and their superstitious worship, and of how these
things were first invented: out of wickedness, men devised for themselves the worship of
idols. By God’s grace we also said a little about the divinity of the Father’s Word, about
his providence and power over all things, and about how the good Father orders everything
through him, so that all things are moved by him and receive life in him. Now, blessed
Macarius, true lover of Christ, let us follow on in order, in keeping with the faith of
true religion. Let us tell about the Word’s becoming man and make known his divine
appearing among us. The Jews slander it, the Greeks mock it, but we worship it. Then,
because of the Word’s apparent lowliness, your reverence toward him will be all the
greater and fuller.[1]

2 For the more he is mocked by unbelievers, the greater the witness he gives to his
Godhead. What men cannot grasp and call impossible, he shows to be possible. What men mock
as unfitting, he in his goodness makes fitting. What men in their clever reasoning laugh
at as merely human, he by his power shows to be divine. By his supposed lowliness, through
the cross, he overthrows the illusion of the idols. And those who mock and disbelieve he
wins over in an unseen way, so that they come to recognize his divinity and power. 3 To
give this account we need to remember what was said before. Then you will be able to know
why the Father’s Word, so great and so exalted, appeared in a body. And you will not
suppose that the Saviour wore a body because his nature required it. Rather, he is
bodiless by nature and is the Word, yet out of the love for mankind and the goodness of
his own Father, he appeared to us in a human body for our salvation.

4 As we give this account, it is fitting first to speak about the creation of the universe
and about God, its Creator. In this way it can rightly be seen that its renewal was
brought about by the same Word who created it in the beginning. For it will not appear
contradictory if the Father worked its salvation in the very one through whom he made it.

CHAPTER 2

Erroneous Views of Creation Rejected. (1) Epicurean (Fortuitous Generation). But Diversity
of Bodies and Parts Argues a Creating Intellect. (2.) Platonists (Pre-Existent Matter.)
But This Subjects God to Human Limitations, Making Him Not a Creator But a Mechanic. (3)
Gnostics (an Alien Demiurge). Rejected from Scripture.

1 Many people have understood the making of the world and the creation of all things in
different ways, and each has defined it as he pleased. Some say that everything came into
being on its own, by chance, as the Epicureans do. They tell the myth, to their own
refutation, that there is no providence over the universe, and in saying so they flatly
contradict what is plain and visible.[2] 2 For if, as they say, everything came into being
on its own without providence, then everything would have been made simply and been all
alike, with no differences. Everything would have to be sun, or moon, as if it were all
one body. Among human beings the whole body would have to be a hand, or an eye, or a foot.
But this is not how it is. We see one thing as the sun, another as the moon, another as
the earth. Likewise in human bodies we see one part as a foot, another as a hand, another
as a head. Such an arrangement shows that these things did not come into being on their
own. It shows that a cause came before them. From that cause we can come to know God, who
arranged and made all things.

3 Others, among them Plato, who is highly regarded among the Greeks, say that God made the
universe out of matter that already existed and had never come into being. They hold that
God could not have made anything unless matter lay ready beforehand, just as a carpenter
must have the wood at hand in order to do his work. 4 Those who say this do not realize
that they are ascribing weakness to God. If he is not himself the cause of matter, but
makes the things that exist only out of matter already lying there, then he turns out to
be weak. He would be unable to make anything that has been made without the matter. In the
same way, it is certainly a weakness in the carpenter that he cannot make any of the
things he needs without timber. On their view, if the matter had not existed, God would
have made nothing. And how could he still be called maker and craftsman, if his ability to
make comes from something else, that is, from the matter? If that is how things are, then
on their account God is only a skilled workman and not a creator who brings things into
being, since he works on matter that lies ready and is not himself the cause of that
matter. He could not be called a creator at all if he does not create the matter from
which the created things have come.[3]

5 The heretics, for their part, invent for themselves another creator of all things, other
than the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. They are utterly blind, even about the very
words they speak.[4] 6 The Lord says to the Jews, “Have you not read that the one who
created them from the beginning made them male and female?” And he said, “For this reason
a man will leave his father and his mother and will be joined to his wife, and the two
will become one flesh.” Then, pointing to the Creator, he says, “So what God has joined
together, let no man separate.” How then can these people bring in a creation that is
foreign to the Father? And if, as John says, including everything, “All things came to be
through him, and without him not one thing came to be,” how could the creator be anyone
other than the Father of Christ?[5] [Matthew 19:4-6; John 1:3]

CHAPTER 3

The True Doctrine. Creation Out of Nothing, of God’s Lavish Bounty of Being. Man Created
Above the Rest, But Incapable of Independent Perseverance. Hence the Exceptional and
Supra-Natural Gift of Being in God’s Image, with the Promise of Bliss Conditionally Upon
His Perseverance in Grace.

1 This is the kind of fable these people tell. But the God-inspired teaching and the faith
that follows Christ condemn their empty talk as godlessness. This teaching knows that
things did not come about by chance, because they are not without providence. Nor were
they made from pre-existing matter, because God is not weak. Instead, God made the whole
universe, which had no existence of any kind, out of nothing, and brought it into being
through the Word. So he says through Moses, “In the beginning God made the heaven and the
earth.” And in that most useful book, the Shepherd, he says, “First of all, believe that
God is one, who created and put together all things, and made them to exist out of what
was not.”[6] [Genesis 1:1] 2 Paul points to the same thing when he says, “By faith we
understand that the ages were put in order by the word of God, so that what is seen has
not come from things that appear.”[7] [Hebrews 11:3]

3 For God is good, or rather he is the very source of goodness, and one who is good could
never be jealous of anything. So, begrudging existence to no one, he made all things out
of nothing through his own Word, our Lord Jesus Christ. Among them, above all the things
on earth, he had mercy on the human race. He saw that, by the terms of its own origin, it
could not remain forever. So he gave human beings something more. He did not simply create
them, as he did all the animals on earth that lack reason. He made them according to his
own image, and gave them a share in the power of his own Word. In this way, having in
themselves, as it were, shadows of the Word, and being made rational, they would be able
to remain in blessedness and live the true life, the real life of the saints in
paradise.[8] [Genesis 1:27]

4 But God also knew that human choice could turn either way. So he acted ahead of time and
made the grace given to them secure by a law and by a place. He brought them into his own
paradise and gave them a law. If they kept the grace and stayed good, they would have the
life of paradise, free from grief, pain and worry, and they would also have the promise of
incorruption in heaven. But if they broke the law, turned away and became wicked, they
were to know that they would undergo the natural corruption of death. They would no longer
live in paradise, but from then on, outside it, they would die and remain in death and
corruption. 5 The divine Scripture also gives warning of this. It says in the person of
God: “From every tree in the garden you shall eat for food; but from the tree of the
knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat. But on the day you eat from it, you shall
die by death.” What else could “you shall die by death” mean than this: not merely to die,
but also to remain in the corruption of death?[9] [Genesis 2:16-17]

CHAPTER 4

Our Creation and God’s Incarnation Most Intimately Connected. As by the Ward Man Was
Called from Non-Existence into Being, and Further Received the Grace of a Divine Life, So
by the One Fault Which Forfeited that Life They Again Incurred Corruption and Untold Sin
and Misery Filled the World.

1 Perhaps you are wondering why, when we set out to speak about the Word becoming man, we
are now describing the origin of human beings. But this is not foreign to the purpose of
our account. 2 When we speak of the Savior’s appearing among us, we must also speak of the
origin of human beings. In this way you will know that our plight was the reason for his
coming down, and that our transgression called out the Word’s love for mankind. So the
Lord came all the way to us and appeared among men. 3 We were the occasion of his taking a
body. For our salvation he showed such love for mankind that he was born and appeared in a
human body. 4 This, then, is how God made man, and he wanted him to remain in
incorruption. But people neglected and turned away from the contemplation of God. They
reasoned out and devised evil for themselves, as was said earlier. So they incurred the
sentence of death with which they had been threatened. From then on they no longer stayed
as they had been made, but were being corrupted according to their own reasonings, and
death ruled over them as king. For the transgression of the commandment was turning them
back to their natural condition. Just as they had come into being out of nothing, so they
were bound, as one would expect, to undergo in time corruption into non-being.[10]

5 Human beings by nature once did not exist, and they were called into existence by the
presence and the love for humanity of the Word. So it followed that when they were emptied
of the knowledge of God and turned back to things that are not, they would also be emptied
of existence forever. (Evil things are not, but good things are, since they come from God
who is.) And this means being dissolved and remaining in death and corruption. 6 Man is by
nature mortal, since he was made out of nothing. But he was made like Him who is. Because
of that likeness, if he had kept it by keeping God in his thoughts, he would have blunted
his natural corruption and remained incorrupt. As Wisdom says: “Attention to the laws is
the confirmation of incorruption.” Being incorrupt, he would from then on have lived as
God. Holy Scripture points to this somewhere when it says: “I said, You are gods, and all
of you sons of the Most High; but you die like men, and fall like one of the rulers.”[11]

CHAPTER 5

For God has not only made us out of nothing; but He gave us freely, by the Grace of the
Word, a life in correspondence with God. But men, having rejected things eternal, and, by
counsel of the devil, turned to the things of corruption, became the cause of their own
corruption in death, being, as I said before, by nature corruptible, but destined, by the
grace following from partaking of the Word, to have escaped their natural state, had they
remained good. 2. For because of the Word dwelling with them, even their natural
corruption did not come near them, as Wisdom also says : “God made man for incorruption,
and as an image of His own eternity; but by envy of the devil death came into the world.”
But when this was come to pass, men began to die, while corruption thence-forward
prevailed against them, gaining even more than its natural power over the whole race,
inasmuch as it had, owing to the transgression of the commandment, the threat of the Deity
as a further advantage against them.

1 God did not only make us out of nothing. He also freely gave us a life according to God,
by the grace of the Word. But men turned away from eternal things and, on the devil’s
advice, turned to the things of corruption. So they became the cause of their own
corruption in death. As I said before, they were by nature corruptible, but by the grace
of sharing in the Word they would have escaped what is natural to them, if they had
remained good. 2 Because the Word was with them, even their natural corruption did not
come near them. Wisdom says the same: “God created man for incorruption, and as an image
of His own eternity; but through the devil’s envy death entered into the world.” When this
happened, men began to die. From then on corruption flourished against them and had more
than its natural power over the whole race. This was because it also had on its side
against them the threat God had made over the transgression of the commandment.

3 Even in their wrongdoing, men did not stay within fixed limits. Little by little they
pushed further, and at last went beyond all measure. At the beginning they were the
inventors of wickedness and brought death and corruption on themselves. Later they turned
to injustice and went beyond every kind of lawlessness. They did not stop at one evil, but
devised one new evil after another, and became insatiable in sinning. 4 There were
adulteries and thefts everywhere, and the whole earth was full of murders and robberies.
No one cared about the law when it came to corruption and injustice. Every kind of evil
was practiced, by individuals and by whole groups together. City made war on city, and
nation rose against nation. The entire inhabited world was torn apart by factions and
battles, each one striving to outdo the others in lawlessness. [Matthew 24:7] 5 Even sins
against nature were not far from them. As the Apostle, Christ’s witness, said: “Their
women exchanged the natural use for that which is against nature. In the same way the men
also, leaving the natural use of the woman, were inflamed in their desire for one another,
men committing shameless acts with men, and receiving in themselves the due penalty of
their error.” [Romans 1:26-27]

CHAPTER 6

The Human Race Then Was Wasting, God’s Image Was Being Effaced, and His Work Ruined.
Either, Then, God Must Forego His Spoken Word by Which Man Had Incurred Ruin; Or that
Which Had Shared in the Being of the Word Must Sink Back Again into Destruction, in Which
Case God’s Design Would Be Defeated. What Then? Was God’s Goodness to Suitor This? But If
So, Why Had Man Been Made? It Could Have Been Weakness, Not Goodness on God’s Part.

1 For these reasons death had gained still more power, and corruption remained upon human
beings. So the human race was being destroyed. Man, who was rational and made in the
image, was disappearing, and the work that God had made was being lost. 2 For death, as I
said before, now had power over us by law. It was impossible to escape that law, because
God had laid it down on account of the transgression. And what was happening was truly
both absurd and unfitting. 3 First, it was absurd that God, having spoken, should prove
false. He had given the law that man would die the death if he broke the commandment. So
it would be absurd if, after the transgression, man did not die and God’s word were
broken. God would not be truthful if, after he had said that we would die, man did not
die. [Genesis 2:17] 4 It was also unfitting that creatures who had once been made rational
and had shared in his Word should be lost, and should turn back again into non-existence
through corruption.

5 For it was not worthy of God’s goodness that the things he had made should be destroyed
because of the deception the devil practiced on human beings. 6 Above all, it was most
unfitting that God’s craftsmanship in human beings should be wiped out, whether through
their own carelessness or through the deception of demons. 7 So, with rational creatures
being corrupted and such works being lost, what ought God to do, being good? Should he let
corruption have power over them and death rule them? Then what was the point of their
being made in the first place? It would have been better for them not to have been made
than, once made, to be neglected and destroyed. 8 For such neglect shows weakness rather
than goodness in God, if after making his own work he looks on while it is destroyed. It
would show weakness more than if he had never made man at the beginning.

9 If he had not made them, there would have been no one to accuse him of weakness. But
since he had made them and brought them into being, it would be most absurd for his works
to be destroyed, and especially before the eyes of their Maker. 10 So it was necessary not
to let human beings be swept away by corruption, because that would be unfitting and
unworthy of God’s goodness.

CHAPTER 7

On the Other Hand There Was the Consistency of God’s Nature, Not to Be Sacrificed for Our
Profit. Were Men, Then, to Be Called Upon to Repent? But Repentance Cannot Avert the
Execution of a Law; Still Less Can It Remedy a Fallen Nature. We Have Incurred Corruption
and Need to Be Restored to the Grace of God’s Image. None Could Renew But He Who Had
Created. He Alone Could (1) Recreate All, (2) Suffer for All, (3) Respect All to the
Father.

1 But just as this had to happen, so on the other side what is right for God stands
against it: God must be seen to be truthful in the law he gave about death. For it would
have been absurd for God, the Father of truth, to appear a liar for the sake of our
benefit and survival. 2 So what ought to happen, or what ought God to do about this?
Should he demand repentance from human beings for the transgression? One might say that
this would be worthy of God, arguing that just as they fell into corruption through the
transgression, so through repentance they might return to incorruption. 3 But repentance
would not preserve what is right for God. He would still be untruthful if death did not
keep its hold on human beings. Nor does repentance call people back from what is natural
to them; it only makes them stop sinning.

4 If there had been only a misdeed and no corruption following it, repentance would have
been fine. But once the transgression had come first, human beings were held fast in
natural corruption, and they were deprived of the grace of being in the image. What else
needed to happen? What was needed for such grace and such a recall, other than the Word of
God, who in the beginning had made everything out of nothing? 5 For it belonged to him
once more to bring the corruptible into incorruption, and to uphold, on behalf of all,
what was due to the Father. For he is the Word of the Father and above all things. So he
alone was able to create all things anew, and he alone was fit to suffer on behalf of all
and to act as ambassador for all before the Father.

CHAPTER 8

The Word, Then, Visited that Earth in Which He Was Yet Always Present ; And Saw All These
Evils. He Takes a Body of Our Nature, and that of a Spotless Virgin, in Whose Womb He
Makes It His Own, Wherein to Reveal Himself, Conquer Death, and Restore Life.

1 For this reason the incorporeal, incorruptible and immaterial Word of God comes into our
land, though he was not far away before. For no part of creation was ever left empty of
him; he fills all things in every place, while remaining with his own Father. But now he
comes, stooping down in his love for humanity and showing himself to us. 2 He saw the
rational race perishing, and death reigning over them through corruption. He saw that the
threat attached to the transgression kept corruption in force against us, and that it
would be out of place for the law to be set aside before it was fulfilled. He saw how
unseemly it was that the very things he had made were disappearing. He saw the surpassing
wickedness of men, how little by little they had increased it against themselves until it
was unbearable. And he saw that all men were liable to death. So he had mercy on our race
and pity on our weakness; he stooped down to our corruption and could not bear death’s
rule over us. He would not let what had been made perish, nor let the Father’s work among
men come to nothing. So he takes for himself a body, and that body is not different from
ours.

3 For he did not simply want to be in a body, nor did he want merely to appear. If he had
wanted only to appear, he could have made his divine appearing by some other, better
means. But he takes what is ours, and not just in any way: he takes it from a pure and
undefiled virgin who had not known a man, a body clean and truly untouched by union with
men. For he himself is mighty and the Maker of all things. In the Virgin he prepares the
body as a temple for himself and makes it his own, as an instrument, making himself known
in it and living in it. 4 In this way he took from us a body like ours. Because all were
liable to the corruption of death, he handed it over to death in place of all and offered
it to the Father. He did this out of love for humanity. He did it, first, so that, since
all had died in him, the law that brought corruption on human beings might be dissolved.
For its power was fully spent in the Lord’s body, and it no longer had any ground against
people like him. Second, he did it so that he might turn back to incorruption those who
had turned back to corruption, and give them life out of death. He did this by making the
body his own and by the grace of the resurrection, wiping out death from them as fire
burns up straw. [2 Corinthians 5:14]

CHAPTER 9

The Word, Since Death Alone Could Stay the Plague, Took a Mortal Body Which, United with
Him, Should Avail for All, and by Partaking of His Immortality Stay the Corruption of the
Race. By Being Above All, He Made His Flesh an Offering for Our Souls; By Being One with
Us All, He Clothed Us with Immortality. Simile to Illustrate This.

1 The Word saw that the corruption of human beings could not be undone in any other way
than by death itself. But it was not possible for the Word to die, since he is immortal
and the Son of the Father. For this reason he takes for himself a body that can die. This
body would share in the Word who is over all, and so be enough to die in place of all.
Because the Word dwelt in it, it would stay incorruptible, and from then on corruption
would cease for everyone through the grace of the resurrection. So he offered to death the
body he had taken for himself, as an offering and sacrifice free from every blemish. By
offering this equivalent, he at once removed death from all who are like him. 2 For the
Word of God is above all. So it was fitting that he offer his own temple and bodily
instrument as a life given in exchange for all, and so pay in his death what was owed. In
this way the incorruptible Son of God, united with all through a body like theirs,
fittingly clothed all with incorruption by the promise of the resurrection. For the
corruption that comes through death no longer has any ground against men, because the Word
dwells among them through his one body. [1 Timothy 2:6; 1 Corinthians 15:53]

3 Think of a great king who enters a great city and lives in one of its houses. Such a
city is counted worthy of great honor. No enemy or bandit attacks and destroys it any
more; instead it is thought worthy of every care, because the king lives in one of its
houses. So it has been with the King of all. 4 When he came to our country and made his
home in one body among others like it, every plot the enemies had against humanity came to
an end. The corruption of death, which had long been strong against people, was wiped out.
The human race would have been destroyed if the Son of God, the Master and Savior of all,
had not come to put an end to death.[12]

CHAPTER 10

By a Like Simile, the Reasonableness of the Work of Redemption is Shewn. How Christ Wiped
Away Our Ruin, and Provided Its Antidote by His Own Teaching. Scripture Proofs of the
Incarnation of the Word, and of the Sacrifice He Wrought.

0 Truly, this great work is especially fitting to the goodness of God. 1 Suppose a king
builds a house or a city, and the inhabitants neglect it, so that bandits attack it. The
king does not overlook it at all. He defends it as his own work and rescues it. He is
looking not at the neglect of the people living there but at what is fitting for himself.
Much more, then, did God the Word, the Word of the all-good Father, refuse to overlook the
human race. That race was made through him and was sliding into corruption. He wiped out
the death that had come upon them by offering his own body. He corrected their neglect by
his own teaching. He set right everything that concerned human beings by his own power. 2
Anyone who reads the writings of the Savior’s own men, who spoke about God, can be assured
of this. They say: “For the love of Christ constrains us, since we have judged this: that
if one died for all, then all died. And he died for all, so that we would no longer live
for ourselves, but for the one who died for us and rose from the dead,” our Lord Jesus
Christ. And again: “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, crowned
with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he
might taste death for everyone.”[13] [2 Corinthians 5:14-15; Hebrews 2:9]

3 Then the writer also shows why no one other than God the Word himself had to become man.
He says: “For it was fitting for him, for whom are all things and through whom are all
things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the founder of their salvation perfect
through sufferings.” By this he means that no one else could bring human beings back from
the corruption that had come upon them except the Word of God, who had also made them in
the beginning.[14] [Hebrews 2:10] 4 The writers also show that the Word took a body for
himself in order to offer a sacrifice on behalf of bodies like his own. They say: “Since,
then, the children share in blood and flesh, he himself likewise took part in the same, so
that through death he might destroy the one who has the power of death, that is, the
devil, and set free those who through fear of death were subject to slavery all their
lives.”[15] [Hebrews 2:14-15]

5 By the sacrifice of his own body he put an end to the law that stood against us. He also
made a fresh beginning of life for us by giving us the hope of resurrection. Since death
came to rule over human beings through human beings, the reverse has now come about
through the Word of God becoming man: the abolishing of death and the resurrection of
life. As the Christ-bearing man says: “For since death came through a man, the
resurrection of the dead also came through a man. For as in Adam all die, so also in
Christ all will be made alive,” and what follows. So we no longer die as people under
condemnation. Instead, as people who are being raised, we wait for the resurrection of all
together. God, who brought it about and gave it freely, will show it in its own times.[16]
[1 Corinthians 15:21-22; 1 Timothy 6:15] 6 This, then, is the first reason for the Savior
becoming man. But from the following points as well, one can see that it was fitting for
him to make his gracious coming to us.

CHAPTER 11

Second Reason for the Incarnation. God Knowing that Man Was Not by Nature Sufficient to
Know Him, Gave Him, in Order that He Might Have Some Profit in Being, a Knowledge of
Himself. He Made Them in the Image of the Word, that Thus They Might Know the Word, and
Through Him the Father. Yet Man, Despising This, Fell into Idolatry, Leaving the Unseen
God for Magic and Astrology; And All This in Spite of God’s Manifold Revelation of
Himself.

1 God has power over all things. When he made the human race through his own Word, he also
saw the weakness of their nature. It was not able, on its own, to know the Maker or to
form any idea of God at all. He is uncreated, while they had been made out of nothing. He
is without a body, while human beings had been formed here below, in a body. In every way,
created things fall far short of grasping and knowing the one who made them. So God took
pity on the human race, since he is good. He did not leave them without knowledge of
himself, so that even their very existence would not be useless to them. 2 For what good
is it to created beings if they do not know their own Maker? And how could they be
rational if they did not know the Word of the Father, in whom they came into being? They
would be no different from the animals without reason if they knew nothing beyond earthly
things. And why would God have made them at all, if he did not want to be known by
them?[17]

3 So that this would not happen, God, being good, gives them a share in his own image, our
Lord Jesus Christ. He makes them according to his own image and likeness. He did this so
that by such grace they might grasp the image, that is, the Word of the Father, and
through him be able to form an idea of the Father himself. Then, knowing their Maker, they
might live the happy and truly blessed life.[18] [Genesis 1:26] 4 But human beings, in
their folly, once again made light even of the grace given them. They turned away from God
so far, and so clouded their own souls, that they not only forgot their idea of God but
also invented one thing after another in its place. They shaped idols for themselves
instead of the truth. They honored things that do not exist above the God who does exist,
serving the creation instead of the Creator. Worst of all, they transferred the honor due
to God to wood and stones, to every kind of material, and to human beings. And they did
even more than this, as we said earlier.[19] [Romans 1:25]

5 Their impiety went so far that they came to worship demons and proclaimed them gods,
fulfilling their desires. As was said before, they offered sacrifices of irrational
animals and slaughtered human beings as offerings due to the demons. In this way they
bound themselves all the more tightly by the demons’ frenzies.[20] 6 For this reason magic
was taught among them, oracles in one place after another led people astray, and everyone
attributed the causes of their birth and existence to the stars and to everything in the
sky. They gave no thought to anything beyond what could be seen. 7 In short, everything
was full of ungodliness and lawlessness, and God alone, and his Word, went unknown. Yet
God had not hidden himself out of sight from human beings, nor given them knowledge of
himself in only one way. He had spread that knowledge out for them in many different ways
and through many means.

CHAPTER 12

For Though Man Was Created in Grace, God, Foreseeing His Forgetfulness, Provided Also the
Works of Creation to Remind Man of Him. Yet Further, He Ordained a Law and Prophets, Whose
Ministry Was Meant for All the World. Yet Men Heeded Only Their Own Lusts.

1 The grace of being made in the image was by itself enough to let people know God the
Word, and through him the Father. But God knew human weakness and made provision even for
their carelessness. If they would not take the trouble to know God by themselves, they
could still, through the works of creation, avoid being ignorant of their Maker. 2 But
human carelessness gradually slid down to worse things. So once again God made provision
for this weakness of theirs. He sent a law and prophets, men they knew, so that even if
they were unwilling to look up to heaven and know the Maker, they could be taught by those
close at hand. For people can learn about higher things more directly from other people. 3
So they could have looked up at the vastness of heaven, considered the harmony of
creation, and known its Ruler, the Word of the Father. By his providence over all things
he makes the Father known to all, and he moves all things for this purpose, that through
him everyone may know God.

4 Or if that was too much trouble for them, they could at least have met with the holy
men, and through them learned about God, the Maker of all things and the Father of Christ.
They could have learned that the worship of idols is godlessness and full of every kind of
impiety. 5 Or, by coming to know the law, they could have stopped all lawlessness and
lived a virtuous life. For the law was not for the Jews alone, and the prophets were not
sent for them alone. They were sent to the Jews and persecuted by the Jews, but for the
whole world they were a holy school of the knowledge of God and of the conduct of the
soul. 6 God’s goodness and love for humanity were that great. Even so, people were
overcome by the pleasures of the moment and by the illusions and deceptions of demons, and
they did not lift up their heads toward the truth. Instead they loaded themselves with
still more evils and sins, until they no longer seemed rational but, judging by their
behavior, were thought to be without reason.

CHAPTER 13

Here Again, Was God to Keep Silence? to Allow to False Gods the Worship He Made Us to
Render to Himseif? a King Whose Subjects Had Revolted Would, After Sending Letters and
Messages, Go to Them in Person. How Much More Shall God Restore in Us the Grace of His
Image. This Men, Themselves But Copies, Could Not Do. Hence the Word Himself Must Come (I)
to Recreate, (2) to Destroy Death in the Body.

1 Human beings had thus become irrational, and demonic deception was casting its shadow
everywhere and hiding the knowledge of the true God. What, then, was God to do? Was he to
stay silent about so great a matter, let people be led astray by demons, and let them not
know him? 2 And what was the point of man being made in God’s image from the beginning? It
would have been better for him simply to be made without reason, like the animals, than to
be made rational and then live the life of the animals.[21] [Genesis 1:27] 3 And what need
was there at all for him to receive any notion of God from the beginning? If he is not
worthy to receive it even now, it should not have been given to him at the beginning
either. 4 What benefit is it to God who made them, or what glory would it be to him, if
the people he made do not worship him, but think that others made them? For then God would
be found to have made them for others and not for himself.

5 Think again of a human king. He does not let the lands he has founded be handed over to
serve others, or go over to other rulers. He reminds them by letters, and often sends
messages to them through friends. If need be, he finally comes himself and puts them to
shame by his presence. He does all this only so that they will not serve others and his
work will not be wasted. 6 Will God not much more spare his own creatures, so that they
are not led away from him to serve things that do not exist? This is especially so because
such error becomes for them a cause of ruin and destruction, and it was not right that
those who had once shared in God’s image should perish. 7 What then was God to do? What
had to happen, if not to renew once more what was made after the image, so that through it
people might again be able to know him? But how could this have happened, unless the very
Image of God, our Savior Jesus Christ, came among us? It could not be done through human
beings, since they themselves were only made after the image. Nor could it be done through
angels, since they are not images either. So the Word of God came in his own person, so
that, being the Image of the Father, he could re-create the man made after the image.[22]

8 But again, this could not have happened unless death and corruption were done away with.
9 So it was fitting that he took a mortal body, so that death might be completely
destroyed in it, and people made after the image might be renewed again. There was no one
else for this need but the Image of the Father.

CHAPTER 14

A Portrait Once Effaced Must Be Restored from the Original. Thus the Son Ofthe Father Came
to Seek, Save, and Regenerate. No Other Way Was Possible. Blinded Himself, Man Could Not
See to Heal. The Witness of Creation Had Failed to Preserve Him, and Could Not Bring Him
Back. The Word Alone Could Do So. But How? Only by Revealing Himself as Man.

1 Consider a likeness painted on a wooden panel, which has been blotted out by dirt from
outside. The person whose likeness it is must come again, so that the portrait can be
renewed on the same material. For the sake of his portrait, the panel it was painted on is
not thrown away, but the likeness is re-drawn on it.[23] 2 In the same way the all-holy
Son of the Father, who is the Image of the Father, came to our region to renew the man
made after himself, and to find him, as one who was lost, through the forgiveness of sins.
As he himself says in the Gospels: “I came to find and to save the lost.” So he also said
to his own people, “Unless someone is born again.” He did not mean birth from a woman, as
they supposed. He meant the soul being born again and re-created according to the
image.[24] [Luke 19:10; John 3:3-4]

3 But idol-madness and godlessness held the world, and the knowledge of God was hidden.
Whose task was it to teach the world about the Father? Someone might say, a human being’s.
But it was not possible for human beings to go through the whole world under the sun. They
were not strong enough by nature to run so far. They could not make themselves believable
on this matter. And they were not able by themselves to stand against the deceit and
illusions of the demons. 4 All people were struck and troubled in soul by demonic deceit
and the emptiness of idols. How then could human beings win over the soul and mind of
others, when they cannot even see another person’s soul and mind? And how can anyone re-
educate what he cannot see? 5 But perhaps someone will say that creation was enough. If
creation had been enough, such great evils would not have happened. Creation was there,
and yet people were still wallowing in the same error about God.

6 So who was needed again but the Word of God, who sees both soul and mind, who moves
everything in creation, and who makes the Father known through it? He taught about the
Father through his own providence and ordering of the universe, so it was for him to renew
that same teaching.[25] 7 How, then, could this be done? Perhaps someone will say that it
was possible to use the same means as before, so that he might again show the truth about
him through the works of creation. But that was no longer safe. No, indeed. People had
overlooked it before, and now their eyes were no longer turned upward but downward.[26] 8
So, wanting to help people, he fittingly came to stay among them as a man. He took for
himself a body like theirs and taught them from below, that is, through the works of the
body. He did this so that those who had refused to know him from his care and rule over
all things might at least come to know, from the works of his own body, the Word of God
who is in the body, and through him the Father.[27]

CHAPTER 15

Thus the Word Condescended to Man’s Engrossment in Corporeal Things, by Even Taking a
Body. All Man’s Superstitions He Met Halfway; Whether Men Were Inclined to Worship Nature,
Man, Demons, or the Dead, He Shewed Himself Lord of All These.

1 A good teacher cares for his own students. When some of them cannot learn from higher
matters, he comes down to their level and teaches them by simpler means. So it was with
the Word of God. Paul says the same: “For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not
know God through its wisdom, God was pleased to save those who believe through the
foolishness of the message preached.”[28] [1 Corinthians 1:21] 2 People had turned away
from looking to God. Their eyes were turned downward, as if they were sunk in the depths.
They searched for God in created things and in what the senses can perceive, and they
invented gods for themselves out of mortal men and demons. For this reason the Word of
God, the Savior of all, who loves mankind, took a body for himself. He lived as a man
among men and reached out to the senses of all people. He did this so that those who
imagined that God is in bodily things might learn the truth from what the Lord does
through the works of his body, and through him might reason their way to the Father.[29]

3 They were human, and all their thinking was human. So wherever they turned their senses,
they found themselves reached there and taught the truth from every side. 4 If they were
struck with awe at creation, they saw it confessing Christ as Lord. If their minds were
already inclined to men, so that they thought them gods, then, when they compared them
with the works of the Savior, the Savior alone appeared among men as the Son of God. For
nothing like the works of the Word of God had been done by those others. [Philippians
2:11] 5 If they were already inclined to demons, they saw the demons driven out by the
Lord. So they came to know that this one alone is the Word of God, and that the demons are
not gods.[30] 6 If their minds were already held fast by the dead, so that they worshiped
heroes and the gods the poets speak of, then, seeing the Savior’s resurrection, they would
admit that those were false. They would admit that the Lord alone is true, the Word of the
Father, who is lord even of death.

7 For this reason He was born, appeared as a man, died and rose again. By His own works He
dulled and overshadowed the works of all the men who had ever lived. He did this so that,
wherever people had been carried away, He could lead them back up from there and teach
them about His own true Father. As He Himself says, “I came to save and to find what was
lost.”[31] [Luke 19:10]

CHAPTER 16

He Came Then to Attract Man’s Sense Bound Attention to Himself as Man, and So to Lead Him
on to Know Him as God.

1 For once human minds had fallen to things perceived by the senses, the Word submitted to
appearing through a body. He did this to bring people over to Himself as a man, and to
turn their senses toward Himself. Then, as they saw Him as a man, He would persuade them
by the works He did that He is not only a man but also God, and the Word and Wisdom of the
true God.[32] 2 Paul wanted to point to this when he said, “rooted and grounded in love,
so that you may have strength to grasp, with all the saints, what is the breadth and
length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, so
that you may be filled to all the fullness of God.”[33] [Ephesians 3:17-19] 3 For the Word
spread Himself out everywhere, above and below, in depth and in breadth: above, in
creation; below, in becoming man; in the depth, in Hades; in the breadth, in the world. So
everything has been filled with the knowledge of God.[34] [Isaiah 11:9]

4 For this reason, when He came, He did not immediately complete the sacrifice on behalf
of all by giving His body over to death and raising it again, for by doing that He would
have made Himself invisible. Instead, He made Himself plainly visible through the body by
remaining in it, doing such works and giving such signs as made Him known no longer as a
man, but as God the Word.[35] 5 For the Saviour showed His love for mankind in two ways
through becoming man. He removed death from us and made us new. And though He was unseen
and invisible, He made Himself plain by His works and made Himself known as the Word of
the Father, the Ruler and King of the universe.

CHAPTER 17

How the Incarnation Did Not Limit the Ubiquity of the Word, Nor Diminish His Purity.
(Simile of the Sun.)

1 For He was not shut up inside the body. Nor was He present in the body while absent
everywhere else. Nor did He move the body while the rest of the universe was left empty of
His activity and care. Rather, and this is most astonishing, being the Word, He was not
contained by anything; instead, He Himself contained all things. Just as, being in all
creation, He is outside the whole in His being, yet is in all things by His powers,
ordering everything, extending His care over all things and in all things, giving life to
each thing and to all together, enclosing the whole without being enclosed, but being
wholly and in every respect in His Father alone— 2 so also, while in the human body and
Himself giving it life, He was fittingly giving life to the whole universe as well. He was
within all things, and yet He was outside the whole. And though He was known from the body
through His works, He was not hidden from the working of the universe either.

3 Now it is the work of the soul to contemplate in its thoughts even things outside its
own body, but not to act outside its own body or to move, by its presence, things that are
far from it. A man who thinks about distant things never thereby moves or transports them.
If someone sits in his own house and reasons about the heavens, he does not thereby move
the sun or turn the sky around. He sees them moving and existing, but he has no power to
act on them. 4 The Word of God in the man was not like that. He was not bound to the body;
rather He Himself held it in control. So He was in the body, and He was in all things, and
He was outside all things that exist, and He rested in the Father alone. 5 And this was
the wonder: He lived as a man, He gave life to all things as the Word, and He was with the
Father as the Son. So when the Virgin gave birth, He Himself suffered nothing, and by
being in a body He was not defiled. On the contrary, He made the body holy as well.[36]

6 For He does not share in the nature of all things by being in them; instead, all things
are given life and fed by Him. 7 Consider the sun, which He made and which we see
travelling across the sky. It is not defiled when it touches bodies on earth, and the
darkness does not make it disappear. Instead it lights them and cleans them. How much
less, then, was the all-holy Word of God, the Maker and Lord of the sun, defiled when He
was made known in a body! Instead, being incorruptible, He gave life to the body, which
was mortal, and made it clean. For it says, “He committed no sin, nor was deceit found in
His mouth.”[37] [1 Peter 2:22; Isaiah 53:9]

CHAPTER 18

How the Word and Power of God Works in His Human Actions : by Casting Out Devils, by
Miracles, by His Birth of the Virgin.

1 So when the sacred writers speak of Him eating, drinking and being born, understand
this: the body, as a body, was born and was fed with food suited to it. But God the Word
Himself, who was united with the body while ordering all things, made Himself known by the
works He did in the body, not as a man but as God the Word. These things are said about
Him because the body that ate, was born and suffered belonged to no one else but the Lord.
And since He had become man, it was fitting that these things be said of Him as of a man,
so that He would be shown to have a body in truth and not in appearance only.[38] 2 But
just as He was recognized as bodily present from these things, so by the works He did
through the body He made Himself known as the Son of God. For this reason He cried out to
the unbelieving Jews: “If I do not do the works of my Father, do not believe me. But if I
do them, even if you do not believe me, believe my works, so that you may know and
understand that the Father is in me and I in the Father.”[39] [John 10:37-38]

3 For though He is invisible, He is known by the works of creation. In the same way, now
that He has become man and is not seen as God in the body, it can be known from His works
that the one doing them is not a man, but the Power and Word of God. [Romans 1:20] 4 For
He gave orders to the demons and they were driven out. That is not a human work, but a
divine one. Or who could watch Him healing the diseases to which the human race is
subject, and still think Him a man and not God? He cleansed lepers, made the lame walk,
opened the ears of the deaf, and gave sight to the blind. In short, He drove every disease
and every sickness away from people. From these works even the most casual observer could
see His divinity. Who could see Him give back what was missing to those whose birth had
left them lacking, and open the eyes of the man born blind, and not realize that the birth
of human beings was under His control, and that He was its Maker and Creator? The one who
gives back what a man did not receive at birth must clearly be Lord of human birth as
well.[40] [Matthew 11:5; Matthew 4:23; John 9:1]

5 For this reason, when He first came down to us, He formed His body for Himself from a
virgin. In this way He gave everyone no small sign of His divinity: the One who formed
this body is also the Maker of all the others. For who could see a body come from a virgin
alone, without a man, and not conclude that the One who appears in it is the Maker and
Lord of other bodies too? 6 Or who could see the nature of water changed and turned into
wine, and not understand that the one who did this is Lord and Creator of the nature of
all water? For this reason also He stepped onto the sea as its master and walked on it as
on dry land, giving those who saw it a sign of His lordship over all things. And when He
fed so great a crowd from so little, supplying abundance Himself where there was nothing,
so that five thousand were filled from five loaves and as much again was left over, what
else did He make known but that He is the Lord whose providence governs all things?[41]
[John 2:9; Matthew 14:25; Matthew 14:20-21]

CHAPTER 19

Man, Unmoved by Nature, Was to Be Taught to Know God by that Sacred Manhood, Whose Deity
All Nature Confessed, Especially in His Death.

1 The Saviour thought it good to do all these things for this reason. Men had not known
His providence in all things, and had not perceived His divinity through creation. So at
least from the works of His body they might look up again and, through Him, gain an idea
of the knowledge of the Father. From particular acts they would reason out, as I said
before, His providence over the whole. 2 For who could see His authority over demons, or
see the demons confess that He is their Lord, and still be doubtful in his mind whether
this is the Son of God, and His Wisdom and His Power? [1 Corinthians 1:24] 3 He even made
creation itself break its silence. The marvel is that at His death, or rather at the very
trophy of victory over death, the cross, all creation confessed that the One who was known
in the body and suffered there was not merely a man, but the Son of God and Saviour of
all. The sun turned away, the earth shook, the mountains were split, and all were struck
with fear. These things showed that Christ on the cross was God, and that all creation was
His servant, bearing witness by its fear to the presence of its Master.[42] [Matthew
27:45; Matthew 27:51]

4 In this way, then, God the Word showed himself to people through his works. It is
fitting next to tell of the end of his life and sojourn in the body, and to describe what
the death of his body was like. This is especially so because it is the main point of our
faith, and everyone without exception talks about it constantly. You will then see that
from this also, no less than from the rest, Christ is known to be God and the Son of God.

CHAPTER 20

None, Then, Could Bestow Incorruption, But He Who Had Made, None Restore the Likeness of
God, Save His Own Image, None Quicken, But the Life, None Teach, But the Word. And He, to
Pay Our Debt of Death, Must Also Die for Us, and Rise Again as Our First-Fruits from the
Grave. Mortal Therefore His Body Must Be; Corruptible, His Body Could Not Be.

1 We have now said in part, as far as we were able and as far as we could understand it,
why he appeared in a body. No one else could change the corruptible into incorruption
except the Savior himself, who in the beginning also made all things out of nothing. No
one else could re-create in human beings what is made according to the image, except the
Image of the Father. No one else could make the mortal immortal, except our Lord Jesus
Christ, who is Life itself. And no one else could teach about the Father and tear down the
worship of idols, except the Word who orders all things and who alone is the true, only-
begotten Son of the Father.[43] 2 But the debt owed by all still had to be paid. As I said
before, all owed it to die, and that was the main reason he came among us. So, after the
proofs of his deity from his works, he went on to offer the sacrifice on behalf of all. He
handed over his own temple to death in place of all. By this he would set everyone free
from guilt for the old transgression, and also show himself stronger than death,
displaying his own body incorruptible as the firstfruits of the resurrection of all.[44]
[1 Corinthians 15:20]

3 Do not be surprised that we often say the same things about the same subjects. We are
speaking of God’s good pleasure, so we explain the same thought in several ways. We do not
want to seem to leave something out and be blamed for speaking inadequately. It is better
to be criticized for repeating ourselves than to omit something that ought to be written
down. 4 Now the body shared the common nature of all, for it was a human body. It was
formed by a new kind of miracle, from a virgin alone. Even so, it was mortal, and
therefore it died, as bodies like it do. But because the Word had come upon it, it no
longer decayed according to its own nature. Because the Word of God dwelt in it, it was
beyond the reach of corruption. 5 So two astonishing things happened at once. The death of
all was fulfilled in the Lord’s body, and death and corruption were wiped out because of
the Word who was with that body. Death was needed, and death had to be suffered on behalf
of all, so that the debt owed by all might be paid.

6 So, as I said before, the Word could not die, because he was immortal. He therefore took
for himself a body that could die. He did this to offer it as his own in place of all.
Because he had come into that body, its suffering on behalf of all was his own suffering.
In this way he would put an end to the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil,
and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by fear of death.[45] [Hebrews
2:14-15]

CHAPTER 21

Death Brought to Nought by the Death of Christ. Why Then Did Not Christ Die Privately, or
in a More Honourable Way? He Was Not Subject to Natural Death, But Had to Die at the Hands
of Others. Why Then Did He Die? Nay But for that Purpose He Came, and But for That, He
Could Not Have Risen.

1 Indeed, now that the common Savior of all has died for us, we who believe in Christ no
longer die the death that the law threatened, as people did before. That sentence has
ended. Corruption has been stopped and wiped out by the grace of the resurrection. So now
we are dissolved only because our bodies are mortal, at the time God has set for each of
us, so that we may gain a better resurrection.[46] [Hebrews 11:35] 2 We are like seeds
thrown into the ground. We do not perish when we are dissolved, but as if sown, we will
rise again, since death has been brought to nothing by the grace of the Savior. This is
why the blessed Paul, who became a guarantor of the resurrection for all, says: “This
corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. And when
this mortal puts on immortality, then the word that is written will come to pass: ‘Death
is swallowed up in victory. Where, O death, is your sting?’”[47] [1 Corinthians 15:53-55]

3 Someone might say: “If it was necessary for him to give his body to death in place of
all, why did he not lay it down privately, as a man might? Why did he go as far as being
crucified? It would have been more fitting to lay his body aside with honor than to endure
a death like this, with such shame.” 4 But see whether this objection is not merely human.
What the Savior did is truly divine, and for many reasons worthy of his deity. First, the
death that comes to human beings comes because of the weakness of their nature. They
cannot last for long, so they break down in time. That is why illnesses come upon them,
and they grow weak and die. But the Lord is not weak. He is the Power of God, the Word of
God, and Life itself. 5 If he had laid aside his body somewhere in private, on a bed, as
people usually do, he too would have been thought to suffer this because of the weakness
of his nature, and to have nothing more than other men. But he was Life and the Word of
God, and the death on behalf of all had to take place. So, because he was life and power,
the body was kept strong in him.

6 But since death had to take place, he did not take the occasion for it from himself. He
received it from others, so that he could complete the sacrifice. For it was not right
that the Lord, who healed the diseases of others, should fall sick himself. Nor was it
right for that body to lose its strength, when in it he strengthened the weaknesses of
others. 7 Why then did he not prevent death, as he prevented sickness? Because he had the
body for this very purpose. It was unfitting for him to prevent death, so that the
resurrection would not be hindered. But it was again unfitting for sickness to come before
his death, so that it would not be thought a weakness of the One who was in the body. Did
he not hunger, then? Yes, he hungered, because hunger belongs to the body. But he did not
perish from hunger, because of the Lord who wore that body. So even though he died as the
ransom for all, he did not see corruption. For his body rose again whole, since it
belonged to no one else but to Life itself.[48] [1 Timothy 2:6; Acts 2:31]

CHAPTER 22

But Why Did He Not Withdraw His Body from the Jews, and So Guard Its Immortality? (1) It
Became Him Not to Inflict Death on Himself, and Yet Not to Shun It. (2) He Came to Receive
Death as the Due of Others, Therefore It Should Come to Him from Without. (3) His Death
Must Be Certain, to Guarantee the Truth of His Resurrection. Also, He Could Not Die from
Infirmity, Lest He Should Be Mocked in His Healing of Others.

1 “But,” someone might say, “he should have hidden from the plot of the Jews, so as to
keep his body immortal altogether.” Let such a person hear that this too was unfitting for
the Lord. The Word of God, being Life, could not properly give death to his own body from
himself. In the same way it was not suitable for him to run away from the death that
others gave. Rather, he should pursue it until he had destroyed it. So it was reasonable
that he neither laid his body aside by himself, nor fled from the Jews when they plotted
against him. 2 This did not show weakness in the Word. On the contrary, it made him known
as Savior and Life. He waited for death in order to destroy it, and he hurried to complete
the death offered to him for the salvation of all. 3 And besides, the Savior came to
complete not his own death but the death of men. So he did not lay aside his body by a
death of his own, for being Life he had none. He received the death that came from men, so
that he might completely abolish it when it came against him in his own body.

4 Then there is this too, from which one can reasonably see why the Lord’s body met such
an end. The Lord was especially concerned about the resurrection of the body, which he was
going to bring about. This was to be the trophy of victory over death. He would show it to
all and convince all that he had removed corruption, and that from then on their bodies
would be incorruptible. As a pledge and a sign of the resurrection that will come to all,
he kept his own body incorrupt. 5 Again, suppose the body had been sick, and the Word had
been separated from it in the sight of all. It would have been unfitting for the one who
healed the diseases of others to overlook his own instrument wasting away in sickness. How
would people have believed that he drove out the weaknesses of others, if his own temple
was weak in him? Either he would have been laughed at as unable to drive out sickness, or,
if he was able but did not do it, he would have been thought unloving toward others too.

CHAPTER 23

Necessity of a Public Death for the Doctrine of the Resurrection.

1 Suppose instead that he had hidden his body away, without any sickness or pain, in
private and by himself, in a corner, or in a desert place, or in a house, or anywhere at
all. Then suppose he had suddenly appeared again and said that he had been raised from the
dead. Everyone would have thought he was telling tales. His words about the resurrection
would have been believed much less, since there would have been no one at all to bear
witness to his death. But death must come before resurrection, for there can be no
resurrection unless death comes first. So if the death of his body had taken place
somewhere in secret, with the death not seen and not before witnesses, his resurrection
too would have been unseen and without witnesses.[49] 2 Or why, when He had risen, did He
proclaim the resurrection, yet cause His death to happen out of sight? Or why did He drive
out demons in the sight of all, make the man blind from birth see, and change the water
into wine, so that through these things He would be believed to be the Word of God? Why,
then, would He not show His mortal body to be incorruptible in the sight of all, so that
He would be believed to be Himself the Life?[50] [John 9:1; John 2:9]

3 How could His disciples have spoken boldly about the resurrection if they could not say
that He had first died? And how could they have been believed, when they said that death
came first and then the resurrection, unless the people before whom they spoke so boldly
could themselves witness to His death? Even as it was, His death and resurrection took
place in the sight of everyone, and still the Pharisees of that time would not believe.
They even forced those who had seen the resurrection to deny it. If these things had
happened in secret, surely they would have thought up many more excuses for unbelief.
[Matthew 28:12-15] 4 And how could the end of death, and the victory over it, have been
shown, unless He had called death out before the eyes of all and proved it dead, now
emptied of its power by the incorruption of His body?

CHAPTER 24

Further Objections Anticipated. He Did Not Choose His Manner of Death; For He Was to Prove
Conqueror of Death in All or Any of Its Forms: (Simple of a Good Wrestler). The Death
Chosen to Disgrace Him Proved the Trophy Against Death: Moreover a Preserved His Body
Undivided.

1 We must also answer in advance what others might say. Someone may perhaps object: “If
His death had to take place in the sight of all, and with witnesses, so that the account
of His resurrection would be believed, then He should at least have devised some glorious
death for Himself, if only to avoid the shame of the cross.” 2 But if He had done this, He
would have given grounds for suspecting that He had power only over the death He had
devised for Himself, and not over every death. There would still have been just as much of
an excuse for disbelieving the resurrection. So death came upon His body not by His own
choosing but by the plotting of others, so that whatever death they brought against the
Saviour, He might completely destroy it. 3 Think of a noble wrestler, great in skill and
courage. He does not choose his opponents himself, lest he give the impression that he is
afraid of some of them. He leaves the choice to the spectators, especially if they happen
to be his enemies, so that whoever they match him against, he may throw him and be
believed stronger than them all. In the same way, Christ, who is the Life of all, our Lord
and Saviour, did not devise a death for His own body, so that He would not appear to be
afraid of some other death. Instead He accepted and endured on the cross the death that
others inflicted, above all His enemies. They thought it terrible, shameful and something
to be avoided. He did this so that, once this death was destroyed, He Himself might be
believed to be the Life, and the power of death might be completely brought to nothing.
[Hebrews 2:14]

4 So something amazing and unexpected has happened. The death they thought would bring Him
disgrace became a trophy of victory over death itself. For this reason He did not undergo
the death of John, whose head was cut off, nor was He sawn in two as Isaiah was. In this
way He kept His body undivided and whole even in death, so that those who want to divide
the Church would have no pretext.[51] [Matthew 14:10; Hebrews 11:37]

CHAPTER 25

Why the Cross, of All Deaths? (1) He Had to Bear the Curse for Us. (2) on It He Held Out
His Hands to Unite All, Jews and Gentiles, in Himself. (3) He Defeated the “Prince of the
Powers of the Air” In His Own Region, Clearing the Way to Heaven and Opening for Us the
Everlasting Doors.

1 That is our answer to those outside the Church who pile up arguments for themselves. But
suppose someone from among us asks, not out of love of arguing but out of eagerness to
learn, why He endured the cross and not some other kind of death. Let him also hear that
no other way than this was good for us, and that the Lord rightly suffered this for our
sake. 2 He came to bear the curse that lay upon us. How else could He have become a curse,
unless He accepted the death that is marked out as a curse? That death is the cross. For
so it is written: “Cursed is he who hangs on a tree.”[52] [Galatians 3:13; Deuteronomy
21:23] 3 Again, the Lord’s death is the ransom for all. By His death the dividing wall
that separated us is broken down, and the calling of the nations comes about. How could He
have called us to Himself if He had not been crucified? For only on the cross does a
person die with his arms stretched out. So it was fitting for the Lord to endure this too,
and to stretch out His hands, so that with one hand He might draw the ancient people and
with the other those from the nations, and join both together in Himself.[53] [Ephesians
2:14; 1 Timothy 2:6]

4 This is what He Himself said, showing by what kind of death He would ransom all: “When I
am lifted up, I will draw all people to Myself.”[54] [John 12:32-33] 5 Again, the devil is
the enemy of our race. He fell from heaven and now roams about in the air down here. There
he rules over the demons who are with him, since they are like him in disobedience.
Through them he produces illusions in people who are deceived, and he tries to block those
who are going up. The apostle speaks of this: “according to the ruler of the power of the
air, of the one now working in the sons of disobedience.” But the Lord came to throw the
devil down, to clear the air, and to build for us a road up into heaven. As the apostle
said, this road is “through the veil, that is, his flesh.” This had to happen through
death. What other death could accomplish it than one that takes place in the air, that is,
the cross? Only a man who is put to death on a cross dies in the air. So it was fitting
that the Lord endured this death.[55] [Ephesians 2:2; Hebrews 10:20]

6 Lifted up in this way, he cleared the air of the devil’s plotting and of every plot of
the demons. He said, “I was watching Satan fall like lightning.” And he made a new road up
into heaven, as he says again: “Lift up your gates, you rulers, and be lifted up, you
everlasting gates.” The Word himself did not need the gates opened, since he is Lord of
all. Nothing he had made was shut against its Maker. We were the ones who needed it, and
he carried us up through his own body. Just as he offered that body to death on behalf of
all, so through it he again made a road up into the heavens.[56] [Luke 10:18; Psalm 24:7;
Hebrews 10:20]

CHAPTER 26

Reasons for His Rising on the Third Day. (1) Not Sooner for Else His Real Death Would Be
Denied, Nor (2) Later; To (A) Guard the Identity of His Body, (B) Not to Keep His
Disciples Too Long in Suspense, Nor (C) to Wait Till the Witnesses of His Death Were
Dispersed, or Its Memory Faded.

1 So the death on the cross for our sake was fitting and suitable. The reason for it has
been shown to be reasonable in every way, and the arguments for it are sound: the
salvation of all had to come through the cross and in no other way. Even on the cross he
did not leave himself hidden. On the contrary, he made creation bear witness to the
presence of its Maker. But he did not allow the temple of his body to remain dead for
long. He only showed it dead, by letting death come into contact with it, and then raised
it straight away on the third day. He carried away, as trophies and victories over death,
the incorruption and freedom from suffering that came to his body.[57] [John 2:21] 2 He
could have raised his body at the very moment of death and shown it alive. But the
Saviour, with good foresight, did not do this. Someone could have said that he had not
died at all, or that death had not fully touched him, if he had shown the resurrection
immediately.

3 Perhaps, too, if the interval between his death and resurrection had been only two days,
the fame of his incorruption would have been unclear. So that his body might be shown to
be dead, the Word waited through one day in between, and on the third day showed it
incorruptible to everyone.[58] 4 So, to prove that death had really taken place in the
body, he raised it on the third day. 5 But he also did not want to raise it after a long
time, when it had completely decayed, and so be disbelieved, as though he had brought back
some other body and not the same one. Over time a person might come to distrust what he
saw, and forget what had happened. For this reason he did not wait longer than three days,
and he did not keep in suspense for long those who had heard him speak about the
resurrection.

6 Instead, the word was still ringing in their ears, their eyes were still watching for
it, and their minds were still hanging on it. Those who had put him to death were still
alive on earth and on the spot, and they were witnesses of the death of the Lord’s body.
Then, after an interval of three days, the Son of God himself showed that the body that
had been dead was immortal and incorruptible. It was made plain to everyone that the body
had not died because of any weakness in the nature of the Word who lived in it. It died so
that death might be wiped out in it by the power of the Saviour.

CHAPTER 27

The Change Wrought by the Cross in the Relation of Death to Man.

1 That death has been destroyed, that the cross has become the victory over it, and that
it has no more strength but is truly dead: there is no small sign and a clear proof of
this. All the disciples of Christ despise death. They all go on the attack against it and
no longer fear it. By the sign of the cross and by faith in Christ they trample it down as
something dead. 2 Long ago, before the Saviour’s divine coming among us, death was
terrible even to the saints, and everyone mourned the dead as if they were perishing. But
now that the Saviour has raised his body, death is no longer terrible. All who believe in
Christ trample it underfoot as if it were nothing, and they would rather die than deny
their faith in Christ. For they truly know that when they die they are not destroyed. They
live, and through the resurrection they become incorruptible.

3 But the devil, who once wickedly exulted in death, was left as the only one truly dead
once death’s pains were loosed. Here is the proof. Before people believe in Christ, they
see death as terrible and are afraid of it. But when they pass over to faith in him and to
his teaching, they despise death so much that they eagerly rush toward it and become
witnesses of the resurrection that the Saviour accomplished against it. Even those still
young in years hurry to die, and not only men but women train themselves against death by
their disciplines. So weak has death become that even the women who were once deceived by
it now make sport of it as something dead and powerless.[59] [Acts 2:24] 4 When a tyrant
has been defeated by a true king and bound hand and foot, everyone who passes by makes fun
of him, striking him and jeering at him. They no longer fear his madness and savagery,
because of the king who conquered him. So too death has been conquered and publicly shamed
by the Saviour on the cross, and bound hand and foot. All who are in Christ, as they pass
by, trample on it. As witnesses to Christ they mock death, taunting it with what was
written against it long ago: “Where is your victory, O death? Where is your sting, O
Hades?”[60] [1 Corinthians 15:55; Hosea 13:14]

CHAPTER 28

This Exceptional Fact Must Be Tested by Experience. Let Those Who Doubt It Become
Christians.

1 Is this, then, a small proof of death’s weakness? Is it a small demonstration of the
Saviour’s victory over it, when boys and young girls in Christ look down on this present
life and train themselves to die? 2 By nature a human being is afraid of death and of the
dissolution of the body. But here is the most astonishing thing: the person who has put on
faith in the cross despises even what is natural, and for Christ’s sake is not afraid of
death. 3 Fire by nature burns. Suppose someone said there was a material that does not
fear its burning but even shows the fire to be weak. The asbestos of the Indians is said
to be like this. Then suppose a person who did not believe the report wanted to test it.
He would put on the unburnable material and touch it to the fire, and he would then be
convinced that the fire was weak.[61]

4 Or suppose someone wanted to see a tyrant in chains. He would go into the land and realm
of those who had defeated him, and there he would see the man who terrified others reduced
to weakness. In the same way, someone may still be unbelieving after all this: after so
many martyrs in Christ, and after the daily mockery of death by those who shine in Christ.
Even so, if he still has doubts in his mind about whether death has been abolished and
brought to an end, he does well to wonder at so great a matter. But let him not be hard in
unbelief, or shameless in the face of what is so plain. 5 As the man who takes the
fireproof material knows that fire cannot touch it, and as the man who wants to see the
tyrant bound goes into the realm of the conqueror, so let the one who doubts the victory
over death take up the faith of Christ and come fully into his teaching. Then he will see
death’s weakness and the victory over it. For many who once disbelieved and mocked later
believed, and then despised death so much that they became martyrs of Christ.

CHAPTER 29

Here Then are Wonderful Effects, and a Sufficient Cause, the Cross, to Account for Them,
as Sunrise Accounts for Daylight.

1 Now if death is trampled down by the sign of the cross and by faith in Christ, then it
is clear, with truth as judge, that no one else but Christ himself has displayed trophies
and victories over death and made it weak. 2 Death was strong before, and that is why it
was terrifying. But now, since the Saviour’s coming among us and the death and
resurrection of his body, death is despised. So it is plain that death has been abolished
and defeated by the very Christ who went up on the cross. 3 Suppose the sun rises after
the night and the whole earth is lit up by it. No one doubts that the sun which spread its
light everywhere is the same sun that drove out the darkness and lit up everything. In the
same way, death is now despised and trampled underfoot. This has been so ever since the
Saviour’s saving appearance in the body and the end he met on the cross. So it is
perfectly clear that he is the Saviour who appeared in the body, who abolished death, and
who displays trophies of victory over it every day in his own disciples. [2 Timothy 1:10]

4 Look at what happens. People who are weak by nature rush forward to meet death. They are
not afraid of its corruption, and they do not dread going down to Hades. With eager hearts
they challenge death, and they do not shrink from torture. For Christ’s sake they would
rather rush into death than go on living here. Or suppose someone watches men, women and
young children charging and leaping into death out of devotion to Christ. Who would be so
foolish, so unbelieving, or so crippled in mind as to fail to understand and reason this
out? Christ is the one these people bear witness to, and he himself gives each of them the
victory over death. He weakens death in each one who holds his faith and wears the sign of
the cross. 5 Think of someone who sees a serpent trampled underfoot, especially if he
knows how savage it used to be. He no longer doubts that it is dead and has lost all its
strength. Only a man whose mind is twisted, or whose bodily senses are unsound, would
think otherwise. And who, seeing a lion being played with by children, does not know that
it is either dead or has lost all its power?

6 These things can be seen with our own eyes, and we know they are true. In the same way,
death is now mocked and despised by those who believe in Christ. So let no one doubt any
longer, and let no one be unbelieving, that death has been abolished by Christ, and that
its corruption has been dissolved and brought to an end.

CHAPTER 30

The Reality of the Resurrection Prayed by Facts: (1) the Victory Over Death Described
Above: (2) the Wonders of Grace are the Work of One Living, of One Who is God: (3) If the
Gods Be (as Alleged) Real and Living, a Fortiori He Who Shatters Their Power is Alive.

1 What has been said so far is no small proof that death has been abolished, and that the
Lord’s cross is a trophy of victory over it. Then there is the resurrection of the body to
immortality that followed, accomplished by Christ, the common Saviour and true Life of
all. For those whose mind’s eye is healthy, the proof of it from what we can see is
clearer than any argument. 2 As our argument has shown, death has been abolished, and
because of the Lord everyone tramples it underfoot. Much more, then, did he himself first
trample it in his own body and abolish it. Now that death had been put to death by him,
what had to happen but that his body rise, and that this be shown as a trophy against
death? How could death have been shown to be abolished unless the Lord’s body had risen?
But if anyone finds this proof of his resurrection insufficient, let him be convinced of
what we say by what happens before his eyes.

3 When a man has died, he can accomplish nothing. His influence reaches only as far as the
grave, and then it stops. Actions, and effective work among people, belong only to the
living. So let anyone who wishes look, and let him be the judge, confessing the truth from
what he sees. 4 The Saviour is doing so many things among people. Every day, from every
direction, he is invisibly persuading so great a multitude, both of those who live in
Greece and of those in foreign lands, to come over to his faith, and all to obey his
teaching. Will anyone still be in doubt whether a resurrection was accomplished by the
Saviour, and whether Christ is alive, or rather whether he is himself the Life? [John
11:25] 5 Is it the work of a dead man to pierce people’s minds, so that they renounce
their ancestral laws and bow in worship to the teaching of Christ? Or, if he is not active
(for inactivity is the mark of a dead man), how does he stop active, living people from
their activity, so that the adulterer no longer commits adultery, the murderer no longer
murders, the wrongdoer no longer grasps for more, and the ungodly person begins to live in
godliness? And if he has not risen but is dead, how does he himself drive out, pursue and
overthrow the false gods that unbelievers say are alive, and the demons they worship?

6 Wherever Christ and faith in him are named, from that place all idolatry is torn down,
every deception of demons is exposed, and no demon can bear even the name. The moment it
hears it, it flees and is gone. This is not the work of a dead man but of one who lives,
and above all of God. 7 Besides, it would be ridiculous to say that the demons he pursues
and the idols he brings to nothing are alive, while the one who drives them away, who by
his own power keeps them from even appearing, and who is acknowledged by all to be the Son
of God, is dead.[62]

CHAPTER 31

If Power is the Sign of Life, What Do We Learn from the Impotence of Idols, for Good or
Evil, and the Constraining Power of Christ and of the Sign of the Cross? Death and the
Demons are by This Proved to Have Lost Their Sovereignty. Coincidence of the Above
Argument from Facts with that from the Personality of Christ.

1 Those who disbelieve the resurrection provide strong proof against themselves. They call
Christ dead, yet all the demons and all the gods they worship do not drive him out. On the
contrary, Christ shows all of them to be dead. 2 If it is true that a dead man does
nothing, yet the Saviour does so many things every day, then consider what he does. He
draws people to godliness, persuades them to virtue, teaches them about immortality, lifts
them to a longing for heaven, reveals the knowledge of the Father, breathes into them
power against death, shows himself to each one, and tears down the godlessness of idols.
The gods and demons of the unbelievers can do none of this. On the contrary, in the
presence of Christ they become dead, and their display is idle and empty. By the sign of
the cross all magic stops and all sorcery is made powerless. All idols are abandoned and
left desolate, every irrational pleasure is checked, and faith looks up from earth to
heaven. Whom, then, could anyone call dead? Christ, who does all these things? But working
is not the mark of a dead man. Or is it the one who does nothing at all but lies there as
if lifeless? That is the mark of the demons and idols, since they are dead.

3 The Son of God is living and active, and every day he works and brings about the
salvation of all. Death, meanwhile, is shown every day to have lost its strength, and the
idols and demons are shown to be the ones who are dead. As a result, no one can doubt any
longer the resurrection of his body.[63] [Hebrews 4:12] 4 Anyone who doubts the
resurrection of the Lord’s body seems to be ignorant of the power of the Word and Wisdom
of God. For if he took a body at all, and made it his own in the reasonable sequence our
argument has shown, what was the Lord to do with it? What end should the body have, once
the Word had come upon it? It could not fail to die, since it was mortal and was being
offered to death on behalf of all. That is why the Saviour prepared it for himself. But it
could not remain dead, because it had become the temple of Life. So it died as mortal, but
it rose again because of the Life that was in it. And the works are the sign of the
resurrection. [1 Corinthians 1:24]

CHAPTER 32

But Who is to See Him Risen, So as to Believe? Nay, God is Ever Invisible and Known by His
Works Only: and Here the Works Cry Out in Proof. If You Do Not Believe, Look at Those Who
Do, and Perceive the Godhead of Christ. The Demons See This, Though Men Be Blind. Summary
of the Argument So Far.

1 But if people do not believe he has risen because he is not seen, it is time for them to
deny the course of nature as well. For it is the very nature of God not to be seen, yet to
be known from his works, as was said above. [Romans 1:20] 2 If there were no works, they
would be right to disbelieve what does not appear. But if the works cry out and show it
plainly, why do they willingly deny the life of the resurrection when it is so clearly
seen? Even if their minds have been crippled, they can still see with their outward senses
the undeniable power and divinity of Christ. 3 A blind man may not see the sun, but when
he feels the warmth it gives, he knows there is a sun above the earth. In the same way,
those who argue against us may not yet believe, since they are still blind to the truth.
Yet at least they know his power through others who believe. So let them not deny the
divinity of Christ and the resurrection that he accomplished.

4 It is plain that if Christ were dead, he would not be driving out demons and plundering
idols. The demons would not obey a dead man. But if they are openly driven out by the
naming of his name, it is clear that he is not dead. This is all the more so because the
demons see even what people cannot see. If Christ were dead, they could tell, and they
would not obey him at all. 5 But as it is, the demons see what the ungodly do not believe:
that he is God. That is why they flee and fall down before him. They say what they also
said when he was in the body: “We know who you are: you are the Holy One of God,” and “Ah,
what have we to do with you, Son of God? I beg you, do not torment me.”[64] [Mark 1:24;
Luke 4:34; Luke 8:28] 6 So the demons confess him, and his works bear witness to him every
day. Let no one then shamelessly resist the truth. It is evident that the Saviour raised
his own body, and that he is the true Son of God. He is the Father’s own Word, Wisdom and
Power, coming from him. In later times he took a body for the salvation of all. He taught
the world about the Father and abolished death. He gave incorruption to all through the
promise of the resurrection, raising his own body as the first-fruits of it. By the sign
of the cross he displayed that body as a trophy of victory over death and its
corruption.[65] [1 Corinthians 1:24; 2 Timothy 1:10; 1 Corinthians 15:20]

CHAPTER 33

Unbelief of Jews and Scoffing of Greeks. The Former Confounded by Their Own Scriptures.
Prophecies of His Coming as God and as Man.

1 Since this is so, and the proof of the resurrection of the body and of the Saviour’s
victory over death is plain, come, let us now refute the unbelief of the Jews and the
mockery of the Greeks.[66] 2 For perhaps it is over these matters that the Jews disbelieve
and the Greeks laugh, ridiculing the unseemliness of the cross and the Word of God
becoming man. But our argument will not hesitate to take on both, especially since the
proofs against them are so clear. [1 Corinthians 1:23] 3 The Jews in their unbelief can be
refuted from the Scriptures they themselves read. Throughout, in short, every God-inspired
book teaches about these things, as their very words make plain. For the prophets long ago
announced beforehand the wonder of the Virgin and the birth that came from her. They said:
“Behold, the Virgin will be with child and bear a son, and they will call his name
Emmanuel, which, translated, means ‘God with us.’”[67] [Isaiah 7:14; Matthew 1:23]

4 Moses too, who was truly great and whom they believe to speak the truth, judged the
saying about the Saviour’s becoming man to be of great weight. Knowing it to be true, he
set it down in these words: “A star will rise out of Jacob, and a man out of Israel, and
he will crush the leaders of Moab.” And again: “How beautiful are your houses, Jacob, and
your tents, Israel: like shady valleys, like gardens by rivers, like tents which the Lord
pitched, like cedars beside the waters. A man will come out of his seed and will rule over
many nations.” And again Isaiah says: “Before the child knows how to call ‘father’ or
‘mother,’ he will take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria before the king of
the Assyrians.”[68] [Numbers 24:17; Numbers 24:5-7; Isaiah 8:4] 5 These words announce
beforehand that he will appear as a man. That the one who is coming is Lord of all, they
again foretell: “Behold, the Lord sits on a light cloud, and will come into Egypt, and the
handmade idols of Egypt will be shaken.” For it is from there too that the Father calls
him back, saying: “Out of Egypt I called my Son.”[69] [Isaiah 19:1; Hosea 11:1; Matthew
2:15]

CHAPTER 34

Prophecies of His Passion and Death in All Its Circumstances.

1 His death is not passed over in silence either. It is indicated very clearly in the
divine Scriptures. The prophets did not fear to speak of the reason for his death: that he
endures it not for his own sake but for the immortality and salvation of all. They also
spoke of the plotting of the Jews and the insults they heaped on him. They did this so
that no one would be ignorant of these events and so be led astray. 2 So they say: “A man
in affliction, who knows how to bear weakness, for his face is turned away. He was
dishonored and held in no account. He bears our sins and suffers pain for us. And we
considered him to be in toil, in affliction, and in ill-treatment. But he was wounded
because of our sins and made weak because of our lawless deeds. The discipline that brings
our peace was upon him, and by his bruise we were healed.” Marvel at the loving-kindness
of the Word: for our sake he is dishonored, so that we might be made honorable. “For all
of us,” it says, “like sheep have gone astray; man has gone astray in his own way. And the
Lord handed him over for our sins, and because he was ill-treated he does not open his
mouth. Like a sheep he was led to slaughter, and like a lamb silent before its shearer, so
he does not open his mouth. In his humiliation his judgment was taken away.”[70] [Isaiah
53:3-8]

3 Then, so that no one would take him for an ordinary man because of his suffering,
Scripture anticipates people’s suspicions. It also tells of the power at work on his
behalf and of how his nature is unlike ours, saying: “Who will declare his generation? For
his life is taken away from the earth. Because of the lawless deeds of the people he was
led to death. And I will give the wicked in return for his burial, and the rich in return
for his death, because he did no lawlessness, nor was deceit found in his mouth. And the
Lord wills to cleanse him from the affliction.”[71] [Isaiah 53:8-10]

CHAPTER 35

Prophecies of the Cross. How These Prophecies are Satisfied in Christ Alone.

1 But perhaps, having heard the prophecy about his death, you want to learn also what is
indicated about the cross. This too is not passed over in silence. The holy men have made
it clear, and very plainly. 2 Moses is the first to announce it in advance, with a loud
voice, saying: “You will see your life hanging before your eyes, and you will not
believe.”[72] [Deuteronomy 28:66] 3 And the prophets after him also bear witness to this,
saying: “But I, like a harmless lamb led away to be sacrificed, did not know it. They
devised evil against me, saying, ‘Come, let us put wood into his bread and wipe him out
from the land of the living.’”[73] [Jeremiah 11:19] 4 And again: “They dug through my
hands and my feet; they counted all my bones; they divided my garments among themselves,
and for my clothing they cast lots.”[74] 5 Now a death that is lifted up on high and takes
place on wood could be none other than the cross. Again, in no other kind of death are the
hands and feet pierced through except on the cross alone.

6 And since, through the Savior’s coming among us, all the nations everywhere began to
know God, the prophets did not leave this unmarked either. Mention of it is also found in
the holy writings. For, it says, “There shall be the root of Jesse, even he who rises to
rule the nations; in him the nations will hope.” These are a few proofs of what has
happened.[75] [Isaiah 11:10; Romans 15:12] 7 But the whole of Scripture is full of proofs
against the unbelief of the Jews. For which of the righteous men, holy prophets and
patriarchs recorded in the divine Scriptures ever had the origin of his body from a virgin
alone? Or what woman, without a man, has been able by herself to bring a human being into
existence? Was not Abel born of Adam, Enoch of Jared, Noah of Lamech, Abraham of Terah,
Isaac of Abraham, and Jacob of Isaac? Was not Judah born of Jacob, and Moses and Aaron of
Amram? Was not Samuel born of Elkanah, David of Jesse, Solomon of David, Hezekiah of Ahaz,
Josiah of Amon, Isaiah of Amoz, Jeremiah of Hilkiah, and Ezekiel of Buzi? Did not each one
have a father as the source of his birth? Who, then, is the one born of a virgin alone?
For the prophet took great care to point to this sign.[76] [Isaiah 7:14]

8 Whose birth was preceded by a star in the heavens, pointing out to the whole world the
one who was born? Moses, when he was born, was hidden by his parents. David was not even
heard of by his neighbors, since even the great Samuel did not know him, but asked whether
Jesse had yet another son. Abraham became known to those nearby only later, after he had
become great. But the witness to Christ’s birth was not a man. It was a star appearing in
heaven, the very place from which he was coming down.[77] [Matthew 2:2; Exodus 2:2]

CHAPTER 36

Prophecies of Christ’s Sovereignty, Flight into Egypt, &C.

1 What king has there ever been who reigned, and won victories over his enemies, before he
was strong enough to call out “father” or “mother”? Did not David begin to reign at
thirty, and Solomon as a young man? Did not Joash come to the throne at seven years old,
and Josiah, who was later still, take up the rule at about seven? Yet even at that age
these kings were strong enough to call out “father” or “mother.”[78] [Isaiah 8:4] 2 Who,
then, is the one who reigns and plunders his enemies almost before he is born? And what
king like that has there ever been in Israel or in Judah? Let the Jews search and tell us.
In what king have all the nations set their hope and found peace? Were the nations not
rather opposed to them on every side? [Isaiah 8:4] 3 As long as Jerusalem stood, there was
unending war against them, and everyone fought against Israel. The Assyrians oppressed
them, the Egyptians pursued them, and the Babylonians invaded them. Strangest of all, they
even had the Syrians, their neighbors, fighting against them. Did not David make war on
the people of Moab and cut down the Syrians? Did not Josiah have to guard against his
neighbors, and Hezekiah cower before the arrogance of Sennacherib? Did not Amalek take the
field against Moses, and the Amorites oppose him, and the people who lived in Jericho line
up in battle against Joshua son of Nun? In short, the nations had no friendly treaties
with Israel at all. So it is worth finding out who it is in whom the nations place their
hope. There must be such a one, since the prophet cannot have spoken falsely.[79]

4 Which of the holy prophets, or of the patriarchs of old, died on a cross for the
salvation of all? Who was wounded and killed for the healing of all? Which of the
righteous men or kings went down into Egypt so that, by his going down, the idols of the
Egyptians came to an end? Abraham went down, and idolatry still prevailed over everyone.
Moses was born there, and the worship of those who were led astray went on there just the
same.[80] [Isaiah 53:5; Isaiah 19:1]

----------------------------------------

NOTES

[1] The Greek word of address, Makarie, means “blessed one.” The older translation takes
it as a man’s name, Macarius, and adds “worthy of that name” to bring out the pun. Nothing
else is known of such a person, and some readers take the word simply as a warm form of
address (“blessed friend”).

[2] The Greek phrase kath’ heautōn means “against themselves.” It probably means that the
Epicureans’ claim tells against them, since it contradicts what anyone can see. The older
translation’s “in their self-contempt” is a loose interpretation.

[3] The older translation adds “out of nothing” in “Creator out of nothing.” The Greek
says only that God would be a craftsman (technitēs) and not a creator “unto being”
(ktistēs eis to einai), that is, one who brings things into existence.

[4] Athanasius probably has in mind groups such as the Marcionites and some Gnostic
teachers, who distinguished the creator of the world from the Father of Jesus Christ.

[5] The Gospel passages are Matthew 19:4–6 (compare Mark 10:6–9) and John 1:3. Athanasius’
wording of Matthew differs slightly from the standard Greek text, and I have translated
his Greek as he gave it.

[6] “The Shepherd” is the Shepherd of Hermas, an early Christian writing that is not in
the Bible. Here Athanasius calls it a “most useful book” rather than Scripture. Later, in
his Festal Letter 39 (AD 367), he listed it among books to be read by new believers,
though it was not part of the canon. The quotation is from its Mandate 1.

[7] Hebrews 11:3. Like the church of Alexandria generally, Athanasius counted Hebrews
among Paul’s letters.

[8] “Rational” translates logikoi, which is related to Logos (Word): humans are “word-
endowed” or reasoning beings because they share in the Word.

[9] Genesis 2:16–17 (Greek Old Testament). “You shall die by death” (thanatō
apothaneisthe) is the Greek translators’ rendering of a Hebrew idiom that repeats the verb
for emphasis (“dying you shall die”). Athanasius reads it as a death that lasts on in
corruption, not a single event.

[10] The word “not” (mē) before “being” in the last clause is supplied by editors; it
gives the sense “corruption into non-being.”

[11] The Wisdom quotation is Wisdom of Solomon 6:18. The second quotation is Psalm 82:6–7
(Psalm 81 in the Greek Old Testament), in its Greek wording.

[12] The Greek “τέλος” can mean “end” or “goal.” The older English “to meet the end of
death” is unclear. The sense here is that he came to bring death to its end.

[13] The quotations are from 2 Corinthians 5:14–15 and Hebrews 2:9. In the first,
Athanasius’s wording differs slightly from the standard text of 2 Corinthians: he has “we”
and “us” where Paul has “those who live” and “them,” and “rose from the dead” where Paul
has “was raised.” The words “our Lord Jesus Christ” are Athanasius’s own, added after the
quotation to name the one meant.

[14] The quotation is from Hebrews 2:10. The Greek word “ἀρχηγός” can mean “founder,”
“leader” or “pioneer.”

[15] The quotation is from Hebrews 2:14–15.

[16] “Will show it in its own times” borrows the wording of 1 Timothy 6:15, where it
refers to Christ’s appearing.

[17] In Greek, “rational” (logikoi) comes from the same root as “Word” (Logos). For
Athanasius, to be rational is to share in the Word, which is why the older English adds
“(and Reason).”

[18] “According to his own image and likeness” echoes Genesis 1:26.

[19] “Serving the creation instead of the Creator” echoes Romans 1:25.

[20] “Their desires” could mean either the people’s own desires or the demons’ desires.
The Greek does not make clear which.

[21] The Greek word for “without reason” (alogos) is the opposite of “rational” (logikos),
and both are built on logos, “reason” or “word.” Earlier in the book (section 3),
Athanasius says humans were made rational by being given a share in the Word (Logos). So
to become “without reason” is, for him, to lose that share.

[22] The Greek here reads “tisai,” which is probably a copying error. Standard editions
read “anaktisai” (“re-create”), which the older translation follows (“create afresh”).

[23] The Greek text given here breaks off in the middle of a word (ana-ty-). Standard
editions complete it as “anatypoutai,” “is traced out again,” which is how the last clause
is translated.

[24] “According to the image” echoes Genesis 1:26–27, where man is made “according to the
image” of God.

[25] The Greek as given here breaks off at “didas-.” The word is almost certainly
didaskontos, “teaching,” as the older English has it.

[26] “About him” in the Greek could mean the Father, as the older translation takes it, or
the Word himself.

[27] The Greek has no verb in “from below, that is, through the works of the body.”
“Taught” is supplied, as in the older translation.

[28] The quotation is 1 Corinthians 1:21.

[29] The verb rendered “reached out to” (proslambanei) can mean “take to oneself,” “lay
hold of,” or “receive”; the older translation renders it “meets ... half-way.”

[30] The older translation says the demons were cast out “by the Word” and adds that he
“was God.” The Greek says “by the Lord” and “that this one alone is the Word of God.”

[31] Compare Luke 19:10, “to seek and to save what was lost.” Athanasius quotes loosely,
giving “to save and to find.”

[32] The older translation says the Word “disguised Himself.” That is an interpretation.
The Greek says more simply that He “submitted himself to appear through a body.”

[33] Ephesians 3:17–19.

[34] Where the older translation says the Word was “revealing Himself” everywhere, the
Greek says He “spread Himself out” or “unfolded Himself.” This picks up the four
dimensions in the Ephesians passage just quoted.

[35] The older translation’s “visible enough” adds the word “enough.” The Greek says
simply that He made Himself visible through the body by remaining in it.

[36] The older translation adds “any change” and “[His glory] dulled.” The Greek says only
that He Himself did not suffer when the Virgin gave birth, nor was He defiled by being in
a body.

[37] The closing words echo 1 Peter 2:22 (and Isaiah 53:9). Athanasius says only “it
says,” without naming a source.

[38] The Greek word here, theologoi (“those who speak of God”), refers to the writers of
Scripture, not to theologians in the modern sense.

[39] John 10:37–38.

[40] Compare Matthew 11:5 and 4:23 for the list of healings. The man born blind is in John
9.

[41] Compare John 2:1–11 (water into wine), Matthew 14:13–21 (the feeding of the five
thousand) and Matthew 14:22–33 (walking on the sea).

[42] Compare Matthew 27:45, 51–54 and Luke 23:44–45, which speak of darkness, an
earthquake and rocks being split; Athanasius says “mountains” where Matthew has “rocks.”

[43] The Greek says “what is according to the image” (to kat’ eikona), and the sentence is
rendered that way here.

[44] “His own temple” means his body. Athanasius uses this image for Christ’s body several
times in the book. Compare John 2:21, where Jesus “was speaking about the temple of his
body.”

[45] The last part is taken almost word for word from Hebrews 2:14–15 and worked into
Athanasius’s own sentence. Only the words “through death” are missing.

[46] “A better resurrection” echoes Hebrews 11:35.

[47] This is 1 Corinthians 15:53–55 as it stands in Athanasius’s text, which lacks Paul’s
“when this corruptible puts on incorruption” and his question “Where, O death, is your
victory?”

[48] “Did not see corruption” echoes the wording of Psalm 16:10 as it is used in Acts
2:27, 2:31 and 13:35–37.

[49] “In a corner” is the Greek phrase also used in Acts 26:26, there meaning something
done in secret.

[50] The Greek text printed here reads “you drove out” (second person). This seems to be a
slip for “he drove out,” and the translation follows the sense.

[51] Athanasius refers to a tradition about Isaiah being sawn in two; it is not told in
the Old Testament itself, though Hebrews 11:37 may allude to such a tradition.

[52] “Become a curse” echoes Galatians 3:13, which quotes Deuteronomy 21:23. Athanasius’s
wording of the quotation lacks the “everyone” found in Galatians.

[53] “The dividing wall” uses the wording of Ephesians 2:14, and “join both together in
Himself” echoes the same passage (Ephesians 2:14-16).

[54] John 12:32. “Draw” is the same verb Athanasius used just above for the outstretched
hands drawing both peoples.

[55] The veil quotation is from Hebrews 10:20.

[56] The second quotation is Psalm 24:7 (Psalm 23:7 in the Greek Old Testament). It
follows the Greek version, which addresses “rulers.” The Hebrew reads “Lift up your heads,
O gates.”

[57] Creation bearing witness probably refers to the signs at the crucifixion: the
darkness and the earthquake (Matthew 27:45, 51). Athanasius mentions these earlier in the
book (chapter 19).

[58] The Greek of the opening clause is obscure. This version takes it to mean an interval
of only “two days,” but other readings of the phrase are possible.

[59] The women “once deceived” may allude to Eve (Genesis 3:13; compare 1 Timothy 2:14).

[60] The quotation is 1 Corinthians 15:55, which draws on Hosea 13:14. Athanasius has
“Hades” in the second line, as many manuscripts of 1 Corinthians do. Most modern Bibles
read “death” in both lines.

[61] “Asbestos” translates the Greek amianton, which means “undefiled.” It was an ancient
name for asbestos, which could be woven into fireproof cloth. Here it is said to come from
India.

[62] The Greek says only “acknowledged by all.” This could mean all people, or it could
refer back to the demons, who in the Gospels confess Jesus as Son of God (Mark 3:11; Luke
4:41).

[63] “Living and active” echoes Hebrews 4:12, where “the word of God is living and
active.” Athanasius applies the phrase to the Son, the Word.

[64] The first saying is from Mark 1:24 and Luke 4:34. The second appears to combine
several Gospel passages, probably quoted from memory: “Ah” (Luke 4:34), “what have we to
do with you, Son of God?” (Matthew 8:29), and “I beg you, do not torment me” (Luke 8:28).

[65] “Wisdom and Power” of God recalls 1 Corinthians 1:24 (“Christ the power of God and
the wisdom of God”). “First-fruits” recalls 1 Corinthians 15:20, where Christ is “the
first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep.”

[66] “Greeks” here, as often in early Christian writers, means pagans in general, that is,
non-Jewish, non-Christian people, not an ethnic group.

[67] The quotation is Isaiah 7:14 in its Greek (Septuagint) form. The words “they will
call” and “which, translated, means ‘God with us’” come from Matthew 1:23, which
Athanasius follows here.

[68] The quotations are Numbers 24:17, Numbers 24:5-7 and Isaiah 8:4. Athanasius uses the
Greek (Septuagint) form, so some wording differs from English Old Testaments, which follow
the Hebrew.

[69] The quotations are Isaiah 19:1 (Septuagint) and Hosea 11:1. The Greek word for
“handmade things” (χειροποίητα) is a common biblical term for idols, and the Hebrew of
Isaiah 19:1 has “idols.” The Septuagint of Hosea 11:1 reads “I called his children out of
Egypt.” Athanasius’s wording, “my Son,” matches Matthew 2:15 and the Hebrew.

[70] The quotation is Isaiah 53:3-8 in the Greek (Septuagint) form, which differs in
places from the Hebrew-based English Bibles; the Greek plēgē means “blow” or “wound,” and
mōlōps a “welt” or “bruise” left by a blow.

[71] The quotation is Isaiah 53:8-10 (Septuagint). “Generation” can mean his birth, his
descent, or his contemporaries. Athanasius reads it as pointing to his unlike nature.

[72] Compare Deuteronomy 28:66, which Athanasius quotes freely. There the words describe a
person’s life “hanging” in doubt under the curse. Athanasius, like other early Christian
writers, takes “your life” as a title for Christ hanging on the cross.

[73] Compare Jeremiah 11:19 (Septuagint). The Greek word for “wood” (xylon) is also used
of the cross, which is why Christian writers saw a reference to it here.

[74] Psalm 21:17-19 in the Greek numbering (Psalm 22:16-18 in English Bibles); the Greek
verb literally means “dug,” which many English Bibles render “pierced.”

[75] Isaiah 11:10 in the Greek Old Testament. Paul quotes the verse in the same form in
Romans 15:12.

[76] “The prophet” is probably Isaiah, whose sign of the virgin (Isaiah 7:14) Athanasius
cited earlier in the work.

[77] Compare Matthew 2:2, 9 (the star); Exodus 2:2 (Moses hidden); 1 Samuel 16:11 (Samuel
asks Jesse about his sons).

[78] Compare 2 Samuel 5:4 (David at thirty) and 2 Kings 11:21 (Joash at seven). Athanasius
gives Josiah’s age as “about seven,” but 2 Kings 22:1 and 2 Chronicles 34:1 say he was
eight.

[79] Joshua son of Nun: the Greek reads “Jesus son of Naue,” because “Joshua” and “Jesus”
are the same name in Greek.

[80] “Wounded ... for the healing of all” echoes Isaiah 53:5. The idols of Egypt failing
at the Lord’s coming echoes Isaiah 19:1, which Athanasius links with the child Jesus being
taken into Egypt (Matthew 2:13-15). Abraham’s journey to Egypt is in Genesis 12:10.


ON THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD (CHAPTERS 37–57)
===============================================

ON THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD continued

CHAPTER 37

Psalm XXII. 16, &C. Majesty of His Birth and Death. Confusion of Oracles and Demons in
Egypt.

1 Who among those commended in Scripture had his hands and feet pierced, or was hung on
wood at all and brought to his end on a cross for the salvation of all? Abraham died in
bed, breathing his last. Isaac and Jacob also died in bed, drawing up their feet. Moses
and Aaron died on the mountain. David died in his house, having suffered no plot from the
people. Even when Saul hunted for him, he was kept safe from harm. Isaiah was sawn in two,
but he was not hung on wood. Jeremiah was insulted, but he did not die under a sentence of
condemnation. Ezekiel suffered, but not for the people. His suffering was a sign of what
would happen to the people.[81] [Genesis 49:33] 2 Besides, even when these men suffered,
they were only men, like everyone else in their common nature. But the one the Scriptures
declare will suffer for all is called not simply a man but the Life of all, even though he
is like human beings in nature. For it says, “You will see your Life hanging before your
eyes,” and “Who will declare his generation?” For one can trace the family line of all the
saints back from the beginning and tell who each one was and where he came from. But the
divine words indicate that the generation of the one who is Life cannot be told.[82]
[Deuteronomy 28:66; Isaiah 53:8]

3 Who, then, is the one of whom the divine Scriptures say these things? Who is so great
that the prophets foretell so much about him? No one else is found in the Scriptures
except the common Savior of all, the Word of God, our Lord Jesus Christ. For he is the one
who came forth from a virgin and appeared on earth as a man, and whose family line
according to the flesh cannot be told. No one can name his father according to the flesh,
since his body came not from a man but from a virgin alone. [Isaiah 53:8] 4 Someone can
trace the family line of David, of Moses, and of all the patriarchs through their fathers.
But no one can describe the Savior’s family line according to the flesh as coming from a
man. He is the one who also made the star mark the birth of his body. For the Word was
coming down from heaven, so he had to have his sign from heaven too. And the King of
creation, when he came forth, had to be clearly recognized by the whole world.[83]

5 Indeed, he was born in Judea, and men from Persia came to worship him. He is the one
who, even before his appearing in the body, won the victory over the demons who opposed
him and raised trophies over idolatry. At any rate, all the people of the nations, from
everywhere, are renouncing the custom of their fathers and the godlessness of idols. They
now set their hope on Christ and enroll themselves under him, as you can see with your own
eyes.[84] [Matthew 2:1-2] 6 At no other time has the godlessness of the Egyptians ceased,
except when the Lord of all came down there in the body, riding, as it were, on a cloud.
He put an end to the error of idols and brought everyone over to himself, and through
himself to the Father.[85] [Isaiah 19:1] 7 He is the one who was crucified with the sun,
creation, and those who put him to death as witnesses. Through his death salvation has
come to all, and all creation has been ransomed. He is the Life of all. Like a sheep, he
handed over his own body to death as a substitute, for the salvation of all, even if the
Jews do not believe it.[86]

CHAPTER 38

Other Clear Prophecies of the Coming of God in the Flesh. Christ’s Miracles Unprecedented.

1 If they do not think these proofs are enough, let them at least be persuaded by other
oracles, ones that they themselves possess. Of whom do the prophets speak when they say:
“I became visible to those who were not seeking me. I was found by those who were not
asking for me. I said, ‘Here I am,’ to a nation that did not call on my name. I spread out
my hands to a disobedient and contradicting people”?[87] [Isaiah 65:1-2; Romans 10:20-21]
2 Who, then, is the one who became visible? One might ask the Jews this. If it is the
prophet himself, let them say when he was hidden, so that he could appear later. And what
kind of prophet is this, who came into view out of obscurity and also stretched out his
hands on a cross? None of the righteous did this. Only the Word of God did, who is
bodiless by nature, and who appeared in a body for our sake and suffered on our behalf.
[Isaiah 65:1-2]

3 Or if even this is not enough for them, let them at least be shamed by other passages,
seeing how clear the proof is. For Scripture says: “Be strong, you slack hands and
paralyzed knees. Take courage, you of little faith in your mind. Be strong, do not fear.
Look, our God repays with judgment. He himself will come and save us. Then the eyes of the
blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will hear. Then the lame man will leap like
a deer, and the tongue of the stammerers will be clear.”[88] [Isaiah 35:3-6] 4 What can
they say about this? How can they dare to look it in the face at all? The prophecy shows
that God is coming to dwell among us, and the signs make known the time of his coming. For
the blind seeing again, the lame walking, the deaf hearing, and the tongue of the
stammerers becoming clear are said to happen when the divine coming takes place. So let
them tell us when such signs ever happened in Israel, or where in Judea anything like this
took place. [Isaiah 35:5-6]

5 Naaman, a leper, was cleansed, but no deaf man heard and no lame man walked. Elijah and
Elisha raised a dead person, but no one blind from birth received sight. To raise a dead
person is truly a great thing, but it is not like the wonder worked by the Saviour. Yet if
Scripture did not stay silent about the leper and the widow’s dead son, then surely, if a
lame man had walked or a blind man had received sight, the account would not have failed
to report these things too. Since Scripture is silent about them, it is clear that they
had not happened before.[89] 6 When, then, did these things happen, if not when the Word
of God himself came in a body? And when did he come, if not when the lame walked, the
stammerers spoke clearly, the deaf heard, and those blind from birth received sight? The
Jews who saw it at that time said this very thing, since they had never heard of such
things happening at any other time: “Never since the world began has it been heard that
anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. If this man were not from God, he could do
nothing.”[90] [John 9:32-33]

CHAPTER 39

Do You Look for Another? But Daniel Foretells the Exact Time. Objections to This Removed.

1 But perhaps they too, being unable to keep fighting against plain facts, will not deny
what is written. Instead they will insist that they are still waiting for these things,
and that the Word of God has not yet come. They keep repeating this over and over, and
they do not blush as they shamelessly defy what is plain to see. 2 But on this point above
all they will be refuted, and not by us. The refutation comes from the very wise Daniel,
who marks both the present time and the divine coming of the Saviour. He says: “Seventy
weeks have been cut short for your people and for the holy city, for sin to be brought to
an end, and for sins to be sealed up, and for iniquities to be wiped out, and for
atonement to be made for iniquities, and for everlasting righteousness to be brought in,
and for vision and prophet to be sealed, and for a Holy of Holies to be anointed. You
shall know and understand, from the going out of the word to answer and to build
Jerusalem, until Christ the leader.”[91] [Daniel 9:24-25]

3 Perhaps with the other prophecies they can at least find excuses and put off what is
written to some future time. But what can they say to this, or how can they even face it?
For here the Christ is pointed out. The one to be anointed is announced as no mere man but
a Holy of Holies. Jerusalem is to stand until his coming, and after that prophet and
vision cease in Israel. [Daniel 9:24] 4 David was anointed long ago, and Solomon, and
Hezekiah. Yet in their time Jerusalem and the temple site still stood, and prophets were
prophesying: Gad, Asaph and Nathan, and after them Isaiah, Hosea, Amos and others.
Besides, these anointed men were themselves called holy, not Holy of Holies. But suppose
they bring up the captivity and say that Jerusalem did not exist because of it. What could
they say about the prophets? For long ago, when the people went down to Babylon, Daniel
and Jeremiah were there, and Ezekiel, Haggai and Zechariah were prophesying.[92]

CHAPTER 40

Argument (I)from the Withdrawal of Prophecy and Destruction of Jerusalem, (2) from the
Conversion of the Gentiles, and that to the God of Moses. What More Remains for the
Messiah to Do, that Christ Has Not Done?

1 So the Jews are talking nonsense, and they are putting off a time that has already come.
For when did prophet and vision cease from Israel, if not now, when Christ, the Holy of
Holies, has come? It is a sign, and a great mark, of the coming of the Word of God that
Jerusalem no longer stands, that no prophet is raised up, and that no vision is revealed
to them. And this is very reasonable. [Daniel 9:24] 2 Once the one who was signified has
come, what further need is there of those who signified him? Once the truth is present,
what further need is there of the shadow? This is why they prophesied until the one who is
Righteousness itself should come, the one who redeems the sins of all. This is also why
Jerusalem stood for so long: so that there they might practise beforehand the types of the
truth.

3 So when the Holy of Holies had come, it was natural that vision and prophecy were sealed
and that the kingdom of Jerusalem came to an end. For kings were anointed among them only
until the Holy of Holies was anointed. And Moses prophesies that the kingdom of the Jews
would stand until him, saying: “A ruler will not fail from Judah, nor a leader from his
loins, until the things reserved for him come, and he is the expectation of the
nations.”[93] [Genesis 49:10; Daniel 9:24] 4 So the Saviour himself cried out: “The law
and the prophets prophesied until John.” If the Jews now have a king, or a prophet, or a
vision, they are right to deny that the Christ has come. But if there is no king and no
vision, if all prophecy is now sealed, and the city and the temple have been taken, why do
they go so far in ungodliness and transgression that they see what has happened and yet
deny the Christ who has done these things? Why, when they see people from the nations
abandoning their idols and placing their hope, through Christ, in the God of Israel, do
they deny the Christ who was born in the flesh from the root of Jesse and who now reigns?
For if the nations were worshipping some other god, and did not confess the God of
Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses, then once more the Jews would be right to make the excuse
that God had not come.[94] [Matthew 11:13; Daniel 9:24; Isaiah 11:10]

5 But the nations worship the very God who gave the law to Moses and made the promise to
Abraham, the God whose word the Jews dishonoured. Why then do the Jews not recognise, or
rather why do they willingly overlook, that the Lord foretold by the Scriptures has shone
upon the world and appeared to it in bodily form? As the Scripture said: “The Lord God has
appeared to us.” And again: “He sent out his Word and healed them.” And again: “Not an
envoy, not an angel, but the Lord himself saved them.”[95] [Isaiah 63:9] 6 Their condition
is like that of a man whose mind is deranged. He sees the earth lit up by the sun, yet he
denies the sun that lights it. For what more could the one they are waiting for do when he
comes? Call the nations? They have already been called. Bring an end to prophet, king and
vision? That too has already happened. Expose the godlessness of idols? It has already
been exposed and condemned. Abolish death? It has already been abolished.

7 What, then, that the Christ was to do has not happened? What remains unfulfilled, that
the Jews should now rejoice and go on in unbelief? For as we can see, they have no king,
no prophet, no Jerusalem, no sacrifice and no vision. The whole earth is filled with the
knowledge of God, and people from the nations are leaving their godlessness and now taking
refuge, through the Word, our Lord Jesus Christ, with the God of Abraham. So it must be
clear, even to the utterly shameless, that Christ has come. He has shone on absolutely
everyone with his own light and given them the true and divine teaching about his
Father.[96] [Isaiah 11:9] 8 From these arguments, and from many more in the divine
Scriptures, one could fairly refute the Jews.

CHAPTER 41

Answer to the Greeks. Do They Recognise the Logos? If He Manifests Himself in the Organism
of the Universe, Why Not in One Body? for a Human Body is a Part of the Same Whole.

1 But one might well be astonished at the Greeks. They laugh at what deserves no mockery,
yet they are blind to their own shame, which they have set up in stones and wood and do
not see.[97] 2 Still, our account is not short of proofs. So let us also bring these
people to shame by sound reasoning, drawing chiefly on what we ourselves can see. For what
is absurd in what we say, or worthy of mockery? Is it simply that we say the Word has
appeared in a body? Yet even they will agree that this was not absurd, provided they
become friends of the truth. 3 If they deny altogether that there is a Word of God, they
act pointlessly, since they mock what they do not know. 4 But suppose they admit that
there is a Word of God. Suppose they admit that he is the ruler of the universe, that the
Father made the creation in him, that everything receives light, life and existence
through his providence, and that he reigns over all, so that he is known from the works of
his providence, and the Father is known through him. Then consider, I beg you, whether
they are not unknowingly turning the mockery against themselves.

5 The philosophers of the Greeks say that the world is a great body, and they speak truly.
For we see it, and its parts, with our senses. So if the Word of God is in the world,
which is a body, and has entered into the whole of it and into every one of its parts,
what is surprising or absurd if we say that he has entered into a human being too?[98] 6
For if it were absurd for him to be in a body at all, it would also be absurd for him to
be present in the universe, giving light and movement to all things by his providence. For
the whole universe is a body too. 7 But if it is fitting for him to enter the world and be
made known in the whole, then it is also fitting for him to appear in a human body, and
for that body to be lit up by him and to act through him. For the human race is a part of
the whole. And if it is unfitting for a part to become his instrument for the knowledge of
his divinity, then it would be far more absurd for him to be made known through the whole
world.

CHAPTER 42

His Union with the Body is Based Upon His Relation to Creation as a Whole. He Used a Human
Body, Since to Man It Was that He Wished to Reveal Himself.

1 Think of a human being whose whole body is moved and lit up by him. If someone said it
was absurd for the man’s power to be in the toe as well, he would be thought foolish. For
he grants that the man pervades and works in the whole body, yet he denies that he is in a
part. In the same way, whoever grants and believes that the Word of God is in the whole
universe, and that the whole is lit up and moved by Him, should not think it absurd that a
single human body is also moved and lit up by Him. 2 Perhaps they think our talk of the
Saviour’s appearing in a human being is unfitting because the human race is a created
thing, made out of nothing. Then it is time for them to throw Him out of creation too, for
creation also came from non-being into being through the Word.

3 But if it is not absurd for the Word to be in creation, even though creation is
something made, then it is not absurd for Him to be in man either. Whatever they conceive
about the whole, they must also think about the part. For man, as I said before, is a part
of the whole. 4 So it is not at all unfitting for the Word to be in man, since all things
are lit, moved and given life by Him and in Him, just as their own writers say: “In him we
live and move and have our being.”[99] [Acts 17:28] 5 What, then, do we say that deserves
mockery, if the Word has used that in which He is as an instrument to reveal Himself? For
if He were not in it, He could not even have used it. But we have already shown that He is
in the whole and in each of its parts. What is hard to believe, then, if He also shows
Himself in the things in which He is?

6 By His own powers He enters wholly into each thing and into all things, and He orders
everything without stint. If He had wished to use a voice through the sun, the moon, the
heaven, the earth, the waters or fire, and so make Himself and His Father known, no one
could fairly have called it out of place. For He holds all things together at once, is
present with all of them and in that very part as well, and shows Himself there invisibly.
In the same way, it cannot be out of place that He, who orders all things and gives life
to the whole, and who chose to make Himself known through men, has used a human body as
His instrument to reveal the truth and to give knowledge of the Father. For humanity too
is a part of the whole.[100] 7 The mind is present throughout the whole person, yet it is
made known through one part of the body, the tongue. No one says on that account that the
being of the mind is made smaller. In the same way, the Word is present through all
things, and if He has used a human instrument, this should not seem unfitting. For, as I
said before, if it is unfitting to use a body as an instrument, it is also unfitting for
Him to be in the whole.

CHAPTER 43

He Came in Human Rather Than in Any Nobler Forth, Because (I) He Came to Save, Not to
Impress ; (2) Man Alone of Creatures Had Sinned. As Men Would Not Recognise His Works in
the Universe, He Came and Worked Among Them as Man ; In the Sphere to Which They Had
Limited Themselves.

1 “Why then,” they may ask, “did He not appear through other, finer parts of creation? Why
did He not use a finer instrument, such as the sun, the moon, the stars, fire or the upper
air, instead of man alone?” Let them know that the Lord did not come to put on a display,
but to heal and teach those who were suffering.[101] 2 Someone who wants to put on a
display only appears and stuns those who see him. But someone who wants to heal and teach
does not merely visit. He gives himself to help those in need, and appears in a way that
those who need him can bear. He must not overwhelm the very people in need by going beyond
what the sufferers require, or God’s appearing would be of no use to them. 3 Nothing in
creation had gone astray in its thoughts about God except man alone. The sun, the moon,
the heaven, the stars, the water and the upper air did not depart from their order. They
know the Word as their Maker and King, and they remain as they were made. Only men turned
away from what is good. They then invented things that do not exist in place of the truth.
The honor due to God, and the knowledge of Him, they gave to demons and to men represented
in stones.[102]

4 So it was fitting that He act as He did. It would not have been worthy of God’s goodness
to overlook so grave a matter. Men could not recognize Him even as He governed and ruled
the whole creation. So He took a part of the whole, a human body, as His instrument, and
entered into it. Since they could not know Him in the whole, they might at least not fail
to know Him in the part. And since they could not look up to His invisible power, they
might at least be able to reason about Him and see Him from what was like themselves. 5
Being men, they will be able to know His Father more quickly and more directly through a
body suited to them and through the divine works done by means of it. They will judge by
comparison that what He does is not the work of men but the work of God.

6 If, as they say, it is absurd for the Word to be known through the works of a body, then
it would also be absurd for Him to be known through the works of the universe. He is in
creation, yet He takes no share in anything of creation. Rather, all things share in His
power. In the same way, when He used the body as His instrument, He took no share in
anything that belongs to the body. Rather, He Himself made the body holy.[103] 7 Even
Plato, whom the Greeks so admire, says that the one who begot the world saw it storm-
tossed and in danger of sinking into the place of unlikeness. So he took his seat at the
helm of the soul, came to its help, and set right all its failures. Then what is hard to
believe in what we say? Humanity had gone astray, and the Word took His seat upon it. He
appeared as a man so that, by His steering and His goodness, He might bring it safely
through the storm.[104]

CHAPTER 44

As God Made Man by a Word, Why Not Restore Him by a Word? But (1) Creation Out of Nothing
is Different from Reparation of What Already Exists. (2) Man Was There with a Definite
Need, Calling for a Definite Remedy. Death Was Ingrained in Man’s Nature : Hethen Must
Wind Life Closely to Human Nature. Therefore the Word Became Incarnate that He Might Meet
and Conquer Death in His Usurped Territory. (Simile of Straw and Asbestos.)

1 But perhaps they will agree with this out of shame, and then want to say this: if God
wished to instruct and save human beings, He should have done it by a mere nod, and His
Word should not have touched a body. After all, that is how He acted long ago, when He
brought all things into being out of nothing. 2 A fitting reply to this objection would be
as follows. In the beginning nothing existed anywhere, so all that was needed to create
the universe was a nod and His will alone. But once man had been made, what was needed was
a cure, not for things that did not exist, but for things that had come into being. It
followed that the Physician and Saviour should come among those who had already been made,
in order to heal what existed. For this reason He became man and used the body as a human
instrument.

3 If this were not the right way, how else was the Word to come, wishing to use an
instrument? Where was He to get it, except from those who had already come to be and who
needed His divinity, through someone like themselves? For it was not things that did not
exist that needed saving, in which case a bare command would have been enough. It was man,
already made, who was decaying and perishing. So it was right and fitting that the Word
used a human instrument, and spread Himself out into all things.[105] 4 Next, you must
also understand this: the corruption that had come was not outside the body but had become
attached to it. So it was necessary for life to be woven into the body in place of
corruption, so that, just as death had come to be in the body, life too might come to be
in it.

5 If death were outside the body, life too would have had to come to it from outside. But
death was woven into the body and ruled over it as something bound up with it. So life too
had to be woven into the body, so that the body, putting on life in exchange, would throw
off corruption. Besides, if the Word had come outside the body and not in it, death would
certainly have been defeated by Him, quite naturally, since death has no strength against
life. Yet the corruption that had attached itself to the body would have remained in it
all the same. 6 For this reason the Saviour fittingly put on a body. The body would be
woven together with life, so that it would no longer stay in death as something mortal.
Having put on immortality, it would rise and from then on remain immortal. Once the body
had put on corruption, it could not have risen unless it had put on life. And death, for
its part, cannot show itself on its own, but only in a body. So He put on a body in order
to find death in the body and wipe it out. For how could the Lord ever have been shown to
be life, if He had not made the mortal alive?[106] [1 Corinthians 15:53-54]

7 Take stubble, which fire naturally destroys. If someone keeps the fire away from the
stubble, it is not burned, but it still remains stubble, uneasy at the fire’s threat, for
fire by nature consumes it. But if someone clothes the stubble with plenty of asbestos,
which is said to resist fire, the stubble no longer fears the fire, since it has safety in
a covering that cannot burn.[107] 8 In the same way one could say of the body and death:
if death had been held back from it by His command alone, the body would still have been
mortal and corruptible, as the nature of bodies requires. To prevent this, the body put on
the bodiless Word of God. So it no longer fears death or corruption, since it has life as
its clothing and corruption is made to vanish in it.

CHAPTER 45

Thus Once Again Every Part of Creation Manifests the Glory of God. Nature, the Witness to
Her Creator, Yields (by Miracles) a Second Testimony to God Inncarnate. The Witness of
Nature, Perverted by Man’s Sin, Was Thus Forced Back to Truth. If These Reasons Suffice
Not, Let the Greeks Look at Facts.

1 So it follows that the Word of God took a body and used a human instrument. He did this
in order to give life to the body as well, and so that, just as he is known in creation
through his works, he might also work in man and show himself everywhere, leaving nothing
empty of his own divinity and of the knowledge of him. 2 I say again what I said before:
the Saviour did this so that, just as he is present and fills everything everywhere, so he
might also fill everything with the knowledge of himself. This is what the divine
Scripture says too: “The whole earth was filled with the knowledge of the Lord.”[108]
[Isaiah 11:9] 3 Suppose someone wants to look up at heaven: he sees its ordered
arrangement. Suppose he cannot look up to heaven but lifts his eyes only to human beings:
through the Word’s works he sees his power, which is beyond comparison with that of men,
and he recognizes him alone among men as God the Word. Suppose someone has turned aside
among demons and is terrified of them: he sees the Word driving them out, and judges him
to be their master. Suppose someone has sunk himself into the nature of water and thinks
it is God, as the Egyptians worship water: he sees that nature changed by the Word, and
knows that the Lord is the creator of the waters.[109]

4 Suppose someone has even gone down to Hades and stands in awe of the heroes who went
down there, as if they were gods. He sees that Christ’s resurrection has taken place, and
his victory over death, and he reasons that among them too Christ alone is the true Lord
and God. 5 For the Lord touched every part of creation. He set them all free from every
deception and exposed it, as Paul says: “He stripped off the rulers and the authorities
and triumphed on the cross.” He did this so that no one could be deceived any longer, but
would find the true Word of God everywhere.[110] [Colossians 2:15] 6 In this way man is
hemmed in on every side. Everywhere he looks, in heaven, in Hades, among men, on earth, he
sees the divinity of the Word spread out. So he is no longer deceived about God. He
worships the Word alone, and through him knows the Father rightly.

7 By these reasonable arguments, then, we shall fittingly put the Greeks to shame too. But
if they think the arguments are not enough to shame them, let them at least be convinced
of what we say by things that appear before everyone’s eyes.[111]

CHAPTER 46

Discredit, from the Date of the Incarnation, of Idol-Cultus, Oracles, Mythologies,
Demoniacal Energy, Magic, and Gentile Philosophy. And Whereas the Old Cults Were Strictly
Local and Independent, the Warship of Christ is Catholic and Uniform.

1 When did people begin to abandon the worship of idols, if not from the time the true
Word of God came among men? When did the oracles among the Greeks and everywhere else
cease and become empty, if not when the Saviour revealed himself here on earth? 2 When did
the so-called gods and heroes of the poets begin to be condemned as mere mortal men, if
not from the time the Lord set up his trophy of victory over death? He kept incorrupt the
body he had taken, raising it from the dead. 3 When were the deceit and frenzy of the
demons despised, if not when the Word, the Power of God, who is master of all things and
of them too, stooped down for the sake of human weakness and appeared on earth? When did
the art of magic and its schools begin to be trampled underfoot, if not when the Word’s
appearing as God took place among men?[112]

4 In short, when did the wisdom of the Greeks become foolish, if not when the true Wisdom
of God revealed itself on earth? In the past the whole world and every place was led
astray by idol worship, and people regarded nothing but idols as gods. Now, all over the
world, people are abandoning the superstition of idols and fleeing to Christ. Worshipping
him as God, they come through him to know the Father, whom they did not know.[113] [1
Corinthians 1:20] 5 And here is the wonder of it. The objects of worship were countless
and varied, and each place had its own idol. The so-called god of one place could not
cross over into the next district, so as to persuade the neighbours to worship him; he was
scarcely worshipped even among his own people. No one worshipped his neighbour’s god. Each
kept his own idol, thinking it lord of all. Christ alone is worshipped by all as one and
the same everywhere. What the weakness of the idols could not do, to persuade even those
living nearby, Christ has done. He has persuaded not only those nearby but quite simply
the whole world to worship one and the same Lord, and through him God, his Father.

CHAPTER 47

The Numerous Oracles,—Fancied of Apparitions in Sacred Places, &C., Dispelied by the Sign
of the Cross. The Old Gods Prove to Have Been Mere Men. Magic is Exposed. And Whereas
Philosophy Could Only Persuade Select and Local Cliques of Immortality, and Goodness,—Men
of Little Intellect Have Infused into the Multitudes of the Churches the Principle of a
Supernatural Life.

1 In the old days every place was full of the deceit of the oracles. The oracles at
Delphi, at Dodona, in Boeotia, in Lycia, in Libya, in Egypt, and among the Cabiri, and the
Pythian priestess, were admired by people who were taken in by illusion. But now that
Christ is preached everywhere, their madness has ended too, and there is no one left among
them to give oracles.[114] 2 In the old days demons used to play tricks on people’s
imaginations. They took possession of springs, rivers, trees, or stones, and by these
sorceries they astonished foolish people. But now that the Word has appeared in his divine
manifestation, these illusions have stopped. For anyone who simply uses the sign of the
cross drives away their deceptions. 3 In the old days people took the so-called gods of
the poets, Zeus, Cronos, Apollo, and the heroes, to be gods, and they went astray by
worshipping them. But now that the Saviour has appeared among men, those others have been
exposed as mortal men. Christ alone has been recognized among men as the true God, God the
Word of God.

4 And what could anyone say about the magic they so admire? Before the Word came to live
among us, magic was strong and active among the Egyptians, the Chaldeans, and the Indians,
and it astonished those who saw it. But at the coming of the Truth and the appearing of
the Word, magic too was exposed and completely put out of action. 5 As for Greek wisdom
and the loud boasting of the philosophers, I think no one needs an argument from us,
because the wonder of it is plain to everyone. The wise men of the Greeks wrote so much,
and yet they could not persuade even a few people in their own neighborhoods about
immortality and a life of virtue. Christ alone has done it, using plain words and working
through men who were not clever with the tongue. All over the world he has persuaded whole
churches full of people to despise death and set their minds on immortal things. He has
persuaded them to look past what is temporary and fix their eyes on what is eternal, to
count earthly glory as nothing, and to strive only for immortality. [2 Corinthians 4:18]

CHAPTER 48

Further Facts. Christian Continence of Virgins and Ascetics. Martyrs. The Power of the
Cross Against Demons and Magic. Christ by His Power Shews Himself More Than a Man, More
Than a Magician, More Than a Spirit. For All These are Totally Subject to Him. Therefore
He is the Word of God.

1 What we are saying here is not just words. Actual experience bears witness that it is
true. 2 Let anyone who wishes come and see the mark of virtue in the virgins of Christ and
in the young men who keep themselves pure in self-control. Let him see the assurance of
immortality in so great a company of martyrs.[115] 3 Let anyone who wants to test what has
been said by experience come, even into the very presence of the demons’ illusions, the
deceit of the oracles, and the wonders of magic. Let him use the sign of the cross, which
they laugh at, and simply name Christ. He will see how by this demons flee, oracles stop,
and all magic and sorcery is put out of action. 4 Who, then, and how great is this Christ,
who by his name and presence has overshadowed and made powerless everything on every side,
who alone is strong against all, and who has filled the whole world with his teaching? Let
the Greeks answer, those who laugh so freely and are not ashamed.

5 If he is a man, how did one man surpass the power of all the gods they have, and by his
own power prove that those gods are nothing? If they call him a magician, how can it be
that all magic is destroyed by a magician, rather than strengthened? If he had defeated
human magicians, or had power over only one, they might fairly suppose that he excelled
the others by a better art. 6 But if his cross has won the victory over magic altogether,
and over the very name of it, then it is plain that the Saviour is not a magician. Even
the demons that other magicians call on flee from him as their master. 7 So who is he? Let
the Greeks tell us, whose only zeal is for mocking. Perhaps they will say that he too was
a demon, and that this is why he is strong. But if they say this, they will make
themselves a laughingstock, for our earlier proofs can put them to shame again. How can it
be that one who drives out demons is himself a demon?

8 If he had driven out only some demons, people might fairly have thought he prevailed
over the lesser ones by the ruler of the demons. That is just what the Jews said when they
wanted to insult him. But every demonic frenzy gives way and is driven off at the naming
of his name. So it is clear that they are wrong here too, and that our Lord and Saviour
Christ is not, as they suppose, some demonic power.[116] [Matthew 12:24; Luke 11:15] 9 So
the Savior is not a mere man, nor a magician, nor some demon. By his own divinity he has
abolished and overshadowed the notions found among the poets, the illusions of the demons,
and the wisdom of the Greeks. It must therefore be plain, and everyone will admit, that he
is truly the Son of God, the Word, Wisdom and Power of the Father. This is why his works
are not human works but beyond man. They are recognized as truly God’s, both from the
facts themselves and from comparing them with what men do.[117] [1 Corinthians 1:24]

CHAPTER 49

His Birth and Miracles. You Call Asclepius, Heracles, and Dionysus Gods for Their Works.
Contrast Their Works With His, And the Wonders at His Death, &C.

1 Who among all the men who ever lived made a body for himself from a virgin alone? Or
what man ever healed diseases such as the common Lord of all healed? Who has supplied what
was lacking at birth, and made a man blind from birth see?[118] [John 9:1] 2 Among them
Asclepius was made a god because he practiced medicine and found herbs for sick bodies. He
did not make these herbs himself out of the earth. He discovered them by knowledge drawn
from nature. But how does that compare with what the Savior did? He did not merely heal a
wound. He formed what birth had left lacking, and restored the creature he had made.[119]
3 The Greeks worship Heracles as a god because he fought against men who were his equals
and killed wild beasts by trickery. How does that compare with what the Word did, driving
diseases, demons and death itself away from men? They worship Dionysus because he became a
teacher of drunkenness to men. But the Savior, who really is Lord of the universe, taught
self-control, and they mock him for it.

4 But let that pass. What can they say about the other wonders of his divinity? At what
man’s death was the sun darkened and the earth shaken? Look: men are dying even now, and
they have died in every age. When did any such wonder happen at their deaths?[120]
[Matthew 27:45; Matthew 27:51; Luke 23:45] 5 Or, to set aside what he did through his body
and recall what happened after his resurrection: whose teaching, of all the men who have
ever lived, has prevailed, one and the same everywhere, from one end of the earth to the
other, so that reverence for him has flown across every land? 6 And why, if Christ is only
a man, as they say, and not God the Word, do their own gods not stop his worship from
crossing into the very land where those gods are? Instead, the Word himself comes to stay
among them, and by his teaching puts an end to their religion and shames their illusion.

CHAPTER 50

Impotence and Rivalries of the Sophists Put to Shame by the Death of Christ. His
Resurrection Unparalleled Even in Greek Legend.

1 Before him there were many kings and tyrants of the earth. Many wise men and magicians
are recorded among the Chaldeans, Egyptians and Indians. Which of them, I do not say after
death but even while still alive, was ever strong enough to fill the whole earth with his
teaching? Which of them taught so great a multitude to turn from the superstition of
idols, as many as our Savior has brought over from the idols to himself? 2 The
philosophers of the Greeks wrote a great deal, with persuasiveness and skill in words. But
what have they shown that equals the cross of Christ? Their clever arguments were
convincing only until they died. And even the influence they seemed to have while alive,
they spent in rivalry with one another, practicing their speeches against each other and
quarreling. 3 But the Word of God, most surprising of all, taught in plainer words. He
overshadowed the very clever sophists and did away with their teachings, drawing everyone
to himself, and he has filled his own churches. And the wonder is this: by going down to
death as a man, he abolished the grand talk of the wise about idols. [John 12:32]

4 Whose death has ever driven away demons? Whose death did demons ever fear as they fear
Christ’s? Wherever the name of the Savior is named, every demon is driven out from there.
And who has ever so removed the passions of the soul from men that the sexually immoral
become self-controlled, murderers no longer take up the sword, and those gripped by
cowardice become brave? 5 And in short, who has persuaded the barbarians, and the people
of the various nations, to put away their madness and think of peace? Nothing but faith in
Christ and the sign of the cross. And who else has given people such assurance about
immortality as the cross of Christ and the resurrection of his body? 6 For although the
Greeks invented every kind of falsehood, they could not even invent a resurrection for
their idols. It never occurred to them at all to ask whether the body could exist again
after death. And for this one might give them special credit. By reasoning this way they
exposed the weakness of their own idol worship, and they left the power to Christ, so that
from this too he might be recognized by all as the Son of God.[121]

CHAPTER 51

The New, Virtue of Continence. Revolution of Society, Purified and Pacified by
Christianity.

1 Now what man, whether after his death or even while living, has taught about virginity
and did not think this virtue impossible for human beings? But Christ, our Saviour and
King of all, was so powerful in his teaching about it that even children who have not yet
reached the lawful age vow a virginity that goes beyond the law. 2 What man has ever been
able to travel so far as to reach the Scythians, the Ethiopians, the Persians, the
Armenians, the Goths, those said to live beyond the Ocean, those beyond Hyrcania, or even
to come among the Egyptians and Chaldeans? These are people who practice magic, who are
superstitious beyond all natural measure, and who are savage in their ways. Who has ever
preached to them at all about virtue and self-control, and against the worship of idols,
as the Lord of all has done, the Power of God, our Lord Jesus Christ?[122]

3 He did not only preach through his disciples. He also persuaded these peoples in their
minds to change their savage ways, no longer to worship the gods of their fathers, but to
come to know him and to worship the Father through him. 4 For in earlier times, when they
worshiped idols, Greeks and barbarians fought against each other, and they were cruel even
to their own relatives. Because of their relentless fighting with one another, no one
could cross land or sea at all without arming his hand with swords. 5 Indeed, their whole
way of life was carried on with weapons. The sword was their walking stick, and the
support they leaned on in every need. Yet, as I said before, they were serving idols and
offering sacrifices to demons. Even so, nothing in their superstitious worship of idols
could re-educate people of that mind. 6 But when they have come over to the teaching of
Christ, then, wonderfully, they are truly pierced to the heart. They have put away the
cruelty of murder and no longer have war on their minds. Everything with them is now
peaceful, and from now on what they desire is whatever leads to friendship.

CHAPTER 52

Wars, &C., Roused by Demons, Lulled by Christianity.

1 Who, then, has done this? Who has joined in peace those who hated one another, if not
the beloved Son of the Father, the common Saviour of all, Jesus Christ? In his love he
endured everything for our salvation. Long ago, too, the Scripture prophesied the peace
that he would bring, saying: “They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears
into sickles, and nation will not take up sword against nation, and they will never again
learn to make war.”[123] [Isaiah 2:4] 2 Nor is this hard to believe, since even now the
barbarians who have savagery born in their nature, while they still sacrifice to their own
idols, rage against one another and cannot bear to be without a sword for a single hour. 3
But when they hear the teaching of Christ, immediately they turn from wars to farming.
Instead of arming their hands with swords, they stretch them out in prayer. In short,
instead of fighting among themselves, from then on they arm themselves against the devil
and against demons, and they defeat them with self-control and virtue of soul.

4 This is a mark of the Saviour’s divinity: what people could not learn among idols, they
have learned from him. It is also no small proof of the weakness and nothingness of demons
and idols. For the demons knew their own weakness. That is why they used to set people at
war against one another, so that, if people stopped quarreling among themselves, they
would not turn to fight against the demons. 5 Indeed, those who are taught by Christ no
longer make war on one another. Instead they take their stand against the demons, with
their way of life and their virtuous deeds. They drive the demons off and make a mockery
of their leader, the devil. So in youth they are self-controlled, in temptations they
endure, in labors they persevere. When they are insulted they are patient, and when they
are robbed they take it lightly. And, what is most astonishing, they even despise death
and become martyrs of Christ.[124]

CHAPTER 53

The Whole Fabric of Gentilism Levelled at a Blow by Christ Secretly Addressing the
Conscience of Man.

1 To name one more proof of the Saviour’s divinity, and a truly astonishing one: what mere
man ever managed this, whether magician, tyrant or king? Who has ever been able, on his
own, to take on idolatry, the whole host of demons, all magic and all the wisdom of the
Greeks, and to stand against all of them with a single decisive stroke? These were
powerful, still at their height, and they amazed everyone. Yet our Lord, the true Word of
God, did it. Invisibly exposing the error of each person, he alone carries off all people
from all of these. So those who used to worship idols now trample them underfoot. Those
who were admired for their magic burn their books. And the wise prefer the interpretation
of the Gospels above every other study.[125] [Acts 19:19] 2 For the gods they used to
worship they now abandon, and the one they used to mock as crucified they now worship as
Christ, confessing Him to be God. The so-called gods among them are driven away by the
sign of the cross. The crucified Savior, meanwhile, is proclaimed throughout the whole
world as God and Son of God. The gods worshiped among the Greeks are denounced by these
same people as shameful. And those who receive the teaching of Christ live a more chaste
life than those gods did.[126]

3 If, then, these things and others like them are merely human, let anyone who wishes show
that men of earlier times did the like, and so persuade us. But if these are clearly not
the works of men but of God, as they are, why are the unbelievers so impious, refusing to
recognize the Master who did them? 4 Their condition is like that of a man who looks at
the works of creation and fails to recognize God as their Maker. For if they knew His
divinity from His power over the whole universe, they would have known that the works
Christ did through the body are not human either, but belong to the Savior of all, the
Word of God. And had they known this, then, as Paul said, “they would not have crucified
the Lord of glory.”[127] [1 Corinthians 2:8]

CHAPTER 54

The Word Incarnate, as is the Case with the Invisible God, is Known to Us by His Works. By
Them We Recognise His Deifying Mission. Let Us Be Content to Enumerate a Few of Them,
Leaving Their Dazzling Plentitude to Him Who Will Behold.

1 Suppose someone wants to see God, who is invisible by nature and cannot be seen at all.
He grasps and knows Him from His works. In the same way, let the person who cannot see
Christ with his mind at least learn of Him from the works of His body. Let him test
whether they are human works or God’s. [Romans 1:20] 2 If they are human, let him scoff.
But if they are known to be not human but God’s, let him not laugh at what deserves no
mockery. Let him rather marvel that through so humble a thing the divine has been shown to
us. Through death immortality has reached all people. Through the Word becoming man, God’s
providence over all things has become known, and with it the one who supplies and creates
it, the very Word of God. 3 For He became man so that we might be made divine. He showed
Himself through a body so that we might gain an idea of the unseen Father. And He endured
the insults of men so that we might inherit incorruption. He Himself was not harmed in any
way, since He is impassible and incorruptible, the Word Himself and God. But the human
beings who were suffering, and for whose sake He endured these things, He guarded and
preserved in His own impassibility.[128]

4 In short, the Savior’s achievements, accomplished through His becoming man, are so many
and so great that to recount them would be like looking out over the open sea and trying
to count its waves. The eyes cannot take in all the waves, because the ones coming on
escape the notice of the person trying. In the same way, anyone who wants to take in all
of Christ’s achievements in the body cannot grasp the whole, even in his mind. More of
them slip past his thought than he supposes he has gathered. 5 So it is better not to try
to speak of the whole, since no one can describe even a part of it. Let me mention just
one more thing and leave you to marvel at the rest. For all of it is equally wonderful,
and wherever a person looks, he sees the divinity of the Word there and is overwhelmed
with amazement.

CHAPTER 55

Summary of Foregoing. Cessation of Pagan Oracles, &C.: Propagation of the Faith. The True
King Has Come Forth and Silenced All Usurpers.

1 After what has been said, it is worth your while to consider this next point, to take it
as the starting place for what remains unsaid, and to marvel at it greatly. Since the
Savior came to live among us, idolatry has not only stopped growing; what remains of it is
shrinking and gradually ceasing. The wisdom of the Greeks no longer advances either; what
is left of it is now disappearing. Demons no longer deceive with apparitions, oracles and
magic. If they so much as dare to try, they are put to shame by the sign of the
cross.[129] 2 To sum it up, see how the Savior’s teaching is growing everywhere, while all
idolatry and everything that stands against the faith of Christ is shrinking daily,
growing weaker and falling. As you see this, worship the Savior who is over all, God the
Word, who is mighty. And condemn those things that are being diminished and wiped out by
Him.[130]

3 When the sun is present, darkness no longer has strength, and if any is left anywhere,
it is driven away. In the same way, now that the divine appearing of the Word of God has
come, the darkness of the idols no longer has strength, and every part of the world in
every direction is lit up by His teaching. 4 Suppose a king reigns over some country but
does not show himself, staying inside his own house. Often some lawless men take advantage
of his withdrawal and proclaim themselves king. Each one puts on the appearance of a king
and deceives the simple, and so people are led astray by the name. They hear that there is
a king but do not see him, chiefly because they cannot get inside the house. But when the
true king comes out and appears, then the lawless deceivers are exposed by his presence,
and the people, seeing the true king, leave those who had long led them astray.

5 In the same way, demons and men used to deceive in former times, clothing themselves
with the honour due to God. But when the Word of God appeared in a body and made his own
Father known to us, then the deceit of the demons is wiped out and comes to an end. People
now look to the true God, the Word of the Father, and abandon the idols, and at last they
come to know the true God. 6 This is a mark that Christ is God the Word and the Power of
God. Human things come to an end, while the word of Christ remains. So it is plain to
everyone that the things that come to an end are only temporary, but the one who remains
is God, the true Son of God, the only-begotten Word.[131] [1 Corinthians 1:24]

CHAPTER 56

Search Then, the Scriptures, If You Can, and So Fill Up This Sketch. Learn to Look for the
Second Advent and Judgment.

1 Let this, then, be our short contribution to you, lover of Christ, as a first outline
and sketch of the faith in Christ and of his divine appearing to us. But take your
starting point from this. If you read the writings of the Scriptures and give them your
sincere attention, you will learn from them, more fully and clearly, the exact details of
what has been said. 2 For those writings were spoken and written by God through men who
spoke of God. We, for our part, have learned from inspired teachers who studied those
Scriptures, and who also became witnesses (martyrs) to the deity of Christ, and we pass on
what we learned to your eagerness to learn.[132] 3 You will also learn of his second
appearing to us, which is glorious and truly divine. Then he will no longer come in
lowliness but in his own glory, no longer in humble condition but in his own majesty. He
will no longer come to suffer, but from then on to give everyone the fruit of his cross. I
mean the resurrection and incorruption. He will no longer be judged, but will judge
everyone, according to what each did through the body, whether good or bad. For the good,
the kingdom of heaven is stored up; for those who did wicked things, eternal fire and the
outer darkness. [2 Corinthians 5:10; Matthew 25:41; Matthew 25:30]

4 For the Lord himself says it this way: “I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of
Man sitting at the right hand of power and coming on the clouds of heaven in the glory of
the Father.”[133] [Matthew 26:64] 5 For this reason, too, there is a saving word that
prepares us for that day: “Be ready and watch, for he comes at an hour you do not know.”
For as the blessed Paul says, we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so
that each may receive what is due for what he did through the body, whether good or
bad.[134] [Matthew 24:42; Matthew 24:44; 2 Corinthians 5:10]

CHAPTER 57

Above All, So Live that You May Have the Right to Eat of This Tree of Knowledge and Life,
and So Come to Eternal Joys. Doxology.

1 But to search the Scriptures and know them truly, one needs a good life, a pure soul,
and the virtue that follows Christ. Then the mind, travelling along that path, can reach
what it longs for and grasp it, as far as human nature can learn about the Word of God. 2
Without a pure mind, and without imitating the lives of the saints, no one could possibly
grasp the words of the saints. 3 Suppose someone wants to see the light of the sun. He
will certainly wipe his eye clean and make it bright, purifying himself until he is almost
like the thing he longs for, so that the eye, having become light, may see the light of
the sun. Or suppose someone wants to see a city or a country. He will certainly travel to
that place to see it. In the same way, anyone who wants to understand the mind of those
who spoke about God must first wash and cleanse his soul by the way he lives. He must come
to the saints themselves by becoming like them in his actions. Then, sharing with them the
way of life they lead, he will understand what God revealed to them. From then on, joined
to them, he will escape the danger of sinners and the fire that awaits them on the day of
judgment. And he will receive what is laid up for the saints in the kingdom of heaven:
“what eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it entered into the heart of man.” These
things are prepared for those who live in virtue and love God the Father, in Christ Jesus
our Lord. Through him and with him, to the Father himself, together with the Son himself,
in the Holy Spirit, be honor and power and glory forever and ever. Amen.[135] [1
Corinthians 2:9]

----------------------------------------

NOTES

[81] That Isaiah was sawn in two comes from Jewish tradition, not from the Old Testament
itself. Hebrews 11:37 (“they were sawn in two”) is usually taken as alluding to it.

[82] The two quotations are given as Athanasius wrote them. The first follows the Greek
Old Testament of Deuteronomy 28:66, which in its original setting describes Israel’s
anxious life under the curse; Athanasius reads it as a prophecy of the cross. The second
is Isaiah 53:8.

[83] The Greek says literally “by the whole inhabited world” (oikoumenē).

[84] “Trophies” were monuments set up on the battlefield after a military victory.

[85] The cloud image echoes Isaiah 19:1, where the Lord rides on a swift cloud and comes
to Egypt, and the idols of Egypt tremble. Athanasius probably has in mind the holy
family’s flight into Egypt (Matthew 2:13–15). He was himself an Egyptian, from Alexandria.

[86] “As a substitute” translates antipsychon, literally something given “in place of a
life” (psyche).

[87] The quotation is Isaiah 65:1–2 in the Greek Old Testament. Paul quotes the same
verses in Romans 10:20–21.

[88] The quotation is Isaiah 35:3–6. Where this Greek text of Athanasius has “of little
faith,” the Greek Old Testament has oligopsychoi, “faint-hearted.”

[89] Naaman: see 2 Kings 5. Elijah raised the widow’s son (1 Kings 17), and in a similar
story Elisha raised the Shunammite woman’s son (2 Kings 4).

[90] The quotation is John 9:32-33, given almost word for word. In John these words are
spoken to the Pharisees by the man who had been born blind.

[91] “Holy of Holies” renders the Hebrew phrase “most holy,” which many modern Bibles take
to mean a most holy place. Athanasius reads it as a person, and his argument in the next
sections depends on that reading.

[92] Athanasius places Jeremiah in Babylon here, but the Bible records him in Jerusalem
and then in Egypt (Jeremiah 43), though he wrote to the exiles in Babylon (Jeremiah 29);
Ezekiel prophesied among the exiles, and Haggai and Zechariah prophesied in Jerusalem
after the return (Ezra 5:1).

[93] The quotation is Genesis 49:10 from the Greek Old Testament, where the words are
Jacob’s blessing on Judah; Athanasius credits them to Moses, traditionally regarded as the
author of Genesis.

[94] The quotation is from Matthew 11:13 (compare Luke 16:16). “Prophecy is sealed” echoes
Daniel 9:24 (“to seal up vision and prophet”), which Athanasius discusses in the preceding
chapters. “The root of Jesse” is from Isaiah 11:1, 10.

[95] The quotations are from Psalm 118:27 (117:27 in the Greek Old Testament), Psalm
107:20 (106:20 in the Greek) and Isaiah 63:9. Athanasius quotes Isaiah 63:9 from the Greek
Septuagint. Most English Bibles translate the Hebrew, which reads differently (for
example, “the angel of his presence saved them”).

[96] “The whole earth is filled with the knowledge of God” echoes Isaiah 11:9 (compare
Habakkuk 2:14).

[97] “Greeks” here means pagans, the Gentile idol-worshippers (the older translation says
“Gentiles”).

[98] The idea of the cosmos as one great living body appears in Plato’s Timaeus and was
common among the Stoics.

[99] The Greek as printed has “and was” (kai ēn) after “lit and moved”, which makes little
sense; it is probably a corruption of “and live” (kai zēn), matching the quotation that
follows, and is translated that way here.

[100] The Greek in the middle of this sentence is difficult and the text appears damaged
in places; the translation gives the probable sense.

[101] “Upper air” translates the Greek aithēr, the bright, pure air of the heavens, which
ancient writers distinguished from the ordinary air near the ground.

[102] Literally “to demons and men in stones”. This probably means stone images, both of
demons and of men who were worshiped as gods. Athanasius discusses such idol worship at
length in Against the Greeks.

[103] “Takes no share in” translates a Greek verb for partaking. Athanasius means that the
Word is not changed or affected by being in creation or in the body. It is the other way
round: creation and the body receive from Him.

[104] Athanasius is loosely recalling Plato’s dialogue the Statesman (around 273d–e).
There the god takes the helm of the world to keep it from sinking into the boundless realm
of “unlikeness.” The older English has “the place of chaos,” which is a paraphrase; the
Greek says “the place of unlikeness.”

[105] “Spread Himself out into all things” follows the Greek (heauton hēplōsen, “unfolded”
or “extended Himself”).

[106] The language of the body “putting on” immortality echoes 1 Corinthians 15:53–54.

[107] “Asbestos” translates amiantos, literally “undefiled.” This was a mineral fibre
believed to be proof against fire.

[108] Isaiah 11:9, quoted almost word for word from the Greek Old Testament (the
Septuagint). That version says simply “the whole”, and “earth” is understood. Compare
Habakkuk 2:14.

[109] The water “changed” by the Word most naturally recalls the turning of water into
wine (John 2:1–11), though Athanasius does not name a specific miracle.

[110] Colossians 2:15, in shortened form. Athanasius leaves out Paul’s “made a public
display of them”, and where Paul has “in it” (or “in him”) he says plainly “on the cross”.

[111] “Greeks” here means pagans in general, not only people from Greece. After answering
the Jews (chapters 33–40), Athanasius has been answering the pagans since chapter 41 and
here begins to round off that argument.

[112] “The Power of God” echoes 1 Corinthians 1:24, where Paul calls Christ “the power of
God and the wisdom of God”.

[113] Compare 1 Corinthians 1:20–24, where God makes foolish the wisdom of the world and
Christ is “the wisdom of God”.

[114] The “Pythia” or Pythoness was the priestess who delivered the oracles at Delphi. The
Cabiri were gods honored in a mystery cult, with a well-known center at Samothrace.
Athanasius lists their oracles without saying where they were.

[115] “Martyrs” here means those who bore witness to Christ by suffering death. The Greek
word for “company” (choros) can also mean a choir.

[116] Athanasius is referring to the charge in the Gospels that Jesus cast out demons by
Beelzebul, the ruler of the demons (Matthew 12:24; Mark 3:22; Luke 11:15).

[117] “Wisdom and Power” of God echoes Paul’s description of Christ in 1 Corinthians 1:24.

[118] The man born blind is the healing in John 9:1–7.

[119] The Greek says he “formed a birth (genesis),” meaning he supplied what the man born
blind had lacked from birth, and “restored the thing formed” (the creature).

[120] See the darkness and the earthquake at the crucifixion in Matthew 27:45, 51 and Luke
23:44–45.

[121] The Greek verb (apodechomai) here means to approve of someone or give them credit,
so the sense is that one would especially commend them for this.

[122] Hyrcania was a region on the southeastern shore of the Caspian Sea. “The Power of
God” echoes 1 Corinthians 1:24.

[123] Athanasius is quoting Isaiah 2:4 in the Greek Septuagint wording (compare Micah
4:3); the word translated “spears” (zibyne) means a hunting spear or javelin.

[124] “Martyr” means “witness.” Here it refers to those who die for their testimony to
Christ.

[125] The burning of magic books recalls Acts 19:19, where former practitioners of magic
in Ephesus burned their books publicly.

[126] The Greek says only “than those.” It most naturally points back to the gods just
named. The older translation’s “than they” leaves this open.

[127] Athanasius is quoting 1 Corinthians 2:8.

[128] “Impassible” translates “apathes,” meaning not subject to suffering.

[129] The Greek printed here says literally to take this point as “a beginning of the
things not said,” not as “the sum of what we have already stated” (the older translation’s
wording).

[130] “Who is over all” may echo Romans 9:5, which speaks of Christ as “over all, God
blessed forever.”

[131] “The Power of God” echoes Paul’s description of Christ in 1 Corinthians 1:24.

[132] “Martyrs” translates the Greek word for “witnesses”; in Athanasius’s day it already
commonly meant those who died for the faith, and probably carries both senses here.

[133] The words follow Matthew 26:64. Athanasius adds “in the glory of the Father,” a
phrase from another saying about the Son of Man’s coming (Matthew 16:27; Mark 8:38).

[134] The saying combines Jesus’ words in Matthew 24:42, 24:44 and 25:13. The Paul
quotation is 2 Corinthians 5:10.

[135] The quotation is from 1 Corinthians 2:9, in slightly varied wording. Where Paul ends
with “for those who love him,” Athanasius adds “those who live in virtue.”


COUNCIL OF NICAEA
=================

COUNCIL OF NICAEA Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

COUNCIL OF NICAEA

Letter of Eusebius of Coesarea to the people of his Diocese . 1. What was transacted
concerning ecclesiastical faith at the Great Council assembled at Nicaea, you have
probably learned, Beloved, from other sources, rumour being wont to precede the accurate
account of what is doing. But lest in such reports the circumstances of the case have been
misrepresented, we have been obliged to transmit to you, first, the formula of faith
presented by ourselves, and next, the second, which [the Fathers] put forth with some
additions to our words. Our ownpaper, then, which was read in the presence of our most
pious Emperor, and declared to be good and unexceptionable, ran thus:- 2. "As we have
received from the Bishops who preceded us, and in our first catechisings, and when we
received the Holy Layer, and as we have learned from the divine Scriptures, and as we
believed and taught in the presbytery, and in the Episcopate itself, so believing also at
the time present, we report to you our faith, and it is this :"-3. "We believe in One God,
the Father Almighty, the Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in One Lord Jesus
Christ, the Word of God, God from God, Light from Light, Life from Life, Son Only-
begotten, first-born of every creature, before all the ages, begotten from the Father, by
Whom also all things were made; Who for our salvation was made flesh, and lived among men,
and suffered, and rose again the third day, and ascended to the Father, and will come
again in glory to judge the quick and dead. And we believe also in One Holy Ghost:"

"Believing each of these to be and to exist, the Father truly Father, and the Son truly
Son, and the Holy Ghost truly Holy Ghost, as also our Lord, sending forth His disciples
for the preaching, said, "Go teach all nations, baptizing them in the Name of the Father
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ." Concerning Whom we confidently affirm that so we
hold, and so we think, and so we have held aforetime, and we maintain this faith unto the
death, anathematizing every godless heresy. That this we have ever thought from our heart
and soul, from the time we recollect ourselves, and now think and say in truth, before God
Almighty and our Lord Jesus Christ do we witness, being able by proofs to shew and to
convince you, that, even in times past, such has been our belief and preaching." 4. On
this faith being publicly put forth by us, no room for contradiction appeared; but our
most pious Emperor, before any one else, testified that it comprised most orthodox
statements. He confessed moreover that such were his own sentiments, and he advised all
present to agree to it, and to subscribe its articles and to assent to them, with the
insertion of the single word, One-in-essence, which moreover he interpreted as not in the
sense of the affections of bodies, nor as if the Son subsisted from the Father in the way
of division, or any severance; for that the immaterial, and intellectual, and incorporeal
nature could not be the subject of any corporeal affection, but that it became us to
conceive of such things in a divine and ineffable manner. And such were the theological
remarks of our most wise and most religious Emperor; but they, with a view to the addition
of One in essence, drew up the following formula:-

The Faith dictated in the Council. "We believe in One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of
all things visible and invisible:"- "And in One Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God,
begotten of the Father, Only-begotten, that is, from the essence of the Father; God from
God, Light from Light, Very God from Very God, begotten not made, One in essence with the
Father, by Whom all things were made, both things in heaven and things in earth; Who for
us men and for our salvation came down and was made flesh, was made man, suffered, and
rose again the third day, ascended into heaven, and cometh to judge quick and dead." "And
in the Holy Ghost." "And those who say, `Once He was not,' and `Before His generation He
was not,' and `He came to be from nothing,' or those who pretend that the Son of God is
`Of other subsistence or essence ,' or `created' or `alterable,' or `mutable,' the
Catholic Church anathematizes."

5. On their dictating this formula, we did not let it pass without inquiry in what sense
they introduced "of the essence of the Father," and "one in essence with the Father."
Accordingly questions and explanations took place, and the meaning of the words underwent
the scrutiny of reason. And they professed, that the phrase "of the essence" was
indicative of the Son's being indeed from the Father, yet without being as if a part of
Him. And with this understanding we thought good to assent to the sense of such religious
doctrine, teaching, as it did, that the Son was from the Father, not however a part of His
essence . On this account we assented to the sense ourselves, without declining even the
term "One in essence," peace being the object which we set before us, and stedfastness in
the orthodox view. 6. In the same way we also admitted "begotten, not made;" since the
Council alleged that "made" was an appellative common to the other creatures which came to
be through the Son, to whom the Son had no likeness. Wherefore, say they, He was not a
work resembling the things which through Him came to be , but was of an essence which is
too high for the level of any work; and which the Divine oracles teach to have been
generated from the Father , the mode of generation being inscrutable and incalculable to
every originated nature.

7. And so too on examination there are grounds for saying that the Son is "one in essence"
with the Father; not in the way of bodies, nor like mortal beings, for He is not such by
division of essence, or by severance no nor by any affection, or alteration, or changing
of the Father's essence and power (since from all such the unoriginate nature of the
Father is alien), but because "one in essence with the Father" suggests that the Son of
God bears no resemblance to the originated creatures, but that to His Father alone Who
begat Him is He in every way assimilated, and that He is not of any other subsistence and
essence, but from the Father . To which term also, thus interpreted, it appeared well to
assent; since we were aware that even among the ancients, some learned and illustrious
Bishops and writers have used the term "one in essence," in their theological teaching
concerning the Father and Son.

8. So much then be said concerning the faith which was published; to which all of us
assented, not without inquiry, but according to the specified senses, mentioned before the
most religious Emperor himself, and justified by thee forementioned considerations. And as
to the anathematism published by them at the end of the Faith, it did not pain us, because
it forbade to use words not in Scripture, from which almost all the confusion and disorder
of the Church have come. Since then no divinely inspired Scripture has used the phrases,
"out of nothing," and "once He was not," and the rest which follow, there appeared no
ground for using or teaching them; to which also we assented as a good decision, since it
had not been our custom hitherto to use these terms. 9. Moreover to anathematize "Before
His generation He was not," did not seem preposterous, in that it is confessed by all,
that the Son of God was before the generation according to the flesh .

10. Nay, our most religious Emperor did at the time prove, in a speech, that He was in
being even according to His divine generation which is before all ages, since even before
He was generated in energy, He was in virtue with the Father ingenerately, the Father
being always Father, as King always, and Saviour always, being all things in virtue, and
being always in the same respects and in the same way. 11. This we have been forced to
transmit to you, Beloved, as making clear to you the deliberation of our inquiry and
assent, and how reasonably we resisted even to the last minute as long as we were offended
at statements which differed from our own, but received without contention what no longer
pained us, as soon as, on a candid examination of the sense of the words, they appeared to
us to coincide with what we ourselves have professed in the faith which we have already
published.


DEPOSITION OF ARIUS
===================

DEPOSITION OF ARIUS Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

DEPOSITION OF ARIUS

S. Alexander's Deposition of Arius and His Companions, and Encyclical Letter on the
Subject. Alexander, being assembled with his beloved brethren, the Presbyters and Deacons
of Alexandria, and the Mareotis, greets them in the Lord. Although you have already
subscribed to the letter I addressed to Arius and his fellows, exhorting them to renounce
his impiety, and to submit themselves to the sound Catholic Faith, and have shewn your
right-mindedness and agreement in the doctrines of the Catholic Church: yet forasmuch as I
have written also to our fellow-ministers in every place concerning Arius and his fellows,
and especially since some of you, as the Presbyters Chares and Pistus , and the Deacons
Serapion, Parammon, Zosimus, and Irenaeus, have joined Arius and his fellows, and been
content to suffer deposition with them, I thought it needful to assemble together you, the
Clergy of the city, and to send for you the Clergy of the Mareotis, in order that you may
learn what I am now writing, and may testify your agreement thereto, and give your
concurrence in the deposition of Arius, Pistus, and their fellows. For it is desirable
that you should be made acquainted with what I write, and that each of you should heartily
embrace it, as though he had written it himself.

A Copy. To his dearly beloved and most honoured fellow-ministers of the Catholic Church in
every place. Alexander sends health in the Lord. 1. As there is one body of the Catholic
Church, and a command is given us in the sacred Scriptures to preserve the bond of unity
and peace, it is agreeable thereto. that we should write and signify to one another
whatever is done by each of us individually; so that whether one member suffer or rejoice,
we may either suffer or rejoice with one another. Now there are gone forth in this
diocese, at this time, certain lawless men, enemies of Christ, teaching an apostasy, which
one may justly suspect and designate as a forerunner of Antichrist. I was desirous to pass
such a matter by without notice, in the hope that perhaps the evil would spend itself
among its supporters, and not extend to other places to defile the ears of the simple .
But seeing that Eusebius, now of Nicomedia, who thinks that the government of the Church
rests with him, because retribution has not come upon him for his desertion of Berytus,
when he had cast an eye of desire on the Church of the Nicomedians, begins to support
these apostates, and has taken upon him to write letters every where in their behalf, if
by any means he may draw in certain ignorant persons to this most base and antichristian
heresy; I am therefore constrained, knowing what is written in the law, no longer to hold
my peace, but to make it known to you all; that you may understand who the apostates are,
and the cavils which their heresy has adopted, and that, should Eusebius write to you, you
may pay no attention to him, for he now desires by means of these men to exhibit anew his
old malevolence , which has so long been concealed, pretending to write in their favour,
while in truth it clearly appears, that he does it to forward his own interests.

2. Now those who became apostates are these, Arius, Achilles, Aeithales, Carpones, another
Arius, and Sarmates, sometime Presbyters: Euzoius, Lucius, Julius, Menas, Helladius, and
Gaius, sometime Deacons: and with them Secundus and Theonas, sometime called Bishops. And
the novelties they have invented and put forth contrary to the Scriptures are these
following :-God was not always a Father , but there was a time when God was not a Father.
The Word of God was not always, but originated from things that were not; for God that is,
has made him that was not, of that which was not; wherefore there was a time when He was
not; for the Son is a creature and a work. Neither is He like in essence to the Father;
neither is He the true and natural Word of the Father; neither is He His true Wisdom ; but
He is one of the things made and created, and is called the Word and Wisdom by an abuse of
terms, since He Himself originated by the proper Word of God, and by the Wisdom that is in
God, by which God has made not only all other things but Him also. Wherefore He is by
nature subject to change and variation as are all rational creatures. And the Word is
foreign from the essence of the Father, and is alien and separated therefrom. And the
Father cannot be described by the Son, for the Word does not know the Father perfectly and
accurately, neither can He see Him perfectly.

Moreover, the Son knows not His own essence as it really is; for He is made for us, that
God might create us by Him, as by an instrument; and He would not have existed, had not
God wished to create us. Accordingly, when some one asked them, whether the Word of God
can possibly change as the devil changed, they were not afraid to say that He can; for
being something made and created, His nature is subject to change. 3. Now when Arius and
his fellows made these assertions, and shamelessly avowed them, we being assembled with
the Bishops of Egypt and Libya, nearly a hundred in number, anathematized both them and
their followers. But Eusebius and his fellows admitted them to communion, being desirous
to mingle falsehood with the truth, and impiety with piety. But they will not be able to
do so, for the truth must prevail; neither is there any "communion of light with
darkness," nor any "concord of Christ with Belial . For who ever heard such assertions
before ? or who that hears them now is not astonished and does not stop his ears lest they
should be defiled with such language? Who that has heard the words of John, "In the
beginning was the Word ," will not denounce the saying of these men, that "there was a
time when He was not? Or who that has heard in the Gospel, "the Only-begotten Son," and
"by Him were all things made ," will not detest their declaration that He is "one of the
things that were made. For how can He be one of those things which were made by Himself?
or how can He be the Only-begotten, when, according to them, He is counted as one among
the rest, since He is Himself a creature and a work?

And how can He be "made of things that were not," when the Father saith, "My heart hath
uttered a good Word," and "Out of the womb I have begotten Thee before the morning star ?
Or again, how is He "unlike in substance to the Father," seeing He is the perfect "image"
and "brightness " of the Father, and that He saith, "He that hath seen Me hath seen the
Father ? And if the Son is the "Word" and "Wisdom" of God, how was there "a time when He
was not? It is the same as if they should say that God was once without Word and without
Wisdom . And how is He "subject to change and variation," Who says, by Himself, "I am in
the Father, and the Father in Me ," and "I and the Father are One ; and by the Prophet,
"Behold Me, for I am, and I change not ? For although one may refer this expression to the
Father, yet it may now be more aptly spoken of the Word, viz., that though He has been
made man, He has not changed; but as the Apostle has said, "Jesus Christ is the same
yesterday, to-day, and for ever. And who can have persuaded them to say, that He was made
for us, whereas Paul writes, "for Whom are all things, and by Whom are all things ?"

4. As to their blasphemous position that "the Son knows not the Father perfectly," we
ought not to wonder at it; for having once set themselves to fight against Christ, they
contradict even His express words, since He says, "As the Father knoweth Me, even so know
I the Father ." Now if the Father knows the Son but in part, then it is evident that the
Son does not know the Father perfectly; but if it is not lawful to say this, but the
Father does know the Son perfectly, then it is evident that as the Father knows His own
Word, so also the Word knows His own Father Whose Word He is. 5. By these arguments and
references to the sacred Scriptures we frequently overthrew them; but they changed like
chameleons , and again shifted their ground, striving to bring upon themselves that
sentence, "when the wicked falleth into the depth of evils, he despiseth ." There have
been many heresies before them, which, venturing further than they ought, have fallen into
folly ; but these men by endeavouring in all their cavils to overthrow the Divinity of the
Word, have justified the other in comparison of themselves, as approaching nearer to
Antichrist. Wherefore they have been excommunicated and anathematized by the Church. We
grieve for their destruction, and especially because, having once been instructed in the
doctrines of the Church, they have now sprung away. Yet we are not greatly surprised, for
Hymenaeus and Philetus did the same, and before them Judas, who followed the Saviour, but
afterwards became a traitor and an apostate. And concerning these same persons, we have
not been left without instruction; for our Lord has forewarned us; "Take heed lest any man
deceive you: for many shall come in My name, saying, I am Christ, and the time draweth
near, and they shall deceive many: go ye not after them ;" While Paul, who was taught
these things by our Saviour, wrote that "in the latter times some shall depart from the
sound faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils, which reject the
truth ."

6. Since then our Lord and Saviour Jesus, Christ has instructed us by His own mouth, and
also hath signified to us by the Apostle concerning such men, we accordingly being
personal witnesses of their impiety, have anathematized, as we said, all such, and
declared them to be alien from the Catholic Faith and Church. And we have made this known
to your piety, dearly beloved and most honoured fellow-ministers, in order that should any
of them have the boldness to come unto you, you may not receive them, nor comply with the
desire of Eusebius, or any other person writing in their behalf. For it becomes us who are
Christians to turn away from all who speak or think any thing against Christ, as being
enemies of God, and destroyers of souls; and not even to "bid such God speed ," lest we
become partakers of their sins, as the blessed John hath charged us. Salute the brethren
that are with you. They that are with me salute you.

Presbyters of Alexandria. 7. I, Colluthus, Presbyter, agree with what is here written, and
give my assent to the deposition of Arius and his associates in impiety. Alexander ,
Presbyter, likewise Dioscorus , Presbyter, likewise Dionysius , Presbyter, likewise
Eusebius, Presbyter, likewise Alexander, Presbyter,likewise Nilaras , Presbyter, likewise
Arpocration, Presbyter, likewise Agathus, Presbyter Nemesius, Presbyter Longus , Presbyter
Silvanus, Presbyter Peroys, Presbyter Apis, Presbyter Proterius, Presbyter Paulus,
Presbyter Cyrus, Presbyter, likewise Deacons Ammonius , Deacon, likewise Macarius, Deacon
Pistus , Deacon, likewise Athanasius, Deacon Eumenes, Deacon Apollonius , Deacon Olympius,
Deacon Aphthonius , Deacon Athanasius , Deacon Macarius, Deacon, likewise Paulus, Deacon
Petrus, Deacon Ambytianus, Deacon Gaius , Deacon, likewise Alexander, Deacon Dionysius,
Deacon Agathon, Deacon Polybius, Deacon, likewise Theonas, Deacon Marcus, Deacon Comodus,
Deacon Serapion , Deacon Nilon, Deacon Romanus, Deacon, likewise Presbyters of the
Mareotis. I, Apollonius, Presbyter, agree with what is here written, and give my assent to
the deposition of Arius and his associates in impiety.

Ingenius , Presbyter, likewise Ammonius, Presbyter Dioscorus , Presbyter Sostras,
Presbyter Theon , Presbyter Tyrannus, Presbyter Copres, Presbyter Ammonas Orion, Presbyter
Serenus, Presbyter Didymus, Presbyter Heracles , Presbyter Boccon, , Presbyter Agathus,
Presbyter Achillas, Presbyter Paulus, Presbyter Thalelaeus, Presbyter Dionysius,
Presbyter, likewise Deacons Sarapion , Deacon, likewise Justus, Deacon, likewise Didymus,
Deacon Demetrius , Deacon Maurus , Deacon Alexander, Deacon Marcus , Deacon Comon, Deacon
Tryphon , Deacon Ammonius , Deacon Didymus, Deacon Ptollarion , Deacon Seras, Deacon Gaius
, Deacon Hierax , Deacon Marcus, Deacon Theonas, Deacon Sarmaton, Deacon Carpon, Deacon
Zoilus, Deacon, likewise


DE DECRETIS OR DEFENCE OF THE NICENE DEFINITION
===============================================

DE DECRETIS OR DEFENCE OF THE NICENE DEFINITION Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION.

1 The complaint of the Arians against the Nicene Council; their fickleness; they, are like
Jews; their employment of force instead of reason. 1. Thou hast done well, in signifying
to me the discussion thou hast had with the advocates of Arianism, among whom were certain
of the friends of Eusebius, as well as very many of the brethren who hold the doctrine of
the Church. I hailed thy vigilance for the love of Christ, which excellently exposed the
irreligion of their heresy; while I marvelled at the effrontery which led the Arians,
after all the past detection of unsoundness and futility in their arguments, nay, after
the general conviction of their extreme perverseness, still to complain like the Jews,
"Why did the Fathers at Nicaea use terms not in Scripture , `Of the essence' and `One in
essence?'" Thou then, as a man of learning, in spite of their subterfuges, didst convict
them of talking to no purpose; and they in devising them were but acting suitably to their
own evil disposition. For they are as variable and fickle in their sentiments, as
chameleons in their colours ; and when exposed they look confused, and when questioned
they hesitate, and then they lose shame, and betake themselves to evasions. And then, when
detected in these, they do not rest till they invent fresh matters which are not, and,
according to the Scripture, `imagine a vain thing '; and all that they may be constant to
their irreligion.

2 Now such endeavours are nothing else than an obvious token of their defect of reason ,
and a copying, as I have said, of Jewish malignity. For the Jews too, when convicted by
the Truth, and unable to confront it, used evasions, such as, 'What sign doest Thou, that
we may see and believe Thee? What dost Thou work ? though so many signs were given, that
they said themselves, `What do we? for this man doeth many miracles .' In tru7th, dead men
were raised, lame walked, blind saw afresh, lepers were cleansed, and the water became
wine, and five loaves satisfied five thousand, and all wondered and worshipped the Lord,
confessing that in Him were fulfilled the prophecies, and that He was God the Son of God;
all but the Pharisees, who, though the signs shone brighter than the sun, yet complained
still, as ignorant men, 'Why dost Thou, being a man, make Thyself God ? Insensate, and
verily blind in understanding! they ought contrariwise to have said, "Why hast Thou, being
God, become man? for His works proved Him God, that they might both worship the goodness
of the Father, and admire the Son's Economy for our sakes. However, this they did not say;
no, nor liked to witness what He was doing; or they witnessed indeed, for this they could
not help, but they changed their ground of complaint again, "Why healest Thou the
paralytic, why makest Thou the born-blind to see, on the sabbath day? But this too was an
excuse, and mere murmuring;

3 for on other days as well did the Lord heal `all manner of sickness, and all manner of
disease ,' but they complained still according to their wont, and by calling Him
Beelzebub, preferred the suspicion of Atheism , to a recantation of their own wickedness.
And though in such sundry times and divers manners the Saviour shewed His Godhead and
preached the Father to all men, nevertheless, as kicking against the pricks, they
contradicted in the language of folly, and this they did, according to the divine proverb,
that by finding occasions, they might separate themselves from the truth . 4 2. As then
the Jews of that day, for acting thus wickedly and denying the Lord, were with justice
deprived of their laws and of the promise made to their fathers, so the Arians, Judaizing
now, are, in my judgment, in circumstances like those of Caiaphas and the contemporary
Pharisees. For, perceiving that their heresy is utterly unreasonable, they invent excuses,
"Why was this defined, and not that?" Yet wonder not if now they practise thus; for in no
long time they will turn to outrage, and next will threaten `the band and the captain .'
Forsooth in these their heterodoxy has its support, as we see; for denying the Word of
God, reason have they none at all, as is equitable. Aware then of this, I would have made
no reply to their interrogations: but, since thy friendliness has asked to know the
transactions of the Council, I have without any delay related at once what then took
place, shewing in few words, how destitute Arianism is of a religious spirit, and how
their one business is to frame evasions.

CHAPTER II. CONDUCT OF THE ARIANS TOWARDS THE NICENE COUNCIL.

Ignorant as well as irreligious to attempt to reverse an Ecumenical Council: proceedings
at Nicoea: Eusebians then signed what they now complain of: on the unanimity of true
teachers and the process of tradition: changes of the Arians. And do thou, beloved,
consider whether it be not so. If, the devil having sowed their hearts with this
perverseness , they feel confidence in their bad inventions, let them defend themselves
against the proofs of heresy which have been advanced, and then will be the time to find
fault, if they can, with the definition framed against them . For no one, on being
convicted of murder or adultery, is at liberty after the trial to arraign the sentence of
the judge, why he spoke in this way and not in that . For this does not exculpate the
convict, but rather increases his crime on the score of petulance and audacity. In like
manner, let these either prove that their sentiments are religious (for they were then
accused and convicted, and their complaints are subsequent, and it is just that those who
are under a charge should confine themselves to their own defence), or if they have an
unclean conscience, and are aware of their own irreligion, let them not complain of what
they do not understand, or they will bring on themselves a double imputation, of
irreligion and of ignorance. Rather let them investigate the matter in a docile spirit,
and learning what hitherto they have not known, cleanse their irreligious ears with the
spring of truth and the doctrines of religion .

3. Now it happened to Eusebius and his fellows in the Nicene Council as follows:-while
they stood out in their irreligion, and attempted their fight against God , the terms they
used were replete with irreligion; but the assembled Bishops who were three hundred more
or less, mildly and charitably required of them to explain and defend themselves on
religious grounds. Scarcely, however, did they begin to speak, when they were condemned ,
and one differed from another; then perceiving the straits in which their heresy lay, they
remained dumb, and by their silence confessed the disgrace which came upon their
heterodoxy. On this the Bishops, having negatived the terms they had invented, published
against them the sound and ecclesiastical faith; and, as all subscribed it, Eusebius and
his fellows subscribed it also in those very words, of which they are now complaining, I
mean, "of the essence" and "one in essence," and that "the Son of God is neither creature
or work, nor in the number of things originated , but that the Word is an offspring from
the substance of the Father. And what is strange indeed, Eusebius of Caesarea in
Palestine, who had denied the day before, but afterwards subscribed, sent to his Church a
letter, saying that this was the Church's faith, and the tradition of the Fathers; and
made a public profession that they were before in error, and were rashly contending
against the truth.

For though he was ashamed at that time to adopt these phrases, and excused himself to the
Church in his own way, yet he certainly means to imply all this in his Epistle, by his not
denying the "one in essence," and "of the essence. And in this way he got into a
difficulty; for while he was excusing himself, he went on to attack the Arians, as stating
that "the Son was not before His generation," and as thereby rejecting His existence
before His birth in the flesh. And this Acacius is aware of also, though he too through
fear may pretend otherwise because of the times and deny the fact. Accordingly I have
subjoined at the end the letter of Eusebius, that thou mayest know from it the disrespect
towards their own doctors shewn by Christ's enemies, and singularly by Acacius himself .
4. Are they not then committing a crime, in their very thought to gainsay so great and
ecumenical a Council? are they not in transgression, when they dare to confront that good
definition against Arianism, acknowledged, as it is, by those who had in the first
instance taught them irreligion? And supposing, even after subscription, Eusebius and his
fellows did change again, and return like dogs to their own vomit of irreligion, do not
the present gain-sayers deserve still greater detestation, because they thus sacrifice
their souls' liberty to others; and are willing to take these persons as masters of their
heresy, who are, as James has said, double-minded men, and unstable in all their ways, not
having one opinion, but changing to and fro, and now recommending certain statements, but
soon dishonouring them, and in turn recommending what just now they were blaming? But
this, as the Shepherd has said, is "the child of the devil ," and the note of hucksters
rather than of doctors. For, what our Fathers have delivered, this is truly doctrine; and
this is truly the token of doctors, to confess the same thing with each other, and to vary
neither from themselves nor from their fathers; whereas they who have not this character
are to be called not true doctors but evil. Thus the Greeks, as not witnessing to the same
doctrines, but quarrelling one with another, have no truth of teaching; but the holy and
veritable heralds of the truth agree together, and do not differ. For though they lived in
different times, yet they one and all tend the same way, being prophets of the one God,
and preaching the same Word harmoniously .

5. And thus what Moses taught, that Abraham observed; and what Abraham observed, that Noah
and Enoch acknowledged, discriminating pure from impure, and becoming acceptable to God.
For Abel too in this way witnessed, knowing what he had learned from Adam, who himself had
learned from that Lord, who said, when He came at the end of the ages for the abolishment
of sin, "I give no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment, which ye have heard
from the beginning . Wherefore also the blessed Apostle Paul, who had learned it from Him,
when describing ecclesiastical functions, forbade that deacons, not to say bishops, should
be double-tongued ; and in his rebuke of the Galatians, he made a broad declaration, "If
anyone preach any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be anathema,
as I have said, so say I again. If even we, or an Angel from heaven should preach unto you
any other Gospel than that ye have received, let him be anathema . Since then the Apostle
thus speaks, let these men either anathematise Eusebius and his fellows, at least as
changing round and professing what is contrary to their subscriptions; or, if they
acknowledge that their subscriptions were good, let them not utter complaints against so
great a Council.

But if they do neither the one nor the other, they are themselves too plainly the sport of
every wind and surge, and are influenced by opinions, not their own, but of others, and
being such, are as little worthy of deference now as before, in what they allege. Rather
let them cease to carp at what they understand not; lest so be that not knowing to
discriminate, they simply call evil good and good evil, and think that bitter is sweet and
sweet is bitter. Doubtless, they desire that doctrines which have been judged wrong and
have been reprobated should gain the ascendancy, and they make violent efforts to
prejudice what was rightly defined. Nor should there be any reason on our part for any
further explanation, or answer to their excuses, neither on theirs for further resistance,
but for an acquiescence in what the leaders of their heresy subscribed; for though the
subsequent change of Eusebius and his fellows was suspicious and immoral, their
subscription, when they had the opportunity of at least some little defence of themselves,
is a certain proof of the irreligion of their doctrine. For they would not have subscribed
previously had they not condemned the heresy, nor would they have condemned it, had they
not been encompassed with difficulty and shame; so that to change back again is a proof of
their contentious zeal for irreligion. These men also ought therefore, as I have said, to
keep quiet;

but since from an extraordinary want of modesty, they hope perhaps to be able to advocate
this diabolical irreligion better than the others, therefore, though in my former letter
written to thee, I have already argued at length against them, notwithstanding, come let
us now also examine them, in each of their separate statements, as their predecessors; for
now not less than then their heresy shall be shewn to have no soundness in it, but to be
from evil spirits.

CHAPTER III.

Two senses of the word Son, 1. adoptive; 2. essential; attempts of Arians to find a third
meaning between these; e.g. that our Lord only was created immediately by God (Asterius's
view), or that our Lord alone partakes the Father. The second and true sense; God begets
as He makes, really; though His creation and generation are not like man's; His generation
independent of time; generation implies an internal, and therefore an eternal, act in God;
explanation of Prov. viii. 22. 6. They say then what the others held and dared to maintain
before them; "Not always Father, not always Son; for the Son was not before His
generation, but, as others, came to be from nothing; and in consequence God was not always
Father of the Son; but, when the Son came to be and was created, then was God called His
Father. For the Word is a creature and a work, and foreign and unlike the Father in
essence; and the Son is neither by nature the Father's true Word, nor His only and true
Wisdom; but being a creature and one of the works, He is improperly called Word and
Wisdom; for by the Word which is in God was He made, as were all things. Wherefore the Son
is not true God ."

Now it may serve to make them understand what they are saying, to ask them first this,
what in fact a son is, and of what is that name significant . In truth, Divine Scripture
acquaints us with a double sense of this word:-one which Moses sets before us in the Law,
`When ye shall hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep all His commandments
which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the Lord thy God,
ye are children of the Lord your God ;' as also in the Gospel, John says, `But as many as
received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God :'-and the other sense, that
in which Isaac is son of Abraham, and Jacob of Isaac, and the Patriarchs of Jacob. Now in
which of these two senses do they understand the Son of God that they relate such fables
as the foregoing? for I feel sure they will issue in the same irreligion with Eusebius and
his fellows.

If in the first, which belongs to those who gain the name by grace from moral improvement,
and receive power to become sons of God (for this is what their predecessors said), then
He would seem to differ from us in nothing; no, nor would He be Only-begotten, as having
obtained the title of Son as others from His virtue. For granting what they say, that,
whereas His qualifications were fore-known , He therefore received grace from the first,
the name, and the glory of the name, from His very first beginning, still there will be no
difference between Him and those who receive the name after their actions, so long as this
is the ground on which He as others has the character of son. For Adam too, though he
received grace from the first, and upon his creation was at once placed in paradise,
differed in no respect either from Enoch, who was translated thither after some time from
his birth on his pleasing God, or from the Apostle, who likewise was caught up to Paradise
after his actions; nay, not from him who once was a thief, who on the ground of his
confession, received a promise that he should be forthwith in paradise.

7. When thus pressed, they will perhaps make an answer which has brought them into trouble
many times already; "We consider that the Son has this prerogative over others, and
therefore is called Only-begotten, because He alone was brought to be by God alone, and
all other things were created by God through the Son . Now I wonder who it was that
suggested to you so futile and novel an idea as that the Father alone wrought with His own
hand the Son alone, and that all other things were brought to be by the Son as by an
under-worker. If for the toil's sake God was content with making the Son only, instead of
making all things at once, this is an irreligious thought, especially in those who know
the words of Esaias, `The everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth,
hungereth not, neither is weary; there is no searching of His understandings .' Rather it
is He who gives strength to the hungry, and through His Word refreshes the labouring .
Again, it is irreligious to suppose that He disdained, as if a humble task, to form the
creatures Himself which came after the Son; for there is no pride in that God, who goes
down with Jacob into Egypt, and for Abraham's sake corrects Abim- elek because of Sara,
and speaks face to face with Moses, himself a man, and descends upon Mount Sinai, and by
His secret grace fights for the people against Amalek.

However, you are false even in this assertion, for `He made us, and not we ourselves .' He
it is who through His Word made all things small and great, and we may not divide the
creation, and says this is the Father's, and this the Son's, but they are of one God, who
uses His proper Word as a Hand , and in Him does all things. This God Himself shews us,
when He says, `All these things hath My Hand made ;' while Paul taught us as he had
learned , that `There is one God, from whom all things; and one Lord Jesus Christ, through
whom all things .' Thus He, always as now, speaks to the sun and it rises, and commands
the clouds and it rains upon one place; and where it does not rain, it is dried up. And He
bids the earth yield her fruits, and fashions Jeremias in the womb. But if He now does all
this, assuredly at the beginning also He did not disdain to make all things Himself
through the Word; for these are but parts of the whole.

8. But let us suppose that the other creatures could not endure to be wrought by the
absolute Hand of the Unoriginate and therefore the Son alone was brought into being by the
Father alone, and other things by the Son as an underworker and assistant, for this is
what Asterius the sacrificer has written, and Arius has transcribed and bequeathed to his
own friends, and from that time they use this form of words, broken reed as it is, being
ignorant, the bewildered men, how brittle it is. For if it was impossible for things
originate to bear the hand of God, and you hold the Son to be one of their number, how was
He too equal to this formation by God alone? and if a Mediator became necessary that
things originate might come to be, and you hold the Son to be originated, then must there
have been some medium before Him, for His creation; and that Mediator himself again being
a creature, it follows that he too needed another Mediator for his own constitution. And
though we were to devise another, we must first devise his Mediator, so that we shall
never come to an end. And thus a Mediator being ever in request, never will the creation
be constituted, because nothing originate, as you say, can bear the absolute hand of the
Unoriginate . And if, on your perceiving the extravagance of this, you begin to say that
the Son, though a creature, was made capable of being made by the Unoriginate, then it
follows that other things also, though originated, are capable of being wrought
immediately by the Unoriginate; for the Son too is but a creature in your judgment, as all
of them. And accordingly the origination of the Word is superfluous, according to your
irreligious and futile imagination, God being sufficient for the immediate formation of
all things, and all things originate being capable of sustaining His absolute hand.

These irreligious men then having so little mind amid their madness, let us see whether
this particular sophism be not even more irrational than the others. Adam was created
alone by God alone through the Word; yet no one would say that Adam had any prerogative
over other men, or was different from those who came after him, granting that he alone was
made and fashioned by God alone, and we all spring from Adam, and consist according to
succession of the race, so long as he was fashioned from the earth as others, and at first
not being, afterwards came to be. 9. But though we were to allow some prerogative to the
Protoplast as having been deemed worthy of the hand of God, still it must be one of honour
not of nature. For he came of the earth, as other men; and the hand which then fashioned
Adam, is also both now and ever fashioning and giving entire consistence to those who come
after him. And God Himself declares this to Jeremiah, as I said before; `Before I formed
thee in the womb, I knew thee ;' and so He says of all, `All those things hath My hand
made ;' and again by Isaiah, `Thus saith the Lord, thy redeemer, and He that formed thee
from the womb, I am the Lord that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens
alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by Myself .' And David, knowing this, says in the
Psalm, `Thy hands have made me and fashioned me ;' and he who says in Isaiah, `Thus saith
the Lord who formed me from the womb to be His servant ,' signifies the same. Therefore,
in respect of nature, he differs nothing from us though he precede us in time, so long as
we all consist and are created by the same hand.

If then these be your thoughts, O Arians, about the Son of God too, that thus He subsists
and came to be, then in your judgment He will differ nothing on the score of nature from
others, so long as He too was not, and came to be, and the name was by grace united to Him
in His creation for His virtue's sake. For He Himself is one of those, from what you say,
of whom the Spirit says in the Psalms, `He spake the word, and they were made; He
commanded, and they were created .' If so, who was it by whom God gave command for the
Son's creation? for a Word there must be by whom God gave command, and in whom the works
are created; but you have no other to shew than the Word you deny, unless indeed you
should devise again some new notion.

"Yes," they will say, "we have another;" (which indeed I formerly heard Eusebius and his
fellows use), "on this score do we consider that the Son of God has a prerogative over
others, and is called Only-begotten, because He alone partakes the Father, and all other
things partake the Son." Thus they weary themselves in changing and in varying their
phrases like colours ; however, this shall not save them from an exposure, as men that are
of the earth, speaking vainly, and wallowing in their own conceits as in mire. 10. For if
He were called God's Son, and we the Son's sons, their fiction were plausible; but if we
too are said to be sons of that God, of whom He is Son, then we too partake the Father ,
who says, `I have begotten and exalted children .' For if we did not partake Him, He had
not said, `I have begotten;' but if He Himself begat us, no other than He is our Father .
And, as before, it matters not, whether the Son has something more and was made first, but
we something less, and were made afterwards, as long as we all partake, and are called
sons, of the same Father . For the more or less does not indicate a different nature; but
attaches to each according to the practice of virtue; and one is placed over ten cities,
another over five; and some sit on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of lsrael; and
others hear the words, `Come, ye blessed of My Father,' and, `Well done, good and faithful
servant .' With such ideas, however, no wonder they imagine that of such a Son God was not
always Father, and such a Son was not always in being, but was generated from nothing as a
creature, and was not before His generation; for such an one is other than the True Son of
God.

But to persist in such teaching does not consist with piety , for it is rather the tone of
thought of Sadducees and the Samosatene ; it remains then to say that the Son of God is so
called according to the other sense, in which Isaac was son of Abraham; for what is
naturally begotten from any one and does not accrue to him from without, that in the
nature of things is a son, and that is what the name implies . Is then the Son's
generation one of human affection? (for this perhaps, as their predecessors , they too
will be ready to object in their ignorance;)-in no wise; for God is not as man, nor men as
God. Men were created of matter, and that passible; but God is immaterial and incorporeal.
And if so be the same terms are used of God and man in divine Scripture, yet the clear-
sighted, as Paul enjoins, will study it, and thereby discriminate, and dispose of what is
written according to the nature of each subject, and avoid any confusion of sense, so as
neither to conceive of the things of God in a human way, nor to ascribe the things of man
to God . For this were to mix wine with water , and to place upon the altar strange fire
with that which is divine.

11. For God creates, and to create is also ascribed to men; and God has being, and men are
said to be, having received from God this gift also. Yet does God create as men do? or is
His being as man's being? Perish the thought; we understand the terms in one sense of God,
and in another of men. For God creates, in that He calls what is not into being, needing
nothing thereunto; but men work some existing material, first praying, and so gaining the
wit to make, from that God who has framed all things by His proper Word. And again men,
being incapable of self-existence, are enclosed in place, and consist in the Word of God;
but God is self-existent, enclosing all things, and enclosed by none; within all according
to His own goodness and power, yet without all in His proper nature . As then men create
not as God creates, as their being is not such as God's being, so men's generation is in
one way, and the Son is from the Father in another . For the offspring of men are portions
of their fathers, since the very nature of bodies is not uncompounded, but in a state of
flux , and composed of parts; and men lose their substance in begetting, and again they
gain substance from the accession of food. And on this account men in their time become
fathers of many children; but God, being without parts, is Father of the Son without
partition or passion;

for there is neither effluence of the Immaterial, nor influx from without, as among men;
and being uncompounded in nature, He is Father of One Only Son. This is why He is Only-
begotten, and alone in the Father's bosom, and alone is acknowledged by the Father to be
from Him, saying, `This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased .' And He too is the
Father's Word, from which may be understood the impassible and impartitive nature of the
Father, in that not even a human word is begotten with passion or partition, much less the
Word of God . Wherefore also He sits, as Word, at the Father's right hand; for where the
Father is, there also is His Word; but we, as His works, stand in judgment before Him;
and, while He is adored, because He is Son of the adorable Father, we adore, confessing
Him Lord and God, because we are creatures and other than He.

12. The case being thus, let who will among them consider the matter, so that one may
abash them by the following question; Is it right to say that what is God's offspring and
proper to Him is out of nothing? or is it reasonable in the very idea, that what is from
God has accrued to Him, that a man should dare to say that the Son is not always? For in
this again the generation of the Son exceeds and transcends the thoughts of man, that we
become fathers of our own children in time, since we ourselves first were not and then
came into being; but God, in that He ever is, is ever Father of the Son . And the
origination of mankind is brought home to us from things that are parallel; but, since `no
one knoweth the Son but the Father, and no one knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to
whomsoever the Son will reveal Him ,' therefore the sacred writers to whom the Son has
revealed Him, have given us a certain image from things visible, saying, `Who is the
brightness of His glory, and the Expression of His Person ;' and again, `For with Thee is
the well of life, and in Thy light shall we see lights ;' and when the Word chides lsrael,
He says, `Thou hast forsaken the Fountain of wisdom ;' and this Fountain it is which says,
`They have forsaken Me the Fountain of living waters .' And mean indeed and very dim is
the illustration compared with what we desiderate; but yet it is possible from it to
understand something above man's nature, instead of thinking the Son's generation to be on
a level with ours. For who can even imagine that the radiance of light ever was not, so
that he should dare to say that the Son was not always, or that the Son was not before His
generation? or who is capable of separating the radiance from the sun, or to conceive of
the fountain as ever void of life, that he should madly say, `The Son is from nothing,'
who says, `I am the life ,' or `alien to the Father's essence,' who, says, `He that hath
seen Me, hath seen the:

Father ?' for the sacred writers wishing us thus to understand, have given these
illustrations; and it is unseemly and most irreligious, when Scripture contains such
images, to form ideas concerning our Lord from others which are neither in Scripture, nor
have any religious bearing. 13. Therefore let them tell us, from what teacher or by what
tradition they derived these notions concerning the Saviour? "We have read," they will
say, "in the Proverbs, `The Lord created me a beginning of His ways unto His works ;'"
this Eusebius and his fellows used to insist on , and you write me word, that the present
men also, though overthrown and confuted by an abundance of arguments, still were putting
about in every quarter this passage, and saying that the Son was one of the creatures, and
reckoning Him with things originated. But they seem to me to have a wrong understanding of
this passage also; for it has a religious and very orthodox sense, which had they
understood, they would not have blasphemed the Lord of glory. For on comparing what has
been above stated with this passage, they will find a great difference between them . For
what man of right understanding does not perceive, that what are created and made are
external to the maker; but the Son, as the foregoing argument has shewn, exists not
externally, but from the Father who begat Him? for man too both builds a house and begets
a son, and no one would reverse things, and say that the house or the ship were begotten
by the builder , but the son was created and made by him; nor again that the house was an
image of the maker, but the son unlike him who begat him;

but rather he will confess that the son is an image of the father, but the house a work of
art, unless his mind be disordered, and he beside himself. Plainly, divine Scripture,
which knows better than any the nature of everything, says through Moses, of the
creatures, `In the beginning God created the heaven and the earths ;' but of the Son it
introduces not another, but the Father Himself saying, `I have begotten Thee from the womb
before the morning star ;' and again, `Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee .'
And the Lord says of Himself in the Proverbs, `Before all the hills He begets me ;' and
concerning things originated and created John speaks, `All things were made by Him ;' but
preaching of the Lord, he says, `The Only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father,
He declared Him .' If then son, therefore not creature; if creature, not son; for great is
the difference between them, and son and creature cannot be the same, unless His essence
be considered to be at once from God, and external to God.

14. `Has then the passage no meaning?' for this, like a swarm of gnats, they are droning
about us . No surely, it is not without meaning, but has a very apposite one; for it is
true to say that the Son was created too, but this took place when He became man; for
creation belongs to man. And any one may find this sense duly given in the divine oracles,
who, instead of accounting their study a secondary matter, investigates the time and
characters , and the object, and thus studies and ponders what he reads. Now as to the
season spoken of, he will find for certain that, whereas the Lord always is, at length in
fulness of the ages He became man; and whereas He is Son of God, He became Son of man
also. And as to the object he will understand, that, wishing to annul our death, He took
on Himself a body from the Virgin Mary; that by offering this unto the Father a sacrifice
for all, He might deliver us all, who by fear of death were all our life through subject
to bondage . And as to the character, it is indeed the Saviour's, but is said of Him when
He took a body and said, `The Lord created me a beginning of His ways unto His works .'
For as it properly belongs to God's Son to be everlasting.

and in the Father's bosom, so on His becoming man, the words befitted Him, `The Lord
created me.' For then it is said of Him, as also that He hungered, and thirsted, and asked
where Lazarus lay, and suffered, and rose again . And as, when we hear of Him as Lord and
God and true Light, we understand Him as being from the Father, so on hearing, `The Lord
created,' and `Servant,' and `He suffered,' we shall justly ascribe this, not to the
Godhead, for it is irrelevant, but we must interpret it by that flesh which He bore for
our sakes: for to it these things are proper, and this flesh was none other's than the
Word's. And if we wish to know the object: attained by this, we shall find it to be as
follows: that the Word was made flesh in order to offer up this body for all, and that we
partaking of His Spirit, might be deified a gift which we could not otherwise have gained
than by His clothing Himself in our created body , for hence we derive our name of "men of
God" and "men in Christ. But as we, by receiving the Spirit, do not lose our own proper
substance, so the Lord, when made man for us, and bearing a body, was no less God; for He
was not lessened by the envelopment of the body, but rather deified it and rendered it
immortal .

CHAPTER IV. PROOF OF THE CATHOLIC SENSE OF THE WORD SON.

Power, Word or Reason, and Wisdom, the names of the Son, imply eternity; as well as the
Father's title of Fountain. The Arians reply, that these do not formally belong to the
essence of the Son, but are names given Him; that God has many words, powers, &c. Why
there is but one Son and Word, &c. All the titles of the Son coincide in Him. 15. This
then is quite enough to expose the infamy of the Arian heresy; for, as the Lord has
granted, out of their own words is irreligion brought home to them . But come now and let
us on our part act on the offensive, and call on them for an answer; for now is fair time,
when their own ground has failed them, to question them on ours; perhaps it may abash the
perverse, and disclose to them whence they have fallen. We have learned from divine
Scripture, that the Son of God, as was said above, is the very Word and Wisdom of the
Father. For the Apostle says, `Christ the power of God and the Wisdom of God ;' and John
after saying, `And the Word was made flesh,' at once adds, `And we saw His glory, the
glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth ,' so that, the Word
being the Only-begotten Son, in this Word and in Wisdom heaven and earth and all that is
therein were made. And of this Wisdom that God is Fountain we have learned from Baruch, by
Israel's being charged with having forsaken the Fountain of Wisdom. If then they deny
Scripture, they are at once aliens to their name, and may fitly be called of all men
atheists , and Christ's enemies, for they have brought upon themselves these names.

But if they agree with us that the sayings of Scripture are divinely inspired, let them
dare to say openly what they think in secret that God was once wordless and wisdomless ;
and let them in their madness say, `There was once when He was not,' and, `before His
generation, Christ was not ;' and again let them declare that the Fountain begat not
Wisdom from itself, but acquired it from without, till they have the daring to say, `The
Son came of nothing;' whence it will follow that there is no longer a Fountain, but a sort
of pool, as if receiving water from without, and usurping the name of Fountain . 16. How
full of irreligion this is, I consider none can doubt who has ever so little
understanding. But since they mutter something about Word and Wisdom being only names of
the Son , we must ask then, If these are only: names of the Son, He must be something
else: beside them. And if He is higher than the names, it is not lawful from the lesser to
denote the higher; but if He be less than the names, yet He surely must have in Him the
principle of this more honourable appellation; and this implies his advance, which is an
irreligion equal to anything that has gone before. For He who is in the Father, and in
whom also the Father is, who says, `I and the Father are one ,' whom he that hath seen,
hath seen the Father, to say that He has been exalted by anything external, is the extreme
of madness. However, when they are beaten hence, and like Eusebius and his fellows, are in
these great straits, then they have this remaining plea, which Arius too in ballads, and
in his own Thalia , fabled, as a new difficulty: `Many words speaketh God; which then of
these are we to call Son and Word, Only-begotten of the Father ?' Insensate, and anything
but Christians ! for first, on using such language about God, they conceive of Him almost
as a man, speaking and reversing His first words by His second, just as if one Word from
God were not sufficient for the framing of all things at the Father's will, and for His
providential care of all. For His speaking many words would argue a feebleness in them
all, each needing the service of the other. But that God should have one Word, which is
the true doctrine, both shews the power of God, and the perfection of the Word that is
from Him, and the religious understanding of them who thus believe.

17. O that they would consent to confess the truth from this their own statement! for if
they once grant that God produces words, they plainly know Him to be a Father; and
acknowledging this, let them consider that, while they are loth to ascribe one Word to
God, they are imagining that He is Father of many; and while they are loth to say that
there is no Word of God at all, yet they do not confess that He is the Son of God,-which
is ignorance of the truth, and inexperience in divine Scripture. For if God is Father of a
word at all, wherefore is not He that is begotten a Son? And again, who should be Son of
God, but His Word? For there are not many words, or each would be imperfect, but one is
the Word, that He only may be perfect, and because, God being one, His Image too must be
one, which is the Son. For the Son of God, as may be learnt from the divine oracles
themselves, is Himself the Word of God, and the Wisdom, and the Image, and the Hand, and
the Power; for God's offspring is one, and of the generation from the Father these titles
are tokens . For if you say the Son, you have declared what is from the Father by nature;
and if you think of the Word, you are thinking again of what is from Him, and what is
inseparable;

and, speaking of Wisdom, again you mean just as much, what is not from without, but from
Him and in Him; and if you name the. Power and the Hand, again you speak of what is proper
to essence; and, speaking of the Image, you signify the Son; for what else is like God but
the offspring from Him? Doubtless the things, which came to be through the Word, these are
`founded in Wisdom' and what are `founded in Wisdom,' these are all made by the Hand, and
dame to be through the Son. And we have proof of this, not from external sources, but from
the Scriptures; for God Himself says by Isaiah the Prophet; `My hand also hath laid the
foundation of the earth, and My right hand hath spanned the heavens .' And again, `And I
will cover thee in the shadow of My Hand, by which I planted the heavens, and laid the
foundations of the earth .' And David being taught this, and knowing that the Lord's Hand
was nothing else than Wisdom, says in the Psalm, `In wisdom hast Thou made them all; the
earth is full of Thy creation .' Solomon also received the same from God, and said, `The
Lord by wisdom founded the earth ,' and John, knowing that the Word was the Hand and the
Wisdom, thus preached, `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 not anything made .' And the Apostle,
seeing that the Hand and the Wisdom and the Word was nothing else than the Son, says,
`God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the Fathers by the
Prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son, whom He hath appointed Heir
of all things, by whom also He made the ages .' And again, `There is one Lord Jesus
Christ, through whom are all things, and we through Him .' And knowing also that the Word,
the Wisdom, the Son Himself was the Image of the Father, he says in the Epistle to the
Colossians, `Giving thanks to God and the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers
of the inheritance of the Saints in light, who hath delivered us from the power of
darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of His dear Son; in whom we have
redemption, even the remission of sins; who is the Image of the Invisible God, the First-
born of every creature; for by Him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that
are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions or
principalities or powers all things were created by Him and for Him;

and He is before all things, and in Him all things consist .' For as all things are
created by the Word, so, because He is the Image, are they also created in Him . And thus
anyone who directs his thoughts to the Lord, will avoid stumbling upon the stone of
offence, but rather will go forward to the brightness in the light of truth; for this is
really the doctrine of truth, though these contentious men burst with spite , neither
religious toward God, nor abashed at their confutation.

CHAPTER V. DEFENCE OF THE COUNCIL'S PHRASES, "FROM THE ESSENCE," AND "ONE IN ESSENCE."

Objection that the phrases are not scriptural; we ought to look at the sense more than the
wording; evasion of the Arians as to the phrase "of God" which is in Scripture; their
evasion of all explanations but those which the Council selected, which were intended to
negative the Arian formula; protest against their conveying any material sense. 18. Now
Eusebius and his fellows were at the former period examined at great length, and convicted
themselves, as I said before; on this they subscribed; and after this change of mind they
kept in quiet and retirement ; but since the present party, in the fresh arrogance of
irreligion, and in dizziness about the truth, are full set upon accusing the Council, let
them tell us what are the sort of Scriptures from which they have learned, or who is the
Saint by whom they have been taught, that they have heaped together the phrases, `out of
nothing ,' and `He was not before His generation,' and `once. He was not,' and
`alterable,' and `pre-existence,' and `at the will;' which are their fables in mockery of
the Lord. For the blessed Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews says, `By faith we understand
that the ages were framed by the Word of God, so that that which is seen was not made of
things which do appear .' But nothing is common to the Word with the ages ;for He it is
who is in existence before the ages, by whom also the ages came to be. And in the Shepherd
it is written (since they allege this book also, though it is not of the Canon ), `First
of all believe, that God is one, who created all things, and arranged them, and brought
all things from nothing into being;' but this again does not relate to the Son, for it
speaks concerning all things which came to be through Him, from whom He is distinct; for
it is not possible to reckon the Framer of all with the things made by Him, unless a man
is so beside himself as to say that the architect also is the same as the buildings which
he rears.

Why then, when they have invented on their part unscriptural phrases, for the purposes of
irreligion, do they accuse those who are religious in their use of them ? For
irreligiousness is utterly forbidden, though it be attempted to disguise it with artful
expressions and plausible sophisms; but religiousness is confessed by all to be lawful,
even though presented in strange phrases , provided only they are used with a religious
view, and a wish to make them the expression of religious thoughts. Now the aforesaid
grovelling phrases of Christ's enemies have been shewn in these remarks to be both
formerly and now replete with irreligion; whereas the definition of the Council against
them, if accurately examined, will be found to be altogether a representation of the
truth, and especially if diligent attention be paid to the occasion which gave rise to
these expressions, which was reasonable, and was as follows:-

19. The Council wishing to do away with the irreligious phrases of the Arians, and to use
instead the acknowledged words of the Scriptures, that the Son is not from nothing but
`from God,' and is `Word' and `Wisdom,' and not creature or work, but a proper offspring
from the Father, Eusebius and his fellows, led by their inveterate heterodoxy, understood
the phrase `from God' as belonging to us, as if in respect to it the Word of God differed
nothing from us, and that because it is written, `There is one God, from whom, all things
;' and again, `Old things are passed away, behold, all things are become new, and all
things are from God .' But the Fathers, perceiving their craft and the cunning of their
irreligion, were forced to express more distinctly the sense of the words `from God.'
Accordingly, they wrote `from the essence of God ,' in order that `from God' might not be
considered common and equal in the Son and in things originate, but that all others might
be acknowledged as creatures, and the Word alone as from the Father. For though all things
be said to be from God, yet this is not in the sense in which the Son is from Him;

for as to the creatures, `of God' is said of them on this account, in that they exist not
at random or spontaneously, nor come to be by chance , according to those philosophers who
refer them to the combination of atoms, and to elements of similar structure,-nor as
certain heretics speak of a distinct Framer,-nor as others again say that the constitution
of all things is from certain Angels;-but in that (whereas God is), it was. by Him that
all things were brought into being, not being before, through His Word; but as to the
Word, since He is not a creature, He alone is both called and is `from the Father;' and it
is significant of this sense to say that the Son is `from the essence of the Father,' for
to nothing originate does this attach. In truth, when Paul says that `all things are from
God,' he immediately adds, `and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom all things ,' in order
to shew all men, that the Son is other than all these things which came to be from God
(for the things which came to be from God, came to be through His Son); and that he had
used his foregoing words with reference to the world as framed by God , and not as if all
things were from the Father as the Son is. For neither are other things as the Son, nor is
the Word one among others, for He is Lord and Framer of all;

and on this account did the Holy Council declare expressly that He was of the essence of
the Father, that we might believe the Word to be other than the nature of things
originate, being alone truly from God; and that no subterfuge should be left open to the
irreligious. This then was the reason why the Council wrote `of the essence.' 20. Again,
when the Bishops said that the Word must be described as the True Power t and Image of the
Father, in all things exact and like the Father, and as unalterable, e and as always, and
as in Him without division (for never was the Word not, but He was always, existing
everlastingly with the Father, as the radiance of light), Eusebius and his fellows endured
indeed, as not daring to contradict, being put to shame by the arguments which were urged
against them; but withal they were caught whispering to each other and winking with their
eyes, that `like,' and `always,' and `power,' and `in Him,' were, as before, common to us
and the Son, and that it was no difficulty to agree to these.

As to `like,' they said that it is written of us, `Man is the image and glory of God :'
`always,' that it was written, `For we which live are alway :' `in Him,' `In Him we live
and move and have our being :'`unalterable,' that it is written, `Nothing shall separate
us from the love of Christ :' as to `power,' that the caterpillar and the locust are
called `power' and `great power ,' and that it is often said of the people, for instance,
`All the power of the Lord came out of the land of Egypt :' and there are others also,
heavenly ones, for Scripture says, `The Lord of powers is with us, the God of Jacob is our
refuge .' Indeed Asterius, by title the sophist, had said the like in writing, having
learned it from them, and before him Arius having learned it also, as has been said. But
the Bishops discerning in this too their dissimulation, and whereas it is written, `Deceit
is in the heart of the irreligious that imagine evil ,' were again compelled on their part
to collect the sense of the Scriptures, and to re-say and re-write what they had said
before, more distinctly still, namely, that the Son is `one in essence ' with the Father:

by way of signifying, that the Son was from the Father, and not merely like, but the same
in likeness , and of shewing that the Son's likeness and unalterableness was different
from such copy of the same as is ascribed to us, which we acquire from virtue on the
ground of observance of the commandments. For bodies which are like each other may be
separated and become at distances from each other, as are human sons relatively to their
parents (as it is written concerning Adam and Seth, who was begotten of him that he was
like him after his own pattern ); but since the generation of the Son from the Father is
not according to the nature of men, and not only like, but also inseparable from the
essence of the Father, and He and the Father are one, as He has said Himself, and the Word
is ever in the Father and the Father in the Word, as the radiance stands towards the light
(for this the phrase itself indicates), therefore the Council, as understanding this,
suitably wrote `one in essence,' that they might both defeat the perverseness of the
heretics, and shew that the Word was other than originated things.

For, after thus writing, they at once added, `But they who say that the Son of God is from
nothing, or created, or alterable, or a work, or from other essence, these the Holy
Catholic Church anathematizes .' And by saying this, they shewed clearly that `of the
essence,' and `one in essence,' are destructive of those catchwords of irreligion, such as
`created,' and `work,' and `originated,' and `alterable,' and `He was not before His
generation.' And he who holds these, contradicts the Council; but he who does not hold
with Arius, must needs hold and intend the decisions of the Council, suitably regarding
them to signify the relation of the radiance to the light, and from thence gaining the
illustration of the truth. 21. Therefore if they, as the others, make an excuse that the
terms are strange, let them consider the sense in which the Council so wrote, and
anathematize what the Council anathematized; and then if they can, let themfind fault with
the expressions. But I well know that, if they hold the sense of the Council, they will
fully accept the terms in which it is conveyed; whereas if it be the sense which they wish
to complain of, all must see that it is idle in them to discuss the wording, when they are
but seeking handles for irreligion. This then was the reason of these expressions; but if
they still complain that such are not scriptural, that very complaint is a reason why they
should be cast out, as talking idly and disordered in mind. And let them blame themselves
in this matter, for they set the example, beginning their war against God with words not
in Scripture However, if a person is interested in the question, let him know, that, even
if the expressions are not in so many words in the Scriptures, yet, as was said before,
they contain the sense of the Scriptures, and expressing it, they convey it to those who
have their hearing unimpaired for religious doctrine. Now this circumstance it is for thee
to consider, and for those ill-instructed men to give ear to. It has been shewn above, and
must be believed as true, that the Word is from the Father, and the only Offspring proper
to Him and natural.

For whence may one conceive the Son to be, who is the Wisdom and the Word, in whom all
things came to be, but from God Himself? However, the Scriptures also teach us this, since
the Father says by David, `My heart uttered a good Word ,' and, `From the womb before the
morning star I begat Thee ;' and the Son signifies to the Jews about Himself, `If God were
your Father, ye would dove Me; for I proceeded forth from the Father .' And again; `Not
that anyone has seen the Father, save He which is from God, He hath seen the Father .' And
moreover, `I and My Father are one,' and, `I in the Father and the Father in Me ,' is
equivalent to saying, `I am from the Father, and inseparable from Him.' And John in
saying, `The Only-begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him,
,' spoke of what He had learned from the Saviour. Besides, what else does `in the bosom'
intimate, but the Son's genuine generation from the Father?

22. If then any man conceives God to be compound, as accident is in essence, or to have
any external envelopement , and to be encompassed, or as if there is aught about Him which
completes the essence, so that when we say `God,' or name `Father,' we do not signify the
invisible and incomprehensible essence, but something about it, then let them complain of
the Council's stating that the Son was from the essence of God; but let them reflect, that
in thus considering they utter two blasphemies; for they make God corporeal, and they
falsely say that the Lord is not Son of the very Father, but of what is about Him. But if
God be simple, as He is, it follows that in saying `God' and naming `Father,' we name
nothing as if about Him, but signify his essence itself. For though to comprehend what the
essence of God is be impossible, yet if we only understand that God is, and if Scripture
indicates Him by means of these titles, we, with the intention of indicating Him and none
else, call Him God and Father and Lord. When then He says, `I am that I am,' and `I am the
Lord God ,' or when Scripture says, `God,' we understand nothing else by it but the
intimation of His incomprehensible essence Itself, and that He Is, who is spoken of .
Therefore let no one be startled on hearing that the Son of God is from the Essence of the
Father;

but rather let him accept the explanation of the Fathers, who in more explicit but
equivalent language have for `from God' written `of the essence' For they considered it
the same thing to say that the Word was `of God' and `of the essence of God,' since the
word `God,' as I have already said, signifies nothing but the essence of Him Who Is. If
then the Word is not in such sense from God, as a son, genuine and natural, from a father,
but only as creatures because they are framed, and as `all things are from God,' then
neither is He from the essence of the Father, nor is the Son again Son according to
essence, but in consequence of virtue, as we who are called sons by grace. But if He only
is from God, as a genuine Son, as He is, then the Son may reasonably be called from the
essence of God.

23. Again, the illustration of the Light and the Radiance has this meaning. For the Saints
have not said that the Word was related to God as fire kindled from the heat of the sun,
which is commonly put out again, for this is an external work and a creature of its
author, but they all preach of Him as Radiance , thereby to signify His being from the
essence, proper and indivisible, and His oneness with the Father. This also will secure
His true unchangableness and immutability; for how can these be His, unless He be proper
Offspring of the Father's essence? for this too must be taken to confirm His identity with
His own Father. Our explanation then having so religious an aspect, Christ's enemies
should not be startled at the `One in essence,' either, since this term also has a sound
sense and good reasons. Indeed, if we say that the Word is from the essence of God (for
after what has been said this must be a phrase admitted by them), what does this mean but
the truth and eternity of the essence from which He is begotten? for it is not different
in kind, lest it be combined with the essence of God as something foreign and unlike it.
Nor is He like only outwardly, lest He seem in some respect or wholly to be other in
essence, as brass shines like gold and silver like tin.

For these are foreign and of other nature, are separated off from each other in nature and
virtues, nor is brass proper to gold, nor is the pigeon born from the dove ; but though
they are considered like, yet they differ in essence. If then it be thus with the Son, let
Him be a creature as we are, and not One in essence; but if the Son is Word, Wisdom, Image
of the Father, Radiance, He must in all reason be One in essence. For unless it be proved
that He is not from God, but an instrument different in nature and different in essence,
surely the Council was sound in its doctrine and correct in its decree . 24. Further, let
every corporeal reference be banished on this subject; and transcending every imagination
of sense, let us, with pure understanding and with mind alone, apprehend the genuine
relation of son to father, and the Word's proper relation towards God, and the unvarying
likeness of the radiance towards the light: for as the words `Offspring' and `Son' bear,
and are meant to bear, no human sense, but one suitable to God, in like manner when we
hear the phrase `one in essence,' let us not fall upon human senses, and imagine
partitions and divisions of the Godhead, but as having our thoughts directed to things
immaterial, let us preserve undivided the oneness of nature and the identity of light; for
this is proper to a son as regards a father, and in this is shewn that God is truly Father
of the Word. Here again, the illustration of light and its radiance is in point . Who will
presume to say that the radiance is unlike and foreign to the sun? rather who, thus
considering the radiance relatively to the sun, and the identity of the light, would not
say with confidence, `Truly the light and the radiance are one, and the one is manifested
in the other, and the radiance is in the sun, so that whoso sees this, sees that also?'
but such a oneness and natural property, what should it be named by those who believe and
see aright, but Offspring one in essence?

and God's Offspring what should we fittingly and suitably consider, but Word, and Wisdom,
and Power? which it were a sin to say was foreign to the Father, or a crime even to
Imagine as other than with Him everlastingly. For by this Offspring the Father made all
things, and extended His Providence unto all things; by Him He exercises His love to man,
and thus He and the Father are one, as has been said; unless indeed these perverse men
make a fresh attempt, and say that the essence of the Word is not the same as the Light
which is in Him from the Father, as if the Light in the Son were one with the Father, but
He Himself foreign in essence as being a creature. Yet this is simply the belief of
Caiaphas and the Samosatene, which the Church cast out, but these now are disguising; and
by this they fell from the truth, and were declared to be heretics. For if He partakes in
fulness the light from the Father, why is He not rather that which others partake , that
there be no medium introduced between Him and the Father? Otherwise, it is no longer clear
that all things were generated by the Son, but by Him, of whom He too partakes . And if
this is the Word, the Wisdom of the Father, in whom the Father is revealed and known, and
frames the world, and without whom the Father doth nothing, evidently He it is who is from
the Father:

for all things originated partake of Him, as partaking of the Holy Ghost. And being such,
He cannot be from nothing, nor a creature at all, but rather a proper Offspring from the
Father, as the radiance from light.

CHAPTER VI. AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF THE COUNCIL.

1 Theognostus ; Dionysius of Alexandria; Dionysius of Rome; Origen. 25. This then is the
sense in which they who met at Nicaea made use of these expressions. But next that they
did not invent them for themselves (since this is one of their excuses), but spoke what
they had received from their predecessors, proceed we to prove this also, to cut off even
this excuse from them. Know then, O Arians, foes of Christ, that Theognostus , a learned
man, did not decline the phrase `of the essence,' for in the second book of his
Hypotyposes, he writes thus of the Son:- "The essence of the Son is not one procured from
without, nor accruing out of nothing , but it sprang from the Father's essence, as the
radiance of light, as the vapour of water; for neither the radiance, nor the vapour, is
the water itself or the sun itself, nor is it alien; but it is an effluence of the
Father's essence, which, however, suffers no partition. For as the sun remains the same,
and is not impaired by the rays poured forth by it, so neither does the Father's essence
suffer change, though it has the Son as an Image of Itself ."

2 Theognostus then, after previously investigating in the way of an exercise , proceeds to
lay down his sentiments in the foregoing words. Next, Dionysius, who was Bishop of
Alexandria, upon his writing against Sabellius and expounding at large the Saviour's
Economy according to the flesh, and thence proving. against the Sabellians that not the
Father but His Word became flesh, as John has said, was suspected of saying that the Son
as a thing made and originated, and not one in essence with the Father; on this he writes
to his namesake Dionysius, Bishop of Rome, to allege in his defence that this was a
slander upon him. And he assured him that he had not called the Son made, nay, did confess
Him to be even one in essence. And his words ran thus:- 3 "And I have written in another
letter a refutation of the false charge they bring against me, that I deny that Christ was
one in essence with God. For though I say that I have not found 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 human birth as being evidently homogeneous,
and I observed that undeniably parents 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 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, yet was altogether one in nature with it : and that a stream
flowing from a fountain, gained a new name, for that neither the fountain was called
stream, nor the stream fountain, and both existed, and the stream was the water from the
fountain"

4 26. And that the Word of God is not a work or creature, but an offspring proper to the
Father's essence and indivisible, as the great Council wrote, here you may see in the
words of Dionysius, Bishop of Rome, who, while writing against the Sabellians, thus
inveighs against those who dared to say so:- 5 "Next, I may reasonably turn to those who
divide and cut to pieces and destroy that most sacred doctrine of the Church of God, the
Divine Monarchy , making it as it were three powers and partitive subsistences and god-
heads three. I am told that some among you who are catechists and teachers of the Divine
Word, take the lead in this tenet, who are diametrically opposed, so to speak, to
Sabellius's opinions; for he blasphemously says that the Son is the Father, and the Father
the Son, but they in some sort preach three Gods, as dividing the sacred Monad into three
subsistences foreign to each other and utterly separate. For it must needs be that with
the God of the Universe, the Divine Word is united, and the Holy Ghost must repose and
habitate in God; thus in one as in a summit, I mean the God of the Universe, must the
Divine Triad be gathered up and brought together. For it is the doctrine of the
presumptuous Marcion, to sever and divide the Divine Monarchy into three origins,-a
devil's teaching, not that of Christ's true disciples and lovers of the Saviour's lessons,
For they know well that a Triad is preached by divine Scripture, but that neither Old
Testament nor New preaches three Gods. Equally must one censure those who hold the: Son to
be a work, and consider that the Lord has come into being, as one of things which really
came to be;

6 whereas the divine oracles witness to a generation suitable to Him and becoming, but not
to any fashioning or making. A blasphemy then is it, not ordinary, but even the highest,
to say that the Lord is in any sort a handiwork. For if He came to be Son, once He was
not; but He was always, if (that is) He be in the Father, as He says Himself, and if the
Christ be Word and Wisdom and Power (which, as ye know, divine Scripture says), and these
attributes be powers of God. If then the Son came into being, once these attributes were
not; consequently there was a time, when God was without them; which is most absurd. And
why say more on these points to you, men full of the Spirit and well aware of the
absurdities which come to view from saying that the Son is a work? Not attending, as I
consider, to this circumstance, the authors of this opinion have entirely missed the
truth, in explaining, contrary to the sense of divine and prophetic Scripture in the
passage, the words, `The Lord created me a beginning of His ways unto His works .' For the
sense of `He created,' as ye know, is not one, for we must understand `He created' in this
place, as `He set over the works made by Him,' that is, `made by the Son Himself.' And `He
created' here must not be taken for `made,' for creating differs from making. `Is not He
thy Father that hath bought thee?

7 hath He not made thee and created thee ?'says Moses in his great song in Deuteronomy.
And one may Say to them, O reckless men, is He a work, who is `the First-born of every
creature, who is born from the womb before the morning star ,' who said, as Wisdom,
`Before all the hills He begets me ?' And in many passages of the divine oracles is the
Son said to have been generated, but nowhere to have come into being; which manifestly
convicts those of misconception about the Lord's generation, who presume to call His
divine and ineffable generation a making . Neither then may we divide into three Godheads
the wonderful and divine Monad; nor disparage with the name of `work' the dignity and
exceeding majesty of the Lord; but we must believe in God the Father Almighty, and in
Christ Jesus His Son, and in the Holy Ghost, and hold that to the God of the universe the
Word is united . For `I,' says He, `and the Father are one;'and, `I in the Father and the
Father in Me.' For thus both the Divine Triad, and the holy preaching of the Monarchy,
will be preserved."

8 27. And concerning the everlasting co-existence of the Word with the Father, and that He
is not of another essence or subsistence, but proper to the Father's, as the Bishops in
the Council said, you may hear again from the labour-loving Origen also. For what he has
written as if inquiring and by way of exercise, that let no one take as expressive of his
own sentiments, but of parties who are contending in investigation, but what he definitely
declares, that is the sentiment of the labour-loving man. After his prolusions then (so to
speak) against the heretics, straightway he introduces his personal belief, thus:- "If
there be an Image of the Invisible God, it is an invisible Image; nay, I will be bold to
add, that, as being the likeness of the Father, never was it not. For when was that God,
who, according to John, is called Light (for `God is Light'), without a radiance of His
proper glory, that a man should presume to assert the Son's origin of existence, as if
before He was not? But when was not that Image of the Father's Ineffable and Nameless and
Unutterable subsistence, that Expression and Word, and He that knows the Father? for let
him understand well who dares to say, `Once the Son was not,' that he is saying, `Once
Wisdom was not,'and `Word was not,' and `Life was not.'"

9 And again elsewhere he says:- "But it is not innocent nor without peril, if because of
our weakness of understanding we deprive God, as far as in us lies, of the Only-begotten
Word ever co-existing with Him; and the Wisdom in which He rejoiced; else He must be
conceived as not always possessed of joy." See, we are proving that this view has been
transmitted from father to father; but ye, O modern Jews and disciples of Caiaphas, how
many fathers can ye assign to your phrases? Not one of the understanding and wise; for all
abhor you, but the devil alone ; none but he is your father in this apostasy, who both in
the beginning sowed you with the seed of this irreligion, and now persuades you to slander
the Ecumenical Council , for committing to writing, not your doctrines, but that which
from the beginning those who were eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word have handed down
to us . For the faith which the Council has confessed in writing, that is the faith of the
Catholic Church; to assert this, the blessed Fathers so expressed themselves while
condemning the Arian heresy; and this is a chief reason why these apply themselves to
calumniate the Council. For it is not the terms which trouble them , but that those terms
prove them to be heretics, and presumptuous beyond other heresies.

CHAPTER VII. ON THE ARIAN SYMBOL "UNORIGINATE."

This term afterwards adopted by them; and why; three senses of it. A fourth sense.
Unoriginate denotes God in contrast to His creatures, not to His Son; Father the
scripturaI title instead; Conclusion.28. This in fact was the reason, when the unsound
nature of their phrases had been exposed at that time, and they were henceforth open to
the charge of irreligion, that they proceeded to borrow of the Greeks the term Unoriginate
, that, under shelter of it, they might reckon among the things originated and the
creatures, that Word of God, by whom these very things came to be; so unblushing are they
in their irreligion, so obstinate in their blasphemies against the Lord. If then this want
of shame arises from ignorance of the term, they ought to have learned of those who gave
it them, and who have not scrupled to say that even intellect, which they derive from
Good, and the soul which proceeds from intellect, though their respective origins be
known, are notwithstanding unoriginated, for they understand that by so saying they do not
disparage that first Origin of which the others come . This being the case, let them say
the like themselves, or else not speak at all of what they do not know. But if they
consider they are acquainted with the subject, then they must be interrogated; for the
expression is not from divine Scripture , but they are contentious, as elsewhere, for
unscriptural positions.

Just as I have related the reason and sense, with which the Council and the Fathers before
it defined and published `of the essence,' and `one in essence,' agreeably to what
Scripture says of the Saviour; so now let them, if they can, answer on their part what has
led them to this unscriptural phrase, and in what sense they call God Unoriginated? In
truth, I am told , that the name has different senses; philosophers say that it means,
first`what has not yet, but may, come to be;' next, `what neither exists, nor can come
into being;' and thirdly, `what exists indeed, but was neither originated nor had origin
of being, but is everlasting and indestructible .' Now perhaps they will wish to pass over
the first two senses, from the absurdity which follows; for according to the first, things
that already have come to be, and things that are expected to come to be, are
unoriginated; and the second is more absurd still; accordingly they will proceed to the
third sense, and use the word in it; though here, in this sense too, their irreligion will
be quite as great. For if by unoriginated they mean what has no origin of being, nor is
originated or created, but eternal, and say that the Word of God is contrary to this, who
comprehends not the craft of these foes of God? who but would stone such madmen?

for, when they are ashamed to bring forward again those first phrases which they fabled,
and which were condemned, the wretches have taken another way to signify them, by means of
what they call unoriginate. For if the Son be of things originate, it follows, that He too
came to be from nothing; and if He has an origin of being, then He was not before His
generation; and if He is not eternal, there was once when He was not . 29. If these are
their sentiments they ought to signify their heterodoxy in their own phrases, and not to
hide their perverseness under the cloke of the Unoriginate. But instead of this, the evil-
minded men do all things with craftiness like their father, the devil; for as he attempts
to deceive in the guise of others, so these have broached the term Unoriginate, that they
might pretend to speak piously of God, yet might cherish a concealed blasphemy against the
Lord, and under a veil might teach it to others. However, on the detecting of this
sophism, what remains to them? `We have found another,' say the evildoers; and then
proceed to add to what they have said already, that Unoriginate means what has no author
of being, but stands itself in this relation to things originated. Unthankful, and in
truth deaf to the Scriptures! who do everything, and say everything, not to honour God,
but to dishonour the Son, ignorant that he who dishonours the Son, dishonours the Father.
For first, even though they denote God in this way, still the Word is not proved to be of
things originated. For again, as being an offspring of the essence of the Father, He is of
consequence with Him eternally. For this name of offspring does not detract from the
nature of the Word, nor does Unoriginated take its sense from contrast with the Son, but
with the things which come to be through the Son; and as he who addresses.

an architect, and calls him framer of house or city, does not under this designation
allude to the son who is begotten from him, but on account of the art and science which he
displays in his work, calls him artificer, signifying thereby that he is not such as the
things made by him, and while he knows the nature of the builder, knows also that he whom
he begets is other than his works; and in regard to his son calls him father, but in
regard to his works, creator and maker; in like manner he who says in this sense that God
is unoriginate, names Him from His works, signifying, not only that He is not originated,
but that He is maker of things which are so; yet is aware withal that the Word is other
than the things originate, and alone a proper offspring of the Father, through whom all
things came to be and consist .

30. In like manner, when the Prophets spoke of God as All-ruling, they did not so name
Him, as if the Word were included in that All; (for they knew that the Son was other than
things originated, and Sovereign over them Himself, according to His likeness to the
Father); but because He is Ruler over all things which through the Son He has made, and
has given the authority of all things to the Son, and having given it, is Himself once
more the Lord of all things through the Word. Again, when they called God, Lord of the
powers , they said not this as if the Word was one of those powers, but because while He
is Father of the Son, He is Lord of the powers which through the Son have come to be. For
again, the Word too, as being in the Father, is Lord of them all, and Sovereign over all;
for all things, whatsoever the Father hath, are the Son's. This then being the force of
such titles, in like manner let a man call God unoriginated, if it so please him; not
however as if the Word were of originated things, but because, as I said before, God not
only is not originated, but through His proper Word is He the maker of things which are
so. For though the Father be called such, still the Word is the Father's Image, and one in
essence with Him; and being His Image, He must be distinct from things originated, and
from everything;

for whose Image He is, His property and likeness He hath: so that he who calls the Father
unoriginated and almighty, perceives in the Unoriginated and the Almighty, His Word and
His Wisdom, which is the Son. But these wondrous men, and prompt for irreligion, hit upon
the term Unoriginated, not as caring for God's honour, but from malevolence towards the
Saviour; for if they had regard to honour and reverent language, it rather had been right
and good to acknowledge and to call God Father, than to give Him this name; for in calling
God unoriginated, they are, as I said before, calling Him from things which came to be,
and as a Maker only, that so they may imply the Word to be a work after their own
pleasure; but he who calls God Father, in Him withal signifies His Son also, and cannot
fail to know that, whereas there is a Son, through this Son all things that came to be
were created.

31. Therefore it will be much more accurate to denote God from the Son and to call Him
Father, than to name Him and call Him Unoriginated from His works only; for the latter
term refers to the works that have come to be at the will of God through the Word, but the
name of Father points out the proper offspring from His essence. And whereas the Word
surpasses things originated, by so muchand more also doth calling God Father surpass the
calling Him Unoriginated; for the latter is non-scriptural and suspicious, as it has
various senses; but the former is simple and scriptural, and more accurate, and alone
implies the Son. And `Unoriginated' is a word of the Greeks who know not the Son: but
`Father' has been acknowledged and vouchsafed by our Lord; for He knowing Himself whose
Son He was, said, `I in the Father and the Father in Me ;' and, `He that hath seen Me hath
seen the Father;' and, `I and the Father are one ;' but nowhere is He found to call the
Father Unoriginated. Moreover, when He teaches us to pray, He says not, `When ye pray,
say, O God Unoriginated,' but rather, `When ye pray, say, Our Father, which art in heavens
.' And it was His Will, that the Summary of our faith should have the same bearing.

For He has bid us be baptized, not in the name of Unoriginate and Originate, not into the
name of Uncreate and Creature, but into the name of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit , for
with such an initiation we too are made sons verily , and using the name of the Father, we
acknowledge from that name the Word in the Father. But if He wills that we should call His
own Father our Father, we must not on that account measure ourselves with the Son
according to nature, for it is because of the Son that the Father is so called by us; for
since the Word bore our body and came to be in us, therefore by reason of the Word in us,
is God called our Father. For the Spirit of the Word in us names through us His own Father
as ours, which is the Apostle's meaning when he says, `God hath sent forth the Spirit of
His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father .'

32. But perhaps being refuted as touching the term Unoriginate also, they will say
according to their evil nature, `It behoved, as regards our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ
also, to state from the Scriptures what is there written of Him, and not to introduce non-
scriptural expressions.' Yes, it behoved, say I too; for the tokens of truth are more
exact as drawn from Scripture, than from other sources ; but the ill disposition and the
versatile and crafty irreligion of Eusebius and his fellows, compelled the Bishops, as I
said before, to publish more distinctly the terms which overthrew their irreligion; and
what the Council did write has already been shewn to have an orthodox sense, while the
Arians have been shewn to be corrupt in their phrases, and evil in their dispositions. The
term Unoriginate, having its own sense, and admitting of a religious use, they
nevertheless, according to their own idea, and as they will, use for the dishonour of the
Saviour, all for the sake of contentiously maintaining, like giants , their fight with
God. But as they did not escape condemnation when they, adduced these former phrases, so
when they misconceive of the Unoriginated which in itself admits of being used well and
religiously, they were detected, being disgraced before all,and their heresy everywhere
proscribed. This then, as I could, have I related, by way of explaining what was formerly
done in the Council;

but I know that the contentious among Christ's foes will not be disposed to change even
after hearing this, but will ever search about for other pretences, and for others again
after those. For as the Prophet speaks, `If the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard
his spots ', then will they be willing to think religiously, who have been instructed in
irreligion. Thou however, beloved, on receiving this, read it by thyself; and if thou
approvest of it, read it also to the brethren who happen to be present, that they too on
hearing it, may welcome the Council's zeal for the truth, and the exactness of its sense;
and may condemn that of Christ's foes, the Arians, and the futile pretences, which for the
sake of their irreligious heresy they have been at the pains to frame among themselves;
because to God and the Father is due the glory, honour, and worship with His co-existent
Son and Word, together with the All-holy and Life-giving Spirit, now and unto endless ages
of ages. Amen.


FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS
==================================

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION.

Reason for writing; certain persons indifferent about Arianism; Arians not Christians,
because sectaries always take the name of their founder. 1. Of all other heresies which
have departed from the truth it is acknowledged that they have but devised a madness, and
their irreligiousness has long since become notorious to all men. For that their authors
went out from us, it plainly follows, as the blessed John has written, that they never
thought nor now think with us. Wherefore, as saith the Saviour, in that they gather not
with us, they scatter with the devil, and keep an eye on those who slumber, that, by this
second sowing of their own mortal poison, they may have companions in death. But, whereas
one heresy, and that the last, which has now risen as harbinger of Antichrist, the Arian,
as it is called, considering that other heresies, her eider sisters, have been openly
proscribed, in her craft and cunning, affects to array herself in Scripture language ,
like her father the devil, and is forcing her way back into the Church's paradise,-that
with the pretence of Christianity, her smooth sophistry (for reason she has none) may
deceive men into wrong thoughts of Christ,-nay, since she has already seduced certain of
the foolish, not only to corrupt their ears, but even to take and eat with Eve, till in
their ignorance which ensues they think bitter sweet, and admire this loathsome heresy, on
this account I have thought it necessary, at your request, to unrip `the folds of its
breast-plate ,' and to shew the ill savour of its folly. So while those who are far from
it may continue to shun it, those whom it has deceived may repent; and, opening the eyes
of their heart, may understand that darkness is not light, nor falsehood truth, nor
Arianism good; nay, that those who call these men Christians are in great and grievous
error, as neither having studied Scripture, nor understanding Christianity at all, and the
faith which it contains.

2. For what have they discovered in this heresy like to the religious Faith, that they
vainly talk as if its supporters said no evil? This in truth is to call even Caiaphas a
Christian, and to reckon the traitor Judas still among the Apostles, and to say that they
who asked Barabbas instead of the Saviour did no evil, and to recommend Hymenaeus and
Alexander as right-minded men, and as if the Apostle slandered them. But neither can a
Christian bear to hear this, nor can he consider the man who dared to say it sane in his
understanding. For with them for Christ is Arius, as with the Manichees Manichaeus; and
for Moses and the other saints they have made the discovery of one Sotades , a man whom
even Gentiles laugh at, and of the daughter of Herodias. For of the one has Arius imitated
the dissolute and effeminate tone, in writing Thaliae on his model; and the other he has
rivalled in her dance, reeling and frolicking in his blasphemies against the Saviour; till
the victims of his heresy lose their wits and go foolish, and change the Name of the Lord
of glory into the likeness of the `image of corruptible man ,' and for Christians come to
be called Arians, bearing this badge of their irreligion. For let them not excuse
themselves;

nor retort their disgrace on those who are not as they, calling Christians after the names
of their teachers , that they themselves may appear to have that Name in the same way. Nor
let them make a jest of it, when they feel shame at their disgraceful appellation; rather,
if they be ashamed, let them hide their faces, or let them recoil from their own
irreligion. For never at any time did Christian people take their title from the Bishops
among them, but from the Lord, on whom we rest our faith. Thus, though the blessed
Apostles have become our teachers, and have ministered the Saviour's Gospel, yet not from
them have we our title, but from Christ we are and are named Christians. But for those who
derive the faith which they profess from others, good reason is it they should bear their
name, whose property they hare become .

3. Yes surely; while all of us are and are called Christians after Christ, Marcion
broached a heresy a long time since and was cast out; and those who continued with him who
ejected him remained Christians; but those who followed Marcion were called Christians no
more, but henceforth Marcionites. Thus Valentinus also, and Basilides, and Manichaeus, and
Simon Magus, have imparted their own name to their followers; and some are accosted as
Valentinians, or as Basilidians, or as Manichees, or as Simonians; and other,
Cataphrygians from Phrygia, and from Novatus Novatians. So too Meletius, when ejected by
Peter the Bishop and Martyr, called his party no longer Christians, but Meletians , and so
in consequence when Alexander of blessed memory had cast out Arius, those who remained
with Alexander, remained Christians; but those who went out with Arius, left the Saviour's
Name to us who were with Alexander, and as to them they were hence-forward denominated
Arians. Behold then, after Alexander's death too, those who communicate with his successor
Athanasius, and those with whom the said Athanasius communicates, are instances of the
same rule; none of them bear his name, nor is he named from them, but all in like manner,
and as is usual, are called Christians. For though we have a succession of teachers and
become their disciples, yet, because we are taught by them the things of Christ, we both
are, and are called, Christians all the same.

But those who follow the heretics, though they have innumerable successors in their
heresy, yet anyhow bear the name of him who devised it. Thus, though Arius be dead, and
many of his party have succeeded him, yet those who think with him, as being known from
Arius, are called Arians. And, what is a remarkable evidence of this, those of the Greeks
who even at this time come into the Church, on giving up the superstition of idols, take
the name, not of their catechists, but of the Saviour, and begin to be called Christians
instead of Greeks: while those of them who go off to the heretics, and again all who from
the Church change to this heresy, abandon Christ's name, and henceforth are called Arians,
as no longer holding Christ's faith, but having inherited Arius's madness. 4. How then can
they be Christians, who for Christians are Ario-maniacs ? or how are they of the Catholic
Church, who have shaken off the Apostolical faith, and become authors of fresh evils? who,
after abandoning the oracles of divine Scripture, call Arius's Thaliae a new wisdom? and
with reason too, for they are announcing a new heresy. And hence a man may marvel, that,
whereas many have written many treatises and abundant homilies upon the Old Testament and
the New, yet in none of them is a Thalia found nay nor among the more respectable of the
Gentiles, but among those only who sing such strains over their cups, amid cheers and
jokes, when men are merry, that the rest may laugh; till this marvellous Arius, taking no
grave pattern, and ignorant even of what is respectable, while he stole largely from other
heresies, would be original in the ludicrous, with none but Sotades for his rival. For
what beseemed him more, when he would dance forth against the Saviour, than to throw his
wretched words of irreligion into dissolute and loose metres? that, while `a man,' as
Wisdom says, `is known from the utterance of his word ,' so from those numbers should be
seen the writer's effeminate soul and corruption of thought . In truth, that crafty one
did not escape detection; but, for all his many writhings to and fro, like the serpent, he
did but fall into the error of the Pharisees.

They, that they might transgress the Law, pretended to be anxious for the words of the
Law, and that they might deny the expected and then present Lord, were hypocritical with
God's name, and were convicted of blaspheming when they said, `Why dost Thou, being a man,
make Thyself God,' and sayest, `I and the Father are one ?' And so too, this counterfeit
and Sotadean Arius, feigns to speak of God, introducing Scripture language , but is on all
sides recognised as godless Arius, denying the Son, and reckoning Him among the creatures.

CHAPTER II. EXTRACTS FROM THE THALIA OF ARIUS.

Arius maintains that God became a Father, and the Son was not always; the Son out of
nothing; once He was not; He was not before his generation; He was created; named Wisdom
and Word after God's attributes; made that He might make us; one out of many powers of
God; alterable; exalted on God's foreknowledge of what He was to be; not very God; but
called so as others by participation; foreign in essence from the Father; does not know or
see the Father; does not know Himself. 5. Now the commencement of Arius's Thalia and
flippancy, effeminate in tune and nature, runs thus:- `According to faith of God's elect,
God's prudent ones, Holy children, rightly dividing, God's Holy Spirit receiving, Have I
learned this from the partakers of wisdom, Accomplished, divinely taught, and wise in all
things. Along their track, have I been walking, with like opinions. I the very famous, the
much suffering for God's glory;

And taught of God, I have acquired wisdom and knowledge.' And the mockeries which he
utters in it, repulsive and most irreligious, are such as these :-`God was not always a
Father;' but `once God was alone, and not yet a Father, but afterwards He became a
Father.' `The Son was not always;' for, whereas all things were made out of nothing, and
all existing creatures and works were made, so the Word of God Himself was `made out of
nothing,' and `once He was not,' and `He was not before His origination,' but He as others
`had an origin of creation.' `For God,' he says, `was alone, and the Word as yet was not,
nor the Wisdom. Then, wishing to form us, thereupon He made a certain one, and named Him
Word and Wisdom and Son, that He might form us by means of Him.' Accordingly, he says that
there are two wisdoms, first, the attribute co-existent with God, and next, that in this
wisdom the Son was originated, and was only named Wisdom and Word as partaking of it. `For
Wisdom,' saith he, `by the will of the wise God, had its existence in Wisdom.' In like
manner, he says, that there is another Word in God besides the Son, and that the Son
again, as partaking of it, is named Word and Son according to grace. And this too is an
idea proper to their heresy, as shewn in other works of theirs, that there are many
powers; one of which is God's own by nature and eternal;

but that Christ, on the other hand, is not the true power of God; but, as others, one of
the so-called powers, one of which, namely, the locust and the caterpillar , is called in
Scripture, not merely the power, but the `great power.' The others are many and are like
the Son, and of them David speaks in the Psalms, when he says, `The Lord of hosts' or
`powers .' And by nature, as all others, so the Word Himself is alterable, and remains
good by His own free will, while He chooseth; when, however, He wills, He can alter as we
can, as being of an alterable nature. For `therefore,' saith he, `as foreknowing that He
would be good, did God by anticipation bestow on Him this glory, which afterwards, as man,
He attained from virtue. Thus in consequence of His works fore-known , did God bring it to
pass that He being such, should come to be.'

6. Moreover he has dared to say, that `the Word is not the very God;' `though He is called
God, yet He is not very God,' but `by participation of grace, He, as others, is God only
in name.' And, whereas all beings are foreign and different from God in essence, so too is
`the Word alien and unlike in all things to the Father's essence and propriety,' but
belongs to things originated and created, and is one of these. Afterwards, as though he
had succeeded to the devil's recklessness, he has stated in his Thalia, that `even to the
Son the Father is invisible,' and `the Word cannot perfectly and exactly either see or
know His own Father;' but even what He knows and what He sees, He knows and sees `in
proportion to His own measure,' as we also know according to our own power. For the Son,
too, he says, not only knows not the Father exactly, for He fails in comprehension , but
`He knows not even His own essence;'-and that `the essences of the Father and the Son and
the Holy Ghost, are separate in nature, and estranged, and disconnected, and alien , and
without participation of each other ;' and, in his own words, `utterly unlike from each
other in essence and glory, unto infinity.' Thus as to `likeness of glory and essence,' he
says that the Word is entirely diverse from both the Father and the Holy Ghost. With such
words hath the irreligious spoken; maintaining that the Son is distinct by Himself, and in
no respect partaker of the Father. These are portions of Arius's fables as they occur in
that jocose composition.

7. Who is there that hears all this, nay, the of the Thalia, but must hate, and justly
hate, this Arius jesting on such matters as on a stage ? who but must regard him, when he
pretends to name God and speak of God, but as the serpent counselling the woman? who, on
reading what follows in his work, but must discern in his irreligious doctrine that error,
into which by his sophistries the serpent in the sequel seduced the woman? who at such
blasphemies is not transported? `The heaven,' as the Prophet says, `was astonished, and
the earth shuddered ' at the transgression of the Law. But the sun, with greater horror,
impatient of the bodily contumelies, which the common Lord of all voluntarily endured for
us, turned away, and recalling his rays made that day sunless. And shall not all human
kind at Arius's blasphemies be struck speechless, and stop their ears, and shut their
eyes, to escape hearing them or seeing their author? Rather, will not the Lord Himself
have reason to denounce men so irreligious, nay, so unthankful, in the words which He has
already uttered by the prophet Hosea, `Woe unto them, for they have fled from Me;
destruction upon them, for they have transgressed against Me; though I have redeemed them,
yet they have spoken lies against Me .' And soon after, `They imagine mischief against Me;

they turn away to nothing .' For to turn away from the Word of God, which is, and to
fashion to themselves one that is not, is to fall to what is nothing. For this was why the
Ecumenical Council, when Arius thus spoke, cast him from the Church, and anathematized
him, as impatient of such irreligion. And ever since has Arius's error been reckoned for a
heresy more than ordinary, being known as Christ's foe, and harbinger of Antichrist.
Though then so great a condemnation be itself of special weight to make men flee from that
irreligious heresy , as I said above, yet since certain persons called Christian, either
in ignorance or pretence, think it, as I then said, little different from the Truth, and
call its professors Christians; proceed we to put some questions to them, according to our
powers, thereby to expose the unscrupulousness of the heresy. Perhaps, when thus caught,
they will be silenced, and flee from it, as from the sight of a serpent.

CHAPTER III. THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SUBJECT.

The Arians affect Scripture language, but their doctrine new, as well as unscriptural.
Statement of the Catholic doctrine, that the Son is proper to the Father's substance, and
eternal. Restatement of Arianism in contrast, that He is a creature with a beginning: the
controversy comes to this issue, whether one whom we are to believe in as God, can be so
in name only, and is merely a creature. What pretence then for being indifferent in the
controversy? The Arians rely on state patronage, and dare not avow their tenets. 8. If
then the use of certain phrases of divine Scripture changes, in their opinion, the
blasphemy of the Thalia into reverent language, of course they ought also to deny Christ
with the present Jews, when they see how they study the Law and the Prophets; perhaps too
they will deny the Law and the Prophets like Manichees , because. the latter read some
portions of the Gospels. If such bewilderment and empty speaking be from ignorance,
Scripture will teach them, that the devil, the author of heresies, because of the ill
savour which attaches to evil, borrows Scripture language, as a cloak wherewith to sow the
ground with his own poison also, and to seduce the simple. Thus he deceived Eve; thus he
framed former heresies; thus he persuaded Arius at this time to make a show of speaking
against those former ones, that he might introduce his own without observation. And yet,
after all, the man of craft did not escape. For being irreligious towards the Word of God,
he lost his all at once , and betrayed to all men his ignorance of other heresies too ;
and having not a particle of truth in his belief, does but pretend to it. For how can he
speak truth concerning the Father, who denies the Son, that reveals concerning Him? or how
can he be orthodox concerning the Spirit, while he speaks profanely of the Word that
supplies the Spirit?

anti who will trust him concerning the Resurrection, denying, as he does, Christ for us
the first-begotten from the dead? and how shall he not err in respect to His incarnate
presence, who is simply ignorant of the Son's genuine and true generation from the Father?
For thus, the former Jews also, denying the Word, and saying, `We have no king but Caesar
,' were forthwith stripped of all they had, and forfeited the light of the Lamp, the odour
of ointment, knowledge of prophecy, and the Truth itself; till now they understand
nothing, but are walking as in darkness. For who was ever yet a hearer of such a doctrines
? or whence or from whom did the abettors and hirelings of the heresy gain it? who thus
expounded to them when they were at school ? who told them, `Abandon the worship of the
creation, and then draw near and worship a creature and a works ?' But if they themselves
own that they have heard it now for the first time, how can they deny that this heresy is
foreign, and not from our fathers ? But wha is not from our fathers, but has come to light
in this day, how can it be but that of which the blessed Paul has foretold, that `in the
latter times some shall depart from the sound faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and
doctrines of devils, in the hypocrisy of liars; cauterized in their own conscience, and
turning from the truth ?'

9. For, behold, we take divine Scripture, and thence discourse with freedom of the
religious Faith, and set it up as a light upon its candlestick, saying:-Very Son of the
Father, natural and genuine, proper to His essence, Wisdom Only-begotten, and Very and
Only Word of God is He; not a creature or work, but an offspring proper to the Father's
essence. Wherefore He is very God, existing one in essence with the very Father; while
other beings, to whom He said, `I said ye are Gods ,' had this grace from the Father, only
by participation of the Word, through the Spirit. For He is the expression of the Father's
Person and Light from Light, and Power, and very Image of the Father's essence. For this
too the Lord has said, `He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father .' And He ever was and
is and never was not. For the Father being everlasting, His Word and His Wisdom must be
everlasting . On the other hand, what have these persons to shew us from the infamous
Thalia? Or, first of all, let them read it themselves, and copy the tone of the writer; at
least the mockery which they will encounter from others may instruct them how low they
have fallen; and then let them proceed to explain themselves. For what can they say from
it, but that `God was not always a Father, but became so afterwards; the Son was not
always, for He was not before His generation;

He is not from the Father, but He, as others, has come into subsistence out of nothing; He
is not proper to the Father's essence, for He is a creature and work?' And `Christ is not
very God, but He, as others, was made God by participation; the Son has not exact
knowledge of the Father, nor does the Word see the Father perfectly; and neither exactly
understands nor knows the Father. He is not the very and only Word of the Father, but is
in name only called Word and Wisdom, and is called by grace Son and Power. He is not
unalterable, as the Father is, but alterable in nature, as the creatures, and He comes
short of apprehending the perfect knowledge of the Father.' Wonderful this heresy, not
plausible even, but making speculations against Him that is, that He be not, and
everywhere putting forward blasphemy for reverent language! Were any one, after requiring
into both sides, to be asked, whether of the two he would follow in faith, or whether of
the two spoke fitly of God,-or rather let them say themselves, these abettors of
irreligion, what, if a man be asked concerning God (for `the Word was God'), it were fit
to answer . For from this one question the whole case on both sides may be determined,
what is fitting to say,-He was, or He was not; always, or before His birth; eternal, or
from this and from then; true, or by adoption, and from participation and in idea ;

to call Him one of things originated, or to unite Him to the Father; to consider Him
unlike the Father in essence, or like and proper to Him; a creature, or Him through whom
the creatures were originated; that He is the Father's Word, or that there is another word
beside Him, and that by this other He was originated, and by another wisdom; and that He
is only named Wisdom and Word, and is become a partaker of this wisdom, and second to it?
10. Which of the two theologies sets forth our Lord Jesus Christ as God and Son of the
Father, this which you vomited forth, or that which we have spoken and maintain from the
Scriptures? If the Saviour be not God, nor Word, nor Son, you shall have leave to say what
you will, and so shall the Gentiles, and the present Jews. But if He be Word of the Father
and true Son, and God from God, and `over all blessed for ever ,' is it not becoming to
obliterate and blot out those other phrases and that Arian Thalia, as but a pattern of
evil, a store of all irreligion, into which, whoso falls, `knoweth not that giants perish
with her, and reacheth the depths of Hades ?' This they know themselves, and in their
craft they conceal it, not having the courage to speak out, but uttering something else .
For if they speak, a condemnation will follow; and if they be suspected, proofs from
Scripture will be cast at them from every side.

Wherefore, in their craft, as children of this world, after feeding their so-called lamp
from the wild olive, and fearing lest it should soon be quenched (for it is said, `the
light of the wicked shall be put out ,') they hide it under the bushel of their hypocrisy,
and make a different profession, and boast of patronage of friends and authority of
Constantius, that what with their hypocrisy and their professions, those who come to them
may be kept from seeing how foul their heresy is. Is it not detestable even in this, that
it dares not speak out, but is kept hid by its own friends, and fostered as serpents are?
for from what sources have they got together these words? or from whom have they received
what they venture to say ? Not any one man can they specify who has supplied it. For who
is there in all mankind, Greek or Barbarian, who ventures to rank among creatures One whom
he confesses the while to be God and says, that He was not till He was made? or who is
there, who to the God in whom he has put faith, refuses to give credit, when He says,
`This is My beloved Son ,' on the pretence that He is not a Son, but a creature? rather,
such madness would rouse an universal indignation. Nor does Scripture afford them any
pretext; for it has been often shewn, and it shah be shewn now, that their doctrine is
alien to the divine oracles.

Therefore, since all that remains is to say that from the devil came their mania (for of
such opinions he alone is sower ), proceed we to resist him-for with him is our real
conflict, and they are but instruments;-that, the Lord aiding us, and the enemy, as he is
wont, being overcome with arguments, they may be put to shame, when they see him without
resource who sowed this heresy in them, and may learn, though late, that, as being Arians,
they are not Christians.

CHAPTER IV. THAT THE SON IS ETERNAL AND INCREATE.

These attributes, being the points in dispute, are first proved by direct texts of
Scripture. Concerning the `eternal power' of God in Rom. i. 20, which is shewn to mean the
Son. Remarks on the Arian formula, `Once the Son was not,' its supporters not daring to
speak of `a time when the Son was not.' 11. At his suggestion then ye have maintained and
ye think, that `there was once when the Son was not;' this is the first cloke of your
views of doctrine which has to be stripped off Say then what was once when the Son was
not, O slanderous and irreligious men ? If ye say the Father, your blasphemy is but
greater; for it is impious to say that He was `once,' or to signify Him by the word
`once.' For He is ever, and is now, and as the Son is, so is He, and is Himself He that
is, and Father of the Son. But if ye say that the Son was once, when He Himself was not,
the answer is foolish and unmeaning. For how could He both be and not be? In this
difficulty, you can but answer, that there was a time when the Word was not; for your very
adverb `once' naturally signifies this. And your other, `The Son was not before His
generation,' is equivalent to saying, `There was once when He was not,' for both the one
and the other signify that there is a time before the Word. Whence then this your
discovery?

Why do ye, as `the heathen, rage, and imagine vain phrases against the Lord and against
His Christ?' for no holy Scripture has used such language of the Saviour, but rather
`always' and `eternal' and `coexistent always with the Father.' For, `In the beginning was
the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God .' And in the Apocalypse be thus
speaks ; `Who is and who was and who is to come.' Now who can rob `who is' and `who was'
of eternity? This too in confutation of the Jews hath Paul written in his Epistle to the
Romans, `Of whom as concerning the flesh is Christ, who is over all, God blessed for ever
;' while silencing the Greeks, he has said, `The visible things of Him from the creation
of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His
eternal Power and Godhead ;' and what the Power of God is, he teaches us elsewhere
himself, `Christ the Power of God and the Wisdom of God .' Surely in these words he does
not designate the Father, as ye often whisper one to another, affirming that the Father is
`His eternal power.' This is not so; for he says not, `God Himself is the power,' but `His
is the power.' Very plain is it to all that `His' is not `He;' yet not something alien but
rather proper to Him.

Study too the context and `turn to the Lord;' now `the Lord is that Spirit ;'and you will
see that it is the Son who is signified. 12. For after making mention of the creation, he
naturally speaks of the Framer's Power as seen in it, which Power, I say, is the Word of
God, by whom all things have been made. If indeed the creation is sufficient of itself
alone, without the Son, to make God known, see that you fill not, from thinking that
without the Son it has come to be. But if through the Son it has come to be, and `in Him
all things consist ,' it must follow that he who contemplates the creation rightly, is
contemplating also the Word who framed it, and through Him begins to apprehend the Father
. And if, as the Saviour also says, `No one knoweth the Father, save the Son, and he to
whom the Son shall reveal Him ,' and if on Philip's asking, `Shew us the Father,' He said
not, `Behold the creation,' but, `He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father ,' reasonably
doth Paul,-while accusing the Greeks of contemplating the harmony and order of the
creation without reflecting on the Framing Word within it (for the creatures witness to
their own Framer) so as through the creation to apprehend the true God,and abandon their
worship of it,-reasonably hath he said, `His Eternal Power and Godhead ,' thereby
signifying the Son. And where the sacred writers say, `Who exists before the ages,' and
`By whom He madethe ages ,' they thereby as clearly preachthe eternal and everlasting
being of the Son,even while they are designating God Himself.

Thus, if Isaiah says, `The Everlasting God, the Creator of the ends of the earth ;' and
Susanna said, `O Everlasting God ;' and Baruch wrote, `I will cry unto the Everlasting in
my days,' and shortly after, `My hope is in the Everlasting, that He will save you, and
joy is come unto me from the Holy One ;' yet forasmuch as the Apostle, writing to the
Hebrews, says, `Who being the radiance of His glory and the Expression of His Person ;'
and David too in the eighty-ninth Psalm, `And the brightness of the Lord be upon us,' and,
`In Thy Light shall we see Light ,' who has so little sense as to doubt of the eternity of
the Son ? for when did man see light without the brightness of its radiance, that he may
say of the Son, `There was once, when He was not,' or `Before His generation He was not.'
And the words addressed to the Son in the hundred and forty-fourth Psalm, `Thy kingdom is
a kingdom of all ages ,' forbid any one to imagine any interval at all in which the Word
did not exist.

For if every interval in the ages is measured, and of all the ages the Word is King and
Maker, therefore, whereas no interval at all exists prior to Him , it were madness to say,
`There was once when the Everlasting was not,' and `From nothing is the Son.' And whereas
the Lord Himself says, `I am the Truth ,' not `I became the Truth;' but always, `I am,-I
am the Shepherd,-I am the Light,'-and again, `Call ye Me not, Lord and Master? and ye call
Me well, for so I am,' who, hearing such language from God, and the Wisdom, and Word of
the Father, speaking of Himself, will any longer hesitate about the truth, and not
forthwith believe that in the phrase `I am,' is signified that the Son is eternal and
without beginning? 13. It is plain then from the above that the Scriptures declare the
Son's eternity; it is equally plain from what follows that the Arian phrases `He was not,'
and `before' and `when,' are in the same Scriptures predicated of creatures. Moses, for
instance, in his account of the generation of our system, says, `And every plant of the
field, before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew; for the
Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the
ground .' And in Deuteronomy, `When the Most High divided to the nations .' And the Lord
said in His own Person, `If ye loved Me, ye would rejoice because I said, I go unto the
Father, for My Father is greater than I. And now I have told you before it come to pass,
that when it is come to pass, ye might believe .' And concerning the creation He says by
Solomon, `Or ever the earth was, when there were no depths, I was brought forth; when
there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before
the hills.

was I brought forth .' And, `Before Abraham was, I am .' And concerning Jeremiah He
says,`Before I formed thee in the womb, I knew thee .' And David in the Psalm says,
`Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever the earth and the world were made, Thou
art, God from everlasting and world without end .' And in Daniel, `Susanna cried out with
a loud voice and said, O everlasting God, that knowest the secrets, and knowest all things
before they be .' Thus it appears that the phrases `once was not,' and `before it came to
be,' and `when,' and the like, belong to things originate and creatures, which come out of
nothing, but are alien to the Word. But if such terms are used in Scripture of things
originate, but `ever' of the Word, it follows, O ye enemies of God, that the Son did not
come out of nothing, nor is in the number of originated things at all, but is the Father's
Image and Word eternal, never having not been, but being ever, as the, eternal Radiance of
a Light which is eternal. Why imagine then times before the Son? or wherefore blaspheme
the Word as after times, by whom even the ages were made?

for how did time or age at all subsist when the Word, as you say, had not appeared,
`through' whom `all things have been made and without' whom `not one thing was made ?' Or
why, when you mean time, do you not plainly say, `a time was when the Word was not?' But
while you drop the word `time' to deceive the simple, you do not at all conceal your own
feeling, nor, even if you did, could you escape discovery. For you still simply mean
times, when you say, `There was when He was not,' and `He was not before His generation.'

CHAPTER V. SUBJECT CONTINUED.

Objection, that the Son's eternity makes Him coordinate with the Father, introduces the
subject of His Divine Sonship, as a second proof of His eternity. The word Son is
introduced in a secondary, but is to be understood in real sense. Since all things partake
of the Father in partaking of the Son, He is the whole participation of the Father, that
is, He is the Son by nature; for to be wholly participated is to beget. 14. When these
points are thus proved, their profaneness goes further. `If there never was, when the Son
was not,' say they, `but He is eternal, and coexists with the Father, you call Him no more
the Father's Son, but brother .' O insensate and contentious! For if we said only that He
was eternally with the Father, and not His Son, their pretended scruple would have some
plausibility; but if, while we say that He is eternal, we also confess Him to be Son from
the Father, how can He that is begotten be considered brother of Him who begets? And if
our faith is in Father and Son, what brotherhood is there between them? and how can the
Word be called brother of Him whose Word He is? This is not an objection of men really
ignorant, for they comprehend how the truth lies; but it is a Jewish pretence, and that
from those who, in Solomon's words, `through desire separate themselves '0 from the truth.
For the Father and the Son were not generated front some pre-existing origin , that we may
account Them brothers, but the Father is the Origin of the Son and begat Him; and the
Father is Father, and not born the Son of any; and the Son is Son, and not brother.
Further, if He is called the eternal offspring of the Father, He is rightly so called. For
never was the essence of the Father imperfect, that what is proper to it should be added
afterwards ;

nor, as man from man, has the Son been begotten, so as to be later than His Father's
existence, but He is God's offspring, and as being proper Son of God, who is ever, He
exists eternally. For, whereas it is proper to men to beget in time, from the imperfection
of their nature , God's offspring is eternal, for His nature is ever perfect . If then He
is not a Son, but a work made out of nothing, they have but to prove it; and then they are
at liberty, as if imagining about a creature, to cry out, `There was once when He was
not;' for things which are originated were not, and have come to be. But if He is Son, as
the Father says, and the Scriptures proclaim, and `Son' is nothing else than what is
generated from the Father; and what is generated from the Father is His Word, and Wisdom,
and Radiance; what is to be said but that, in maintaining `Once the Son was not,' they rob
God of His Word, like plunderers, and openly predicate of Him that He was once without His
proper Word and Wisdom, and that the Light was once without radiance, and the Fountain was
once barren and dry ?

For though they pretend alarm at the name of time, because of those who reproach them with
it, and say, that He was before times, yet whereas they assign certain intervals, in which
they imagine He was not, they are most irreligious still, as equally suggesting times, and
imputing to God an absence of Reason . 15. But if on the other hand, while they
acknowledge with us the name of `Son,' from an unwillingness to be publicly and generally
condemned, they deny that the Son is the proper offspring of the Father's essence, on the
ground that this must imply parts and divisions ; what is this but to deny that He is very
Son, and only in name to call Him Son at all? And is it not a grievous error, to have
material thoughts about what is immaterial, and because of the weakness of their proper
nature to deny what is natural and proper to the Father? It does but remain, that they
should deny Him also, because they understand not how God is , and what the Father is, now
that, foolish men, they measure by themselves the Offspring of the Father. And persons in
such a state of mind as to consider that there cannot be a Son of God, demand our pity;
but they must be interrogated and exposed for the chance of bringing them to their senses.
If then, as you say, `the Son is from nothing,' and `was not before His generation,' He,
of course, as well as others, must be called Son and God and Wisdom only by participation;
for thus all other creatures consist, and by sanctification are glorified. You have to
tell us then, of what He is partaker . All other things partake of the Spirit, but He,
according to you, of what is He partaker? of the Spirit?

Nay, rather the Spirit Himself takes from the Son, as He Himself says; and it is not
reasonable to say that the latter is sanctified by the former. Therefore it is the Father
that He partakes; for this only remains to say. But this, which is participated, what is
it or whence ? If it be something external provided by the Father, He will not now be
partaker of the Father, but of what is external to Him; and no longer will He be even
second after the Father, since He has before Him this other; nor can He be called Son of
the Father, but of that, as partaking which He has been called Son and God. And if this be
unseemly and irreligious, when the Father says, `This is My Beloved Son ,' and when the
Son says that God is His own Father, it follows that what is partaken is not external, but
from the essence of the Father. And as to this again, if it be other than the essence of
the Son, an equal extravagance will meet us; there being in that case something between
this that is from the Father and the essence of the Son, whatever that be .

16. Such thoughts then being evidently unseemly and untrue, we are driven to say that what
is from the essence of the Father, and proper to Him, is entirely the Son; for it is all
one to say that God is wholly participated, and that He begets; and what does begetting
signify but a Son? And thus of the Son Himself, all things partake according to the grace
of the Spirit coming from Him ; and this shews that the Son Himself partakes of nothing,
but what is partaken from the Father, is the Son; for, as partaking of the Son Himself, we
are said to partake of God; and this is what Peter said `that ye may be partakers in a
divine nature ;' as says too the Apostle, `Know ye not, that ye are a temple of God?' and,
`We are the temple of a living God .' And beholding the Son, we see the Father; for the
thought and comprehension of the Son, is knowledge concerning the Father, because He is
His proper offspring from His essence. And since to be partaken no one of us would ever
call affection or division of God's essence (for it has been shewn and acknowledged that
God is participated, and to be participated is the same thing as to beget); therefore that
which is begotten is neither affection nor division of that blessed essence. Hence it is
not incredible that God should have a Son, the Offspring of His own essence;

nor do we imply affection or division of God's essence, when we speak of `Son' and
`Offspring;' but rather, as acknowledging the genuine, and true, and Only-begotten of God,
so we believe. If then, as we have stated and are shewing, what is the Offspring of the
Father's essence be the Son, we cannot hesitate, rather we must be certain, that the same
is the Wisdom and Word of the Father, in and through whom He creates and makes all things;
and His Brightness too, in whom He enlightens all things, and is revealed to whom He will;
and His Expression and Image also, in whom He is contemplated and known, wherefore `He and
His Father are one ,' and whoso looketh on Him looketh on the Father; and the Christ, in
whom all things are redeemed, and the new creation wrought afresh. And on the other hand,
the Son being such Offspring, it is not fitting, rather it is full of peril, to say, that
He is a work out of nothing, or that He was not before His generation. For he who thus
speaks of that which is proper to the Father's essence, already blasphemes the Father
Himself ; since he really thinks of Him what he falsely imagines of His offspring.

CHAPTER VI. SUBJECT CONTINUED.

Third proof of the Son's eternity, viz. from other titles indicative of His
coessentiality; as the Creator; One of the Blessed Trinity; as Wisdom; as Word: as Image.
If the Son is a perfect Image of the Father, why is He not a Father also? because God,
being perfect, is not the origin of a race. Only the Father a Father because the Only
Father, only the Son a Son because the Only Son. Men are not really fathers and really
sons, but shadows of the True. The Son does not become a Father, because He has received
from the Father to be immutable and ever the same. 17. This is of itself a sufficient
refutation of the Arian heresy; however, its heterodoxy will appear also from the
following:-If God be Maker and Creator, and create His works through the Son, and we
cannot regard things which come to be, except as being through the Word, is it not
blasphemous, God being Maker, to say, that His Framing Word and His Wisdom once was not?
it is the same as saying, that God is not Maker, if He had not His proper Framing Word
which is from Him, but that that by which He frames, accrues to Him from without , and is
alien from Him, and unlike in essence. Next, let them tell us this,-or rather learn from
it how irreligious they are in saying, `Once He was not,' and, `He was not before His
generation;'-for if the Word is not with the Father from everlasting, the Triad is not
everlasting; but a Monad was first, and afterwards by addition it became a Triad; and so
as time went on, it seems what we know concerning God grew and took shape . And further,
if the Son is not proper offspring of the Father's essence, but of nothing has come to be,
then of nothing the Triad consists, and once there was not a Triad, but a Monad; and a
Triad once with deficiency, and then complete; deficient, before the Son was originated,
complete when He had come to be;

and henceforth a thing originated is reckoned with the Creator, and what once was not has
divine worship and glory with Him who was ever . Nay, what is more serious still, the
Triad is discovered to he unlike Itself, consisting of strange and alien natures and
essences. And this, in other words, is saying, that the Triad has an originated
consistence. What sort of a religion then is this, which is not even like itself, but is
in process of completion as time goes on, and is now not thus, and then again thus? For
probably it will receive some fresh accession, and so on without limit, since at first and
at starting it took its consistence by way of accessions. And so undoubtedly it may
decrease on the contrary, for what is added plainly admits of being subtracted. 18. But
this is not so: perish the thought; the Triad is not originated; but there is an eternal
and one Godhead in a Triad, and there is one Glory of the Holy Triad. And you presume to
divide it into different natures; the Father being eternal, yet you say of the Word which
is seated by Him, `Once He was not;' and, whereas the Son is seated by the Father, yet you
think to place Him far from Him. The Triad is Creator and Framer, and you fear not to
degrade It to things which are from nothing; you scruple not to equal servile beings to
the nobility of the Triad, and to rank the King, the Lord of Sabaoth with subjects . Cease
this confusion of things unassociable, or rather of things which are not with Him who is.
Such statements do not glorify and honour the Lord, but the reverse; for he who dishonours
the Son, dishonours also the Father. For if the doctrine of God is now perfect in a Triad,
and this is the true and only Religion, and this is the good and the truth, it must have
been always so, unless the good and the truth be something that came after, and the
doctrine of God is completed by additions. I say, it must have been eternally so; but if
not eternally, not so at present either, but at present so, as you suppose it was from the
beginning,-I mean, not a Triad now. But such heretics no Christian would bear;

it belongs to Greeks, to introduce an originated Triad, and to level It with things
originate; for these do admit of deficiencies and additions; but the faith of Christians
acknowledges the blessed Triad as unalterable and perfect and ever what It was, neither
adding to It what is more, nor imputing to It any loss (for both ideas are irreligious),
and therefore it dissociates It from all things generated, and it guards as indivisible
and worships the unity of the Godhead Itself; and shuns the Arian blasphemies, and
confesses and acknowledges that the Son was ever; for He is eternal, as is the Father, of
whom He is the Eternal Word,-to which subject let us now return again. 19. If God be, and
be called, the Fountain of wisdom and life-as He says by Jeremiah, `They have forsaken Me
the Fountain of living waters ;' and again, `A glorious high throne from the beginning, is
the place of our sanctuary; O Lord, the Hope of Israel, all that forsake Thee shall be
ashamed, and they that depart from Me shall be written in the earth, because they have
forsaken the Lord, the Fountain of living waters ;' and in the book of Baruch it is
written, `Thou hast forsaken the Fountain of wisdom ,'-this implies that life and wisdom
are not foreign to the Essence of the Fountain, but are proper to It, nor were at any time
without existence, but were always. Now the Son is all this, who says, `I am the Life ,'
and, `I Wisdom dwell with prudence .' Is it not then irreligious to say, `Once the Son was
not?' for it is all one with saying, `Once the Fountain was dry, destitute of Life and
Wisdom.' But a fountain it would then cease to be; for what begetteth not from itself, is
not a fountain . What a load of extravagance! for God promises that those who do His will
shall be as a fountain which the water fails not, saying by Isaiah the prophet, `And the
Lord shall satisfy thy soul in drought, and make thy bones fat;

and thou shalt be like a watered garden, and like a spring of water, whose waters fail not
.' And yet these, whereas God is called and is a Fountain of wisdom, dare to insult Him as
barren and void of His proper Wisdom. But their doctrine is false; truth witnessing that
God is the eternal Fountain of His proper Wisdom; and, if the Fountain be eternal, the
Wisdom also must needs be eternal. For in It were all things made, as David says in the
Psalm, `In Wisdom bast Thou made them all ;' and Solomon says, `The Lord by Wisdom hath
formed the earth, by understanding hath He established the heavens .' And this Wisdom is
the Word, and by Him, as John says, `all things were made,' and `without Him was made not
one thing .' And this Word is Christ; for `there is One God, the Father, from whom are all
things, and we for Him; and One Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we
through Him .' And if all things are through Him, He Himself is not to be reckoned with
that `all' For he who dares to call Him, through whom are things, one of that `all,'
surely will have like speculations concerning God, from whom are all. But if he shrinks
from this as unseemly, and excludes God from that all, it is but consistent that he should
also exclude from that all the Only-Begotten Son, as being proper to the Father's essence.

And, if He be not one of the all , it is sin to say concerning Him, `He was not,' and `He
was not before His generation.' Such words may be used of the creatures; but as to the
Son, He is such as the Father is, of whose essence He is proper Offspring, Word, and
Wisdom . For this is proper to the Son, as regards the Father, and this shews that the
Father is proper to the Son; that we may neither say that God was ever without Word , nor
that the Son was non-existent. For wherefore a Son, if not from Him? or wherefore Word and
Wisdom, if not ever proper to Him? 20. When then was God without that which is proper to
Him? or how can a man consider that which is proper, as foreign and alien in essence? for
other things, according to the nature of things originate, are without likeness in essence
with the Maker; but are external to Him, made by the Word at His grace and will, and thus
admit of ceasing to be, if it so pleases Him who made them ; for such is the nature of
things originate . But as to what is proper to the Father's essence (for this we have
already found to be the Son), what daring is it in irreligion to say that `This comes from
nothing,' and that `It was not before generation,' but was adventitious , and can at some
time cease to be again? Let a person only dwell upon this thought, and he will discern how
the perfection and the plenitude of the Father's essence is impaired by this heresy;
however, he will see its unseemliness still more clearly, if he considers that the Son is
the Image and Radiance of the Father, and Expression, and Truth. For if, when Light
exists, there be withal its Image, viz. Radiance, and, a Subsistence existing, there be of
it the entire Expression, and, a Father existing, there be His Truth (viz. the Son); let
them consider what depths of irreligion they fall into, who make time the measure of the
Image and Form of the Godhead.

For if the Son was not before His generation, Truth was not always in God, which it were a
sin to say; for, since the Father was, there was ever in Him the Truth, which is the Son,
who says, `I am the Truth .' And the Subsistence existing, of course there was forthwith
its Expression and Image; for God's Image is not delineated from without , but God Himself
hath begotten it; in which seeing Himself, He has delight, as the Son Himself says, `I was
His delight .' When then did the Father not see Himself in His own Image? or when had He
not delight, that a man should dare to say, `the Image is out of nothing,' and `The Father
had not delight before the Image was originated?' and how should the Maker and Creator see
Himself in a created and originated essence? for such as is the Father, such must be the
Image.

21. Proceed we then to consider the attributes of the Father, and we shall come to know
whether this Image is really His. The Father is eternal, immortal, powerful, light, King,
Sovereign, God, Lord, Creator, and Maker. These attributes must be in the Image, to make
it true that he `that hath seen' the Son `hath seen the Father .' If the Son be not all
this, but, as the Arians consider, originate, and not eternal, this is not a true Image of
the Father, unless indeed they give up shame, and go on to say, that the title of Image,
given to the Son, is not a token of a similar essence , but His name only. But this, on
the other hand, O ye enemies of Christ, is not an Image, nor is it an Expression. For what
is the likeness of what is out of nothing to Him who brought what was nothing into being?
or how can that which is not, be like Him that is, being short of Him in once not being,
and in its having its place among things originate? However, such the Arians wishing Him
to be, devised for themselves arguments such as this;-`If the Son is the Father's
offspring and Image, and is like in all things to the Father, then it necessarily holds
that as He is begotten, so He begets, and He too becomes father of a son. And again, he
who is begotten from Him, begets in his turn, and so on without limit;

for this is to make the Begotten like Him that begat Him.' Authors of blasphemy, verily,
are these foes of God! who, sooner than confess that the Son is the Father's Image ,
conceive material and earthly ideas concerning the Father Himself, ascribing to Him
severings and effluences and influences. If then God be as man, let Him become also a
parent as man, so that His Son should be father of another, and so in succession one from
another, till the series they imagine grows into a multitude of gods. But if God be not as
man, as He is not, we must not impute to Him the attributes of man. For brutes and men,
after a Creator has begun them, are begotten by succession; and the son, having been
begotten of a father who was a son, becomes accordingly in his turn a father to a son, in
inheriting from his father that by which he himself has come to be. Hence in such
instances there is not, properly speaking, either father or son, nor do the father and the
son stay in their respective characters, for the son himself becomes a father, being son
of his father, but father of his son. But it is not so in the Godhead; for not as man is
God; for the Father is not from a father; therefore doth He not beget one who shall become
a father; nor is the Son from effluence of the Father, nor is He begotten from a father
that was begotten;

therefore neither is He begotten so as to beget. Thus it belongs to the Godhead alone,
that the Father is properly father, and the Son properly son, and in Them, and Them only,
does it hold that the Father is ever Father and the Son ever Son. 22. Therefore he who
asks why the Son is not to beget a son, must inquire why the Father had not a father. But
both suppositions are unseemly and full of impiety. For as the Father is ever Father and
never could become Son, so the Son is ever Son and never could become Father. For in this
rather is He shewn to be the Father's Expression and Image, remaining what He is and not
changing, but thus receiving from the Father to be one and the same. If then the Father
change, let the Image change; for so is the Image and Radiance in its relation towards Him
who begat It. But if the Father is unalterable, and what He is that He continues,
necessarily does the Image also continue what He is, and will not alter. Now He is Son
from the Father; therefore He will not become other than is proper to the Fathers essence.
Idly then have the foolish ones devised this objection also, wishing to separate the Image
from the Father, that they might level the Son with things originated.

CHAPTER VII. OBJECTIONS TO THE FOREGOING PROOF.

Whether, in the generation of the Son, God made One that was already, or One that was not.
22 (continued). Ranking Him among these, according to the teaching of Eusebius, and
accounting Him such as the things which come into being through Him, Arius and his fellows
revolted from the truth, and used, when they commenced this heresy, to go about with
dishonest phrases which they had got together; nay, up to this time some of them , when
they fall in with boys in the market-place, question them, not out of divine Scripture,
but thus, as if bursting with `the abundance of their heart ;'-`He who is, did He make him
who was not, from that which was [not], or him who was? therefore did He make the Son,
whereas He was, or whereas He was not ?' And again, `Is the Unoriginate one or two?' and
`Has He free will, and yet does not alter at His own choice, as being of an alterable
nature? for He is not as a stone to remain by Himself unmoveable.' Next they turn to silly
women, and address them in turn in this womanish language; `Hadst thou a son before
bearing? now, as thou hadst not, so neither was the Son of God before His generation.' In
such language do the disgraceful men sport and revel, and liken God to men pretending to
be Christians, but changing God's glory `into an image made like to corruptible man .'

23. Words so senseless and dull deserved no answer at all; however, lest their heresy
appear to have any foundation, it may be right, though we go out of the way for it, to
refute them even here, especially on account of the silly women who are so readily
deceived by them. When they thus speak, they should have inquired of an architect, whether
he can build without materials; and if he cannot, whether it follows that God could not
make the universe without materials . Or they should have asked every man, whether he can
be without place; and if he cannot, whether it follows that God is in place, that so they
may be brought to shame even by their audience. Or why is it that, on hearing that God has
a Son, they deny Him by the parallel of themselves; whereas, if they hear that He creates
and makes, no longer do they object their human ideas? they ought in creation also to
entertain the same, and to supply God with materials, and so deny Him to be Creator, till
they end in grovelling with Manichees. But if the bare idea of God transcends such
thoughts, and, on very first hearing, a man believes and knows that He is in being, not as
we are, and yet in being as God, and creates not as man creates, but yet creates as God,
it is plain that He begets also not as men beget, but begets as God. For God does not make
man His pattern; but rather we men, for that God is properly, and alone truly , Father of
His Son, are also called fathers of our own children; for of Him `is every fatherhood in
heaven and earth named .' And their positions, while unscrutinized, have a shew of sense;
but if any one scrutinize them by reason, they will be found to incur much derision and
mockery.

24. For first of all, as to their first question, which is such as this, how dull and
vague it is! they do not explain who it is they ask about, so as to allow of an answer,
but they say abstractedly, `He who is,' `him who is not.' Who then `is,' and what `are
not,' O Arians? or who `is,' and who `is not?' what are said `to be,' what `not to be?'
for He that is, can make things which are not, and which are, and which were before. For
instance, carpenter, and goldsmith, and potter, each, according to his own art, works upon
materials previously existing, making what vessels he pleases; and the God of all Himself,
having taken the dust of the earth existing and already brought to be, fashions man; that
very earth, however, whereas it was not once, He has at one time made by His own Word. If
then this is the meaning of their question, the creature on the one hand plainly was not
before its origination, and men, on the other, work the existing material; and thus their
reasoning is inconsequent, since both `what is' becomes, and `what is not' becomes, as
these instances shew. But if they speak concerning God and His Word, let them complete
their question and then ask, Was the God, `who is,' ever without Reason? and, whereas He
is Light, was He ray-less? or was He always Father of the Word? Or again in this manner.

Has the Father `who is' made the Word `who is not,' or has He ever with Him His Word, as
the proper offspring of His substance? This will shew them that they do but presume and
venture on sophisms about God and Him who is from Him. Who indeed can bear to hear them
say that God was ever without Reason? this is what they fall into a second time, though
endeavouring in vain to escape it and to hide it with their sophisms. Nay, one would fain
not hear them disputing at all, that God was not always Father, but became so afterwards
(which is necessary for their fantasy, that His Word once was not), considering the number
of the proofs already adduced against them; while John besides says, `The Word was ,' and
Paul again writes, `Who being the brightness of His glory ,' and, `Who is over all, God
blessed for ever. Amen .'

25. They had best have been silent; but since it is otherwise, it remains to meet their
shameless question with a bold retort . Perhaps on seeing the counter absurdities which
beset themselves, they may cease to fight against the truth. After many prayers then that
God would be gracious to us, thus we might ask them in turn; God who is, has He so become,
whereas He was not? or is He also before His coming into being? whereas He is, did He make
Himself, or is He of nothing, and being nothing before, did He suddenly appear Himself?
Unseemly is such an enquiry, both unseemly and very blasphemous, yet parallel with theirs;
for the answer they make abounds in irreligion. But if it be blasphemous and utterly
irreligious thus to inquire about God, it will be blasphemous too to make the like
inquiries about His Word. However, by way of exposing a question so senseless and so dull,
it is necessary to answer thus:-whereas God is, He was eternally; since then the Father is
ever, His Radiance ever is, which is His Word. And again, God who is, hath from Himself
His Word who also is; and neither hath the Word been added, whereas He was not before, nor
was the Father once without Reason. For this assault upon the Son makes the blasphemy
recoil upon the Father; as if He devised for Himself a Wisdom, and Word, and Son from
without ;

for whichever of these titles you use, you denote the offspring from the Father, as has
been said. So that this their objection does not hold; and naturally; for denying the
Logos they in consequence ask questions which are illogical. As then if a person saw the
sun, and then inquired concerning its radiance, and said, `Did that which is make that
which was, or that which was not,' he would be held not to reason sensibly, but to be
utterly mazed, because he fancied what is from the Light to be external to it, and was
raising questions, when and where and whether it were made; in like manner, thus to
speculate concerning the Son and the Father and thus to inquire, is far greater madness,
for it is to conceive of the Word of the Father as external to Him, and to idly call the
natural offspring a work, with the avowal, `He was not before His generation.' Nay, let
them over and above take this answer to their question;-The Father who was, made the Son
who was, for `the Word was made flesh ;' and, whereas He was Son of God, He made Him in
consummation of the ages also Son of Man, unless forsooth, after the Samosatene, they
affirm that He did not even exist at all, till He became man.

26. This is sufficient from us in answer to their first question. And now on your part, O
Arians, remembering your own words, tell us whether He who was needed one who was not for
the framing of the universe, or one who was? You said that He made for Himself His Son out
of nothing, as an instrument whereby to make the universe. Which then is superior, that
which needs or that which supplies the need? or does not each supply the deficiency of the
other? You rather prove the weakness of the Maker, if He had not power of Himself to make
the universe, but provided for Himself an instrument from without , as carpenter might do
or shipwright, unable to work anything without adze and saw! Can anything be more
irreligious? yet why should one dwell on its heinousness, when enough has gone before to
shew that their doctrine is a mere fantasy?

CHAPTER VIII. OBJECTIONS CONTINUED.

Whether we may decide the question by the parallel of human sons, which are born later
than their parents. No, for the force of the analogy lies in the idea of connaturality.
Time is not involved in the idea of Son, but is adventitious to it, and does not attach to
God, because He is without parts and passions. The titles Word and Wisdom guard our
thoughts of Him and His Son from this misconception. God not a Father, as a Creator, in
posse from eternity, because creation does not relate to the essence of God, as generation
does. 26. (continued). Nor is answer needful to their other very simple and foolish
inquiry, which they put to silly women; or none besides that which has been already given,
namely, that it is not suitable to measure divine generation by the nature of men.
However, that as before they may pass judgment on themselves, it is well to meet them on
the same ground, thus:-Plainly, if they inquire of parents concerning their son, let them
consider whence is the child which is begotten. For, granting the parent had not a son
before his begetting, still, after having him, he had him, not as external or as foreign,
but as from himself, and proper to his essence and his exact image, so that the former is
beheld in the latter, and the latter is contemplated in the former. If then they assume
from human examples that generation implies time, why not from the same infer that it
implies the Natural and the Proper , instead of extracting serpent-like from the earth
only what turns to poison? Those who ask of parents, and say, `Had you a son before you
begot him?' should add, `And if you had a son, did you purchase him from without as a
house or any other possession?' And then you would be answered, `He is not from without,
but from myself. For things which are from without are possessions, and pass from one to
another; but my son is from me, proper and similar to my essence, not become mine from
another, but begotten of me;

wherefore I too am wholly in him, while I remain myself what I am .' For so it is; though
the parent be distinct in time, as being man, who himself has come to be in time, yet he
too would have had his child ever coexistent with him, but that his nature was a restraint
and made it impossible. For Levi too was already in the loins of his great-grandfather,
before his own actual generation, or that of his grandfather. When then the man comes to
that age at which nature supplies the power, immediately, with nature, unrestrained, he
becomes father of the son from himself. 27. Therefore, if on asking parents about
children, they get for answer, that children which are by nature are not from without, but
from their parents, let them confess in like manner concerning the Word of God, that He is
simply from the Father. And if they make a question of the time, let them say what is to
restrain God-for it is necessary to prove their irreligion on the very ground on which
their scoff is made-let them tell us, what is there to restrain God from being always
Father of the Son; for that what is begotten must be from its father is undeniable.
Moreover, they will pass judgment on themselves in attributing such things to God, if, as
they questioned women on the subject of time, so they inquire of the sun concerning its
radiance, and of the fountain concerning its issue. They will find that these, though an
offspring, always exist with those things from which they are. And if parents, such as
these, have in common with their children nature and duration, why, if they suppose God
inferior to things that come to be , do they not openly say out their own irreligion?

But if they do not dare to say this openly, and the Son is confessed to be, not from
without, but a natural offspring from the Father, and that there is nothing which is a
restraint to God for not as man is He, but more than the sun, or rather the God of the
sun), it follows that the Word is from Him and is ever co-existent with Him, through whom
also the Father caused that all things which were not should be. That then the Son comes
not of nothing but is eternal and from the Father, is certain even from the nature of the
case; and the question of the heretics to parents exposes their perverseness; for they
confess the point of nature, and now have been put to shame on the point of time. 28. As
we said above, so now we repeat, that the divine generation must not be compared to the
nature of men, nor the Son considered to be part of God, nor the generation to imply any
passion whatever; God is not as man; for men beget passibly, having a transitive nature,
which waits for periods by reason of its weakness. But with God this cannot be; for He is
not composed of parts, but being impassible and simple, He is impassibly and indivisibly
Father of the Son. This again is strongly evidenced and proved by divine Scripture. For
the Word of God is His Son, and the Son is the Father's Word and Wisdom; and Word and
Wisdom is neither creature nor part of Him whose Word He is, nor an offspring passibly
begotten. Uniting then the two titles, Scripture speaks of `Son,' in order to herald the
natural and true offspring of His essence; and, on the other hand, that none may think of
the Offspring humanly, while signifying His essence, it also calls Him Word, Wisdom, and
Radiance; to teach us that the generation was impassible, and eternal, and worthy of God.
What affection then, or what part of the Father is the Word and the Wisdom and the
Radiance? So much may be impressed even on these men of folly;

for as they asked women concerning God's Son, so let them inquire of men concerning the
Word, and they will find that the word which they put forth is neither an affection of
them nor a part of their mind. But if such be the word of men, who are passible and
partitive, why speculate they about passions and parts in the instance of the immaterial
and indivisible God, that under pretence of reverence they may deny the true and natural
generation of the Son? Enough was said above to shew that the offspring from God is not an
affection; and now it has been shewn in particular that the Word is not begotten according
to affection. The same may be said of Wisdom; God is not as man; nor must they here think
humanly of Him. For, whereas men are capable of wisdom, God partakes in nothing, but is
Himself the Father of His own Wisdom, of which whoso partake a given the name of wise. And
this Wisdom too is not a passion, nor a part, but an Offspring proper to the Father.
Wherefore He is ever Father, nor is the character of Father adventitious to God, lest He
seem alterable; for if it is good that He be Father, but has not ever been Father, then
good has not ever been in Him.29. But, observe, say they, God was always a Maker, nor is
the power of framing adventitious to Him;

does it follow then, that,because He is the Framer of all, therefore His works also are
eternal, and is it wicked to say of them too, that they were not before origination?
Senseless are these Arians; for what likeness is there between Son and work, that they
should parallel a father's with a maker's function? How is it that, with that difference
between offspring and work, which has been shewn, they remain so ill-instructed? Let it be
repeated then, that a work is external to the nature, but a son is the proper offspring of
the essence; it follows that a work need not have been always, for the workman frames it
when he will; but an offspring is not subject to will, but is proper to the essence . And
a man may be and may be called Maker, though the works are not as yet; but father he
cannot be called, nor can he be, unless a son exist. And if they curiously inquire why
God, though always with the power to make, does not always make (though this also be the
presumption of madmen, for `who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who hath been His
Counsellor?' or how `shall the thing formed say to' the potter, `why didst thou make me
thus ?' however, not to leave even a weak argument unnoticed), they must be told, that
although God always had the power to make, yet the things originated had not the power of
being eternal .

For they are out of nothing, and therefore were not before their origination; but things
which were not before their origination, how could these coexist with the ever-existing
God? Wherefore God, looking to what was good for them, then made them all when He saw
that, when originated, they were able to abide. And as, though He was able, even from the
beginning in the time of Adam, or Noah, or Moses, to send His own Word, yet He sent Him
not until the consummation of the ages (for this He saw to be good for the whole
creation), so also things originated did He make when He would, and as was good for them.
But the Son, not being a work, but proper to the Father's offspring, always is; for,
whereas the Father always is, so what is proper to His essence must always be; and this is
His Word and His Wisdom. And that creatures should not be in existence, does not disparage
the Maker; for He hath the power of framing them, when He wills; but For the offspring not
to be ever with the Father, is a disparagement of the perfection of His essence. Wherefore
His works were framed, when He would, through His Word; but the Son is ever the proper
offspring of the Father's essence.

CHAPTER IX. OBJECTIONS CONTINUED.

Whether is the Unoriginate one or two? Inconsistent in Arians to use an unscriptural word;
necessary to define its meaning. Different senses of the word. If it means `without
Father,' there is but One Unoriginate; if `without beginning or creation,' there are two.
Inconsistency of Asterius. `Unoriginate' a title of God, not in contrast with the Son, but
with creatures, as is `Almighty,' or `Lord of powers.' `Father' is the truer title, as not
only Scriptural, but implying a Son, and our adoption as sons. 30. These considerations
encourage the faithful, and distress the heretical, perceiving, as they do, their heresy
overthrown thereby. Moreover, their further question, `whether the Unoriginate be one or
two ,' shews how false are their views, how treacherous and full of guile. Not for the
Father's honour ask they this, but for the dishonour of the Word. Accordingly, should any
one, not aware of their craft, answer, `the Unoriginated is one,' forthwith they spirit
out their own venom, saying, `Therefore the Son is among things originated,' and well have
we said, `He was not before His generation.' Thus they make any kind of disturbance and
confusion, provided they can but separate the Son from the Father, and reckon the Framer
of all among His works. Now first they may be convicted on this score, that, while blaming
the Nicene Bishops for their use of phrases not in Scripture, though these not injurious,
but subversive of their irreligion, they themselves went off upon the same fault, that is,
using words not in Scripture , and those in contumely of the Lord, knowing `neither what
they say nor whereof they affirm .' For instance, let them ask the Greeks, who have been
their instructors (for it is a word of their invention, not Scripture), and when they have
been instructed in its various significations, then they will discover that they cannot
even question properly, on the subject which they have undertaken.

For they have led me to ascertain that by `unoriginate' is meant what has not yet come to
be, but is possible to be, as wood which is not yet become, but is capable of becoming, a
vessel; and again what neither has nor ever can come to be, as a triangle quadrangular,
and an even number odd. For a triangle neither has nor ever can become quadrangular; nor
has even ever, nor can ever, become odd. Moreover, by `unoriginate' is meant, what exists,
but has not come into being from any, nor having a father at all. Further, Asterius, the
unprincipled sophist, the patron too of this heresy, has added in his own treatise, that
what is not made, but is ever, is `unoriginate .' They ought then, when they ask the
question, to add in what sense they take the word `unoriginate,' and then the parties
questioned would be able to answer to the point.

31. But if they still are satisfied with merely asking, `Is the Unoriginate one or two?'
they must be told first of all, as ill-educated men, that many are such and nothing is
such, many, which are capable of origination, and nothing, which is not capable, as has
been said. But if they ask according as Asterius ruled it, as if `what is not a work but
was always' were unoriginate, then they must constantly be told that the Son as well as
the Father must in this sense be called unoriginate. For He is neither in the number of
things originated, nor a work, but has ever been with the Father, as has already been
shewn, in spite of their many variations for the sole sake of speaking against the Lord,
`He is of nothing' and `He was not before His generation.' When then, after failing at
every turn, they betake themselves to the other sense of the question, `existing but not
generated of any nor having a father,' we shall tell them that the unoriginate in this
sense is only one, namely the Father; and they will gain nothing by their question . For
to say that God is in this sense Unoriginate, does not shew that the Son is a thing
originated, it being evident from the above proofs that the Word is such as He is who
begat Him. Therefore if God be unoriginate, His Image is not originated, but an Offspring
, which is His Word and His Wisdom.

For what likeness has the originated to the unoriginate? (one must not weary of using
repetition; for if they will have it that the one is like the other, so that he who sees
the one beholds the other, they are like to say that the Unoriginate is the image of
creatures; the end of which is a confusion of the whole subject, an equalling of things
originated with the Unoriginate, and a denial of the Unoriginate by measuring Him with the
works; and all to reduce the Son into their number. 32. However, I suppose even they will
be unwilling to proceed to such lengths, if they follow Asterius the sophist. For he,
earnest as he is in his advocacy of the Arian heresy, and maintaining that the Unoriginate
is one, runs counter to them in saying, that the Wisdom of God is unoriginate and without
beginning also. The following is a passage out of his work : `The Blessed Paul said not
that he preached Christ the power of God or the wisdom of God, but, without the article,
`God's power and God's wisdom ;' thus preaching that the proper power of God Himself,
which is natural to Him and co-existent with Him unoriginatedly, is something besides.'
And again, soon after: `However, His eternal power and wisdom, which truth argues to be
without beginning and unoriginate; this must surely be one.' For though, misunderstanding
the Apostle's words, he considered that there were two wisdoms; yet, by speaking still of
a wisdom coexistent with Him, he declares that the Unoriginate is not simply one, but that
there is another Unoriginate with Him. For what is coexistent, coexists not with itself,
but with another. If then they agree with Asterius, let them never ask again, `Is the
Unoriginate one or two,' or they will have to contest the point with him; if, on the other
hand, they differ even from him, let them not rely upon his treatise, lest, `biting one
another, they be consumed one of another .' So much on the point of their ignorance;

but who can say enough on their crafty character? who but would justly hate them while
possessed by such a madness? for when they were no longer allowed to say `out of nothing'
and `He was not before His generation,' they hit upon this word `unoriginate,' that, by
saying among the simple that the Son was `originate,' they might imply the very same
phrases `out of nothing,' and `He once was not;' for in such phrases things originated and
creatures are implied. 33. If they have confidence in their own positions, they should
stand to them, and not change about so variously ; but this they will not, from an idea
that success is easy, if they do but shelter their heresy under colour of the word
`unoriginate.' Yet after all, this term is not used in contrast with the Son, clamour as
they may, but with things originated; and the like may be found in the words `Almighty,'
and `Lord of the Powers .' For if we say that the Father has power and mastery over all
things by the Word, and the Son rules the Father's kingdom, and has the power of all, as
His Word, and as the Image of the Father, it is quite plain that neither here is the Son
reckoned among that all, nor is God called Almighty and Lord with reference to Him, but to
those things which through the Son come to be, and over which He exercises power and
mastery through the Word. And therefore the Unoriginate is specified not by contrast to
the Son, but to the things which through the Son come to be. And excellently: since God is
not as things originated, but is their Creator and Framer through the Son. And as the word
`Unoriginate' is specified relatively to things originated, so the word `Father' is
indicative of the Son. And he who names God Maker and Framer and Unoriginate, regards and
apprehends things created and made; and he who calls God Father, thereby conceives and
contemplates the Son.

And hence one might marvel at the obstinacy which is added to their irreligion, that,
whereas the term `unoriginate' has the aforesaid good sense, and admits of being used
religiously , they, in their own heresy, bring it forth for the dishonour of the Son, not
having read that he who honoureth the Son honoureth the Father, and he who dishonoureth
the Son, dishonoureth the Father . If they had any concern at all for reverent speaking
and the honour due to the Father, it became them rather, and this were better and higher,
to acknowledge and call God Father, than to give Him this name. For, in calling God
unoriginate, they are, as I said before, calling Him from His works, and as Maker only and
Framer, supposing that hence they may signify that the Word is a work after their own
pleasure. But that he who calls God Father, signifies Him from the Son being well aware
that if there be a Son, of necessity through that Son all things originate were created.
And they, when they call Him Unoriginate, name Him only from His works, and know not the
Son any more than the Greeks; but he who calls God Father, names Him from the Word; and
knowing the Word he acknowledges Him to be Framer of all, and understands that through Him
all things have been made.

34. Therefore it is more pious and more accurate to signify God from the Son and call Him
Father, than to name Him from His works only and call Him Unoriginate . For the latter
title, as I have said, does nettling more than signify all the works, individually and
collectively, which have come to be at the will of God through the Word; but the title
Father has its significance and its bearing only from the Son. And, whereas the Word
surpasses things originated, by so much and more doth calling God Father surpass the
calling Him Un-originate. For the latter is unscriptural and suspicious, because it has
various senses; so that, when a man is asked concerning it, his mind is carried about to
many ideas; but the word Father is simple and scriptural, and more accurate, and only
implies the Son. And `Unoriginate' is a word of the Greeks, who know not the Son; but
`Father' has been acknowledged and vouchsafed by our Lord. For He, knowing Himself whose
Son He was, said, `I am in the Father, and the Father is in Me;' and, `He that hath seen
Me, hath seen the Father,' and `I and the Father are One ;' but nowhere is He found to
call the Father Unoriginate.

Moreover, when He teaches us to pray, He says not, `When ye pray, say, O God Unoriginate,'
but rather, `When ye pray, say, Our Father, which art in heaven .' And it was His will
that the Summary of our faith should have the same bearing, in bidding us be baptized, not
into the name of Unoriginate and originate, nor into the name of Creator and creature, but
into the Name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. For with such an initiation we too, being
numbered among works, are made sons, and using the name of the Father, acknowledge from
that name the Word also in the I Father Himself . A vain thing then is their argument
about the term `Unoriginate,' as is now proved, and nothing more than a fantasy.


FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS
==================================

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

CHAPTER X. OBJECTIONS CONTINUED.

How the Word has free will, yet without being alterable. He is unalterable because the
Image of the Father, proved from texts. 35. As to their question whether the Word is
alterable , it is superfluous to examine it; it is enough simply to write down what they
say, and so to shew its daring irreligion. How they trifle, appears from the following
questions:-`Has He free will, or has He not? is He good from choice according to free
will, and can He, if He will, alter, being of an alterable nature? or, as wood or stone,
has He not His choice free to be moved and, incline hither and thither?' It is but
agreeable to their heresy thus to speak and think; for, when once they have framed to
themselves a God out of nothing and a created Son, of course they also adopt such terms,
as being suitable to a creature. However, when in their controversies with Churchmen they
hear from them of the real and only Word of the Father, and yet venture thus to speak of
Him, does not their doctrine then become the most loathsome that can be found? is it not
enough to distract a man on mere hearing, though unable to reply, and to make him stop his
ears, from astonishment at the novelty of what he hears them say, which even to mention is
to blaspheme? For if the Word be alterable and changing, where will He stay, and what will
be the end of His development? how shall the alterable possibly be like the Unalterable?
How should he who has seen the alterable, be considered to have seen the Unalterable?

At what state must He arrive, for us to be able to behold in Him the Father? for it is
plain that not at all times shall we see the Father in the Son, because the Son is ever
altering, and is of changing nature. For the Father is unalterable and unchangeable, and
is always in the same state and the same; but if, as they hold, the Son is alterable, and
not always the same, but of an ever-changing nature, how can such a one be the Father's
Image, not having the likeness of His unalterableness ? how can He be really in the
Father, if His purpose is indeterminate? Nay, perhaps, as being alterable, and advancing
daily, He is not perfect yet. But away with such madness of the Arians, and let the truth
shine out, and shew that they are foolish. For must not He be perfect who is equal to God?
and must not He be unalterable, who is one with the Father, and His Son proper to His
essence? and the Father's essence being unalterable, unalterable must be also the proper
Offspring from it. And if they slanderously impute alteration to the Word, let them learn
how much their own reason is in peril for from the fruit is the tree known. For this is
why he who hath seen the Son hath seen the Father; and why the knowledge of the Son is
knowledge of the Father.

36. Therefore the Image of the unalterable God must be unchangeable; for `Jesus Christ is
the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever .' And David in the Psalm says of Him, `Thou,
Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work
of Thine hands. They shall perish, but Thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth
a garment. And as a vesture shall Thou fold them up, and they shall be changed, but Thou
art the same. and Thy years shall not fail .' And the Lord Himself says of Himself through
the Prophet, `See now that I, even I am He,' and `I change not .' It may be said indeed
that what is here signified relates to the Father; yet it suits the Son also to say this,
specially because, when made man, He manifests His own identity and unalterableness to
such as suppose that by reason of the flesh He is changed and become other than He was.
More trustworthy are the saints, or rather the Lord, than the perversity of the
irreligious. For Scripture, as in the above-cited passage of the Psalter, signifying under
the name of heaven and earth, that the nature of all things originate and created is
alterable and changeable, yet excepting the Son from these, shews us thereby that He is no
wise a thing originate;

nay teaches that He changes everything else, and is Himself not changed, in saying, `Thou
art the same, and Thy years shall not fail .' And with reason; for things originate, being
from nothing , and not being before their origination, because, in truth, they come to be
after not being, have a nature which is changeable; but the Son, being from the Father,
and proper to His essence, is unchangeable and unalterable as the Father Himself. For it
were sin to say that from that essence which is unalterable was begotten an alterable word
and a changeable wisdom. For how is He longer the Word, if He be alterable? or can that be
Wisdom which is changeable? unless perhaps, as accident in essence , so they would have
it, viz. as in any particular essence, a certain grace and habit of virtue exists
accidentally, which is called Word and Son and Wisdom, and admits of being taken from it
and added to it. For they have often expressed this sentiment, but it is not the faith of
Christians; as not declaring that He is truly Word and Son of God, or that the wisdom
intended is true Wisdom. For what alters and changes, and has no stay in one and the same
condition, how can that be true?

whereas the Lord says, `I am the Truth .' If then the Lord Himself speaks thus concerning
Himself, and declares His unalterableness, and the Saints have learned and testify this,
nay and our notions of God acknowledge it as religious, whence did these men of irreligion
draw this novelty? From their heart as from a seat of corruption did they vomit it forth .

CHAPTER XI. TEXTS EXPLAINED; AND FIRST, PHIL. II. 9, 10

Various texts which are alleged against the Catholic doctrine: e.g. Phil. ii. 9, Phil. ii.
10. Whether the words `Wherefore God hath highly exalted' prove moral probation and
advancement. Argued against, first, from the force of the word `Son;' which is
inconsistent with such an interpretation. Next, the passage examined. Ecclesiastical sense
of `highly exalted,' and `gave,' and `wherefore;' viz. as being spoken with reference to
our Lord's manhood. Secondary sense; viz. as implying the Word's `exaltation' through the
resurrection in the same sense in which Scripture speaks of His descent in the
Incarnation; how the phrase does not derogate from the nature of the Word. 37. But since
they allege the divine oracles and force on them a misinterpretation, according to their
private sense , it becomes necessary to meet them just so far as to vindicate these
passages, and to shew that they bear an orthodox sense, and that our opponents are in
error. They say then, that the Apostle writes, `Wherefore God also hath highly exalted
Him, and given Him a Name which is above every name; that in the Name of Jesus every knee
should bow, of things in heaven and things in earth and things under the earth ;' and
David, `Wherefore God even Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy
fellows .' Then they urge, as something acute: `If He was exalted and received grace, on a
`wherefore,' and on a `wherefore' He was anointed, He received a reward of His purpose;
but having acted from purpose, He is altogether of an alterable nature.' This is what
Eusebius and Arius have dared to say, nay to write while their partizans do not shrink
from conversing about it in full market-place, not seeing how mad an argument they rise.
For if He received what He had as a reward of His purpose, and would not have had it,
unless He had needed it, and had His work to shew for it, then having gained it from
virtue and promotion, with reason had He `therefore' been called Son and God, without
being very Son.

For what is from another by nature, is a real offspring, as Isaac was to Abraham, and
Joseph to Jacob, and the radiance to the sun; but the so called sons from virtue and
grace, have but in place of nature a grace by acquisition, and are something else besides
the gift itself; as the men who have received the Spirit by participation, concerning whom
Scripture saith, `I begat and exalted children, and they rebelled against Me .' And of
course, since they were not sons by nature, therefore, when they altered, the Spirit was
taken away and they were disinherited; and again on (heir repentance that God who thus at
the beginning gave them grace, will receive them, and give light, and call them sons
again. 38. But if they say this of the Saviour also, it follows that He is neither very
God nor very Son, nor like the Father, nor in any wise has God for a Father of His being
according to essence, but of the mere grace given to Him, and for a Creator of His being
according to essence, after the similitude of all others. And being such, as they
maintain, it will be manifest further that He had not the name `Son' from the first, if so
be it was the prize of works done and of that very same advance which He made when He
became man, and took the form of the servant; but then, when, after becoming `obedient
unto death,' He was, as the text says, `highly exalted,' and received that `Name' as a
grace, `that in the Name of Jesus every knee should bow .' What then was before this, if
then He was exalted, and then began to be worshipped, and then was called Son, when He
became man? For He seems Himself not to have promoted the flesh at all, but rather to have
been Himself promoted through it, if, according to their perverseness, He was then exalted
and called Son, when He became man. What then was before this? One must urge the question
on them again, to make it understood what their irreligious doctrine results in .

For if the Lord be God, Son, Word, yet was not all these before He became man, either He
was something else beside these, and afterwards became partaker of them for His virtue's
sake, as we have said; or they must adopt the alternative (may it return upon their heads!
that He was not before that time, but is wholly man by nature and nothing more. But this
is no sentiment of the Church. but of the Samosatene and of the present Jews. Why then, if
they think as Jews, are they not circumcised with them too, instead of pretending
Christianity, while they are its foes? For if He was not, or was indeed, but afterwards
was promoted, how were all things made by Him, or how in Him, were He not perfect, did the
Father delight ? And He, on the other hand, if now promoted, how did He before rejoice in
the presence of the Father? And, if He received His worship after dying, how is Abraham
seen to worship Him in the tent , and Moses in the bush? and, as Daniel saw, myriads of
myriads, and thousands of thousands were ministering unto Him?

And if, as they say, He had His promotion now, bow did the Son Himself make mention of
that His glory before and above the world, when He said, `Glorify Thou Me, O Father, with
the glory which I had with Thee before the world was .' If, as they say, He was then
exalted, bow did He before that `bow the heavens and come down;' and again, `The Highest
gave His thunder ?' Therefore, if, even before the world was made, the Son had that glory,
and was Lord of glory and the Highest, and descended from heaven, and is ever to be
worshipped, it follows that He had not promotion from His descent, but rather Himself
promoted the things which needed promotion; and if He descended to effect their promotion,
therefore He did not receive in reward the name of the Son and God, but rather He Himself
has made us sons of the Father, and deifed men by becoming Himself man.

39. Therefore He was not man, and then became God, but He was God, and then became man,
and that to deify us , Since, if when He became man, only then He was called Son and God,
but before He became man, God called the ancient people sons, and made Moses a god of
Pharaoh (and Scripture says of many, `God standeth in the congregation of Gods '), it is
plain that He is called Son and God later than they. How then are all things through Him,
and He before all? or how is He `first-born of the whole creation ,' if He has others
before Him who are called sons and gods? And how is it that those first partakers do not
partake of the Word? This opinion is not true; it is a device of our present Judaizers.
For how in that case can any at all know God as their Father? for adoption there could not
be apart from the real Son, who says, `No one knoweth the Father, save the Son, and he to
whomsoever the Son will reveal Him .' And how can there be deifying apart from the Word
and before Him?

yet, saith He to their brethren the Jews, `If He called them gods, unto whom the Word of
God came .' And if all that are called sons and gods, whether in earth or in heaven, were
adopted and deified through the Word, and the Son Himself is the Word, it is plain that
through Him are they all, and He Himself before all, or rather He Himself only is very Son
, and He alone is very God from the very God, not receiving these prerogatives as a reward
for His virtue, nor being another beside them, but being all these by nature and according
to essence. For He is Offspring of the Father's essence, so that one cannot doubt that
after the resemblance of the unalterable Father, he Word also is unalterable. 40. Hitherto
we have met their irrational conceits with the true conceptions implied in the Word `Son,'
as the Lord Himself has given us. But it will be well next to cite the divine oracles,
that the unalterableness of the Son and His unchangeable nature, which is the Father's, as
well as their perverseness, may be still more fully proved. The Apostle then, writing to
the Philippians, says, `Have this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus; 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 as a man, He humbled Himself. becoming obedient to death, even the death of the
cross. Wherefore God also highly exalted Him, and gave Him a Name which is above every
name; that in the Name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in
earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ
is Lord, to the glory of God the Father .' Can anything be plainer and more express than
this? He was not from a lower state pro-rooted: but rather, existing as God, He took the
form of a servant, and in taking it, was not promoted but humbled Himself. Where then is
there here any reward of virtue, or what advancement and promotion in humiliation?

For if, being God, He became man, and descending from on high He is still said to be
exalted, where is He exalted, being God? this withal being plain, that, since God is
highest of all, His Word must necessarily he highest also. Where then could He be exalted
higher, who is in the Father and like the Father in all things ? Therefore He is beyond
the need of any addition; nor is such as the Arians think Him. For though the Word has
descended in order to be exalted, and so it is written, yet what need was there that He
should humble Himself, as if to seek that which He had already? And what grace did He
receive who is the Giver of grace ? or how did He receive that Name for worship, who is
always worshipped by His Name? Nay, certainly before He became man, the sacred writers
invoke Him, `Save me, O God, for Thy Name's sake ;'and again, `Some put their trust in
chariots, and some in horses, but we will remember the Name of the Lord our God .' And
while He was worshipped by the Patriarchs, concerning the Angels it is written, `Let all
the Angels of God worship Him .'

41. And if, as David says in the 71st Psalm, `His Name remaineth before the sun, and
before the moon, from one generation to another ,' how did He receive what He had always,
even before He now received it? or how is He exalted, being before His exaltation the Most
High? or how did He receive the right of being worshipped, who before He now received it,
was ever worshipped? It is not a dark saying but a divine mystery . `In the beginning was
the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God;' but for our sakes afterwards
the `Word was made flesh .' And the term in question, `highly exalted,' does not signify
that the essence of the Word was exalted, for He was ever and is `equal to God ,' but the
exaltation is of the manhood. Accordingly this is not said before the Word became flesh;
that it might be plain that `humbled' and `exalted' are spoken of His human nature; for
where there is humble estate, there too may be exaltation; and if because of His taking
flesh `humbled' is written, it is clear that `highly exalted' is also said because of it.
For of this was man's nature in want, because of the humble estate of the flesh and of
death.

Since then the Word, being the Image of the Father and immortal, took the form of the
servant, and as man underwent for us death in His flesh, that thereby He might offer
Himself for us through death to the Father; therefore also, as man, He is said because of
us and for us to be highly exalted, that as by His death we all died in Christ, so again
in the Christ Himself we might be highly exalted, being raised from the dead, and
ascending into heaven, `whither the forerunner Jesus is for us entered, not into the
figures of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us
.' But if now for us the Christ is entered into heaven itself, though He was even before
and always Lord and Framer of the heavens, for us therefore is that present exaltation
written.

And as He Himself, who sanctifies all, says also that He sanctifies Himself to the Father
for our sakes, not that the Word may become holy, but that He Himself may in Himself
sanctify all of us, in like manner we must take the present phrase, `He highly exalted
Him,' not that He Himself should be exalted, for He is the highest, but that He may become
righteousness for us , and we may be exalted in Him, and that we may enter the gates of
heaven, which He has also opened for us, the forerunners saying, `Lift up your gates, O ye
rulers, and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of Glory shall come in .'
For here also not on Him were shut the gates, as being Lord and Maker of all, but because
of us is this too written, to whom the door of paradise was shut. And therefore in a human
relation, because of the flesh which He bore, it is said of Him, `Lift up your gates,' and
`shall come in,' as if a man were entering;

but in a divine relation on the other hand it is said of Him, since `the Word was God,'
that He is the `Lord' and the `King of Glory.' Such our exaltation the Spirit
foreannounced in the eighty-ninth Psalm, saying, `And in Thy righteousness shall they be
exalted, for Thou art the glory of their strength .' And it the Son be Righteousness, then
He is not exalted as being Himself in need, but it is we who are exalted in that
Righteousness, which is He . 42. And so too the words `gave Him' are not written because
of the Word Himself; for even before He became man He was worshipped, as we have said, by
the Angels and the whole creation in virtue of being proper to the Father; but because of
us and for us this too is written of Him. For as Christ died and was exalted as man, so,
as man, is He said to take what, as God, He ever had, that even such a grant of grace
might reach to us. For the Word was not impaired in receiving a body, that He should seek
to receive a grace, but rather He deified that which He put on, and more than that, `gave'
it graciously to the race of man. For as He was ever worshipped as being the Word and
existing in the form of God, so being what He ever was, though become man and called
Jesus, He none the less has the whole creation under foot, and bending their knees to Him
in this Name, and confessing that the Word's becoming flesh, and undergoing death in
flesh, has not happened against the glory of His Godhead, but `to the glory of God the
Father.' For it is the Father's glory that man, made and then lost, should be found again;
and, when dead, that he should be made alive, and should become God's temple.

For whereas the powers in heaven, both Angels and Archangels, were ever worshipping the
Lord, as they are now worshipping Him in the Name of Jesus, this is our grace and high
exaltation, that even when He became man, the Son of God is worshipped, and the heavenly
powers will not be astonished at seeing all of us, who are of one body with Him ,
introduced into their realms. And this had not been, unless He who existed in the form of
God had taken on Him a servant's form, and had humbled Himself, yielding His body to come
unto death. 43. Behold then what men considered the foolishness of God because of the
Cross, has become of all things most honoured. For our resurrection is stored up in it;
and no longer Israel alone, but henceforth all the nations, as the Prophet hath foretold,
leave their idols and acknowledge the true God, the Father of the Christ. And the illusion
of demons is come to nought, and He only who is really God is worshipped in the Name of
our Lord Jesus Christ . For the fact that the Lord, even when come in human body and
called Jesus, was worshipped and believed to be God's Son, and that through Him the Father
was known, shows, as has been said, that not the Word, considered as the Word, received
this so great grace, but we. For because of our relationship to His Body we too have
become God's temple, and in consequence are made God's sons, so that even in us the Lord
is now worshipped, and beholders report, as the Apostle says, that God is in them of a
truth .

As also John says in the Gospel, `As many as received Him, to them gave He power to become
children of God ;' and in his Epistle he writes, `By this we know that He abideth in us by
His Spirit which He hath given us .' And this too is an evidence of His goodness towards
us that, while we were exalted because that the Highest Lord is in us, and on our account
grace was given to Him, because that the Lord who supplies the grace has become a man like
us, He on the other hand, the Saviour, humbled Himself in taking `our body of humiliation
,' and took a servant's form, putting on that flesh which was enslaved to sin . And He
indeed has gained nothing from us for His own promotion: for the Word of God is without
want and full; but rather we were promoted from Him; for He is the `Light, which
lighteneth every man, coming into the world .' And in vain do the Arians lay stress upon
the conjunction `wherefore,' because Paul has said, `Wherefore, hath God highly exalted
Him.' For in saying this he did not imply any prize of virtue, nor promotion from advance
, but the cause why the exaltation was bestowed upon us. And what is this but that He who
existed in form of God, the Son of a noble Father, humbled Himself and became a servant
instead of us and in our behalf?

For if the Lord had not become man, we had not been redeemed from sins, not raised from
the dead, but remaining dead under the earth; not exalted into heaven, but lying in Hades.
Because of us then and in our behalf are the words, `highly exalted' and `given.' 44. This
then I consider the sense of this passage, and that, a very ecclesiastical sense .
However, there is another way in which one might remark upon it, giving the same sense in
a parallel way; viz. that, though it does not speak of the exaltation of the Word Himself,
so far as He is Word (for He is, as was just now said, most high and like His Father), yet
by reason of His becoming man it indicates His resurrection from the dead. For after
saying, `He hath humbled Himself even unto death,' He immediately added, `Wherefore He
hath highly exalted Him;' wishing to shew, that, although as man He is said to have died,
yet, as being Life, He was exalted on the resurrection; for `He who descended, is the same
also who rose again .' He descended in body, and He rose again because He was God Himself
in the body. And this again is the reason why according to this meaning he brought in the
conjunction `Wherefore;' not as a reward of virtue nor of advancement, but to signify the
cause why the resurrection took place; and why, while all other men from Adam down to this
time have died and remained dead, He only rose in integrity from the dead. The cause is
this, which He Himself has already taught us, that, being God, He has become man. For all
other men, being merely born of Adam, died, and death reigned over them;

but He, the Second Man, is from heaven, for `the Word was made flesh ,' and this Man is
said to be from heaven and heavenly , because the Word descended from heaven; wherefore He
was not held under death. For though He humbled Himself, yielding His own Body to come
unto death, in that it was capable of death , yet He was highly exalted from earth,
because He was God's Son in a body. Accordingly what is here said, `Wherefore God also
hath highly exalted Him,' answers to Peter's words in the Acts, `Whom God raised up,
having loosed the bonds of death, because it was not possible that He should be holden of
it .' For as Paul has written, `Since being in form of God He became man, and humbled
Himself unto death, therefore God also hath highly exalted Him,' so also Peter says,
`Since, being God, He became man, and signs and wonders proved Him to beholders to be God,
therefore it was not possible that He should be holden of death.' To alan it was not
possible to succeed in this; for death belongs to man; wherefore, the Word, being God,
became flesh, that, being put to death in the flesh, He might quicken all men by His own
power.

45. But since He Himself is said to be `exalted,' and God `gave' Him, and the heretics
think this a defect or affection in the essence of the Word, it becomes necessary to
explain how these words are used. He is said to he exalted from the lower parts of the
earth, because death is ascribed even to Him. Both events are reckoned His, since it was
His Body , and none other's, that was exalted from the dead and taken up into heaven. And
again, the Body being His, and the Word not being external to it, it is natural that when
the Body was exalted, He, as man, should, because of the body, be spoken of as exalted. If
then He did not become man, let this not be said of Him: but if the Word became flesh, of
necessity the resurrection and exaltation, as in the case of a man, must be ascribed to
Him, that the death which is ascribed to Him may be a redemption of the sin of men and an
abolition of death, and that the resurrection and exaltation may for His sake remain
secure for us. In both respects he hath said of Him, `God hath highly exalted Him,' and
`God hath given to Him;' that herein moreover he may show that it is not the Father that
hath become flesh, but it is His Word, who has become man, and receives after the manner
of men from the Father, and is exalted by Him, as has been said.

And it is plain, nor would any one dispute it, that what the Father gives, He gives
through. the Son. And it is marvellous and overwhelming verily; for the grace which the
Son gives from the Father, that the Son Himself is said to receive; and the exaltation,
which the Son bestows from the Father, with that the Son is Himself exalted. For He who is
the Son of God, became Himself the Son of Man; and, as Word, He gives from the Father, for
all things which the Father does and gives, He does and supplies through Him; and as the
Son of Man, He Himself is said after the manner of men to receive what proceeds from Him,
because His Body is none other than His, and is a natural recipient of grace, as has been
said. For He received it as far as His man's nature was exalted; which exaltation was its
being deified. But such an exaltation the Word Himself always had according to the
Father's Godhead and perfection, which was His .

CHAPTER XII. TEXTS EXPLAINED; SECONDLY, PSALM XLV. 7, 8.

Whether the words `therefore,' `anointed,' &c., imply that the Word has been rewarded.
Argued against first from the weird `fellows' or `partakers.' He is anointed with the
Spirit in His manhood to sanctify human nature. Therefore the Spirit descended on Him in
Jordan, when in the flesh. And He is said to sanctify Himself for us, and give us the
glory He has received The word `wherefore' implies His divinity. `Thou hast loved
righteousness,' &c., do not imply trial or choice. 46. Such an explanation of the
Apostle's words confutes the irreligious men; and what the sacred poet says admits also
the same orthodox sense, which they misinterpret, but which in the Psalmist is manifestly
religious. He says then, `Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; a sceptre of
righteousness is the sceptre of Thy Kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hated
iniquity, therefore God, even Thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above
Thy fellows .' Behold, O ye Arians, and acknowledge even hence the truth. The Singer
speaks of us all as `fellows' or `partakers' of the Lord: but were He one of things which
come out of nothing and of things originate, He Himself had been one of those who partake.
But, since he hymned Him as the eternal God, saying, `Thy throne, O God, is for ever and
ever,' and has declared that all other things partake of Him, what conclusion must we
draw, but that He is distinct from originated things, and He only the Father's veritable
Word, Radiance, and Wisdom, which all things originate partake , being sanctified by Him
in the Spirit ? And therefore He is here `anointed,' not that He may become God, for He
was so even before; nor that He may become King, for He had the Kingdom eternally,
existing as God's Image, as the sacred Oracle shews; but in our behalf is this written, as
before.

For the Israelitish kings, upon their being anointed, then became kings, not being so
before, as David, as Hezekiah, as Josiah, and the rest; but the Saviour on the contrary,
being God, and ever ruling in the Father's Kingdom, and being Himself He that supplies the
Holy Ghost, nevertheless is here said to be anointed, that, as before, being said as man
to be anointed with the Spirit, He might provide for us men, not only exaltation and
resurrection, but the indwelling and intimacy of the Spirit. And signifying this the Lord
Himself hath said by His own mouth in the Gospel according to John, `I have sent them into
the world, and for their sakes do I sanctify Myself, that they may be sanctified in the
truth .' In saying this He has shown that He is not the sanctified, but the Sanctifier;
for He is not sanctified by other, but Himself sanctifies Himself, that we may be
sanctified in the truth. He who sanctifies Himself is Lord of sanctification. How then
does this take place? What does He mean but this? `I, being the Father's Word, I give to
Myself, when becoming man, the Spirit; and Myself, become man, do I sanctify in Him, that
henceforth in Me, who am Truth (for "Thy Word is Truth"), all may be sanctified.'

47. If then for our sake He sanctifies Himself, and does this when He is become man, it is
very plain that the Spirit's descent on Him in Jordan was a descent upon us, because of
His bearing our body. And it did not take place for promotion to the Word, but again for
our sanctification, that we might share His anointing, and of us it might be said, `Know
ye not that ye are God's Temple, and the Spirit of God dwelleth in you ?' For when the
Lord, as man, was washed in Jordan, it was we who were washed in Him and by Him . And when
He received the Spirit, we it was who by Him were made recipients of It. And moreover for
this reason, not as Aaron or David or the rest, was He anointed with oil, but in another
way above all His fellows, `with the oil of gladness,' which He Himself interprets to be
the Spirit, saying by the Prophet, `The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me, because the Lord
hath anointed Me ;' as also the Apostle has said, `How God anointed Him with the Holy
Ghosts. ' When then were these things spoken of Him but when He came in the flesh and was
baptized in Jordan, and the Spirit descended on Him?

And indeed the Lord Himself said, `The Spirit shall take of Mine;' and `I will send Him;'
and to His disciples, `Receive ye the Holy Ghost .' And notwithstanding, He who, as the
Word and Radiance of the Father, gives to others, now is said to be sanctified, because
now He has become man, and the Body that is sanctified is His. From Him then we have begun
to receive the unction and the seal, John saying, `And ye have an unction from the Holy
One;' and the Apostle, `And ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise .' Therefore
because of us and for us are these words. What advance then of promotion, and reward of
virtue or generally of conduct, is proved from this in our Lord's instance? For if He was
not God, and then had become God, if not being King He was preferred to the Kingdom, your
reasoning would have had some faint plausibility. But if He is God and the throne of His
kingdom is everlasting, in what way could God advance? or what was there wanting to Him
who was sitting on His Father's throne? And if, as the Lord Himself has said, the Spirit
is His, and takes of His, and He sends It, it is not the Word, considered as the Word and
Wisdom, who is anointed with the Spirit which He Himself gives, but the flesh assumed by
Him which is anointed in Him and by Him ;

that the sanctification coming to the Lord as man, may come to all men from Him. For not
of Itself, saith He, doth the Spirit speak, but the Word is He who gives It to the worthy.
For this is like the passage considered above; for as the Apostle has written, `Who
existing in form of God thought it not a prize to be equal with God, but emptied Himself,
and took a servant's form,' so David celebrates the Lord, as the everlasting God and King,
but sent to us and assuming our booty which is mortal. For this its his meaning in the
Psalm, `All thy garments smell of myrrh, aloes. and cassia;' and it is represented by
Nicodemus and by Mary's company, when the one came bringing `a mixture of myrrh and aloes,
about an hundred pounds weight;' and the others `the spices which they had prepared' for
the burial of the Lord's body.

48. What advancement then was it to the Immortal to have assumed the mortal? or what
promotion is it to the Everlasting to have put on the temporal? what reward can be great
to the Everlasting God and King in the bosom of the Father? See ye not, that this too was
done and written because of us and for us, that us who are mortal and temporal, the Lord,
become man, might make immortal, and bring into the everlasting kingdom of heaven? Blush
ye not, speaking lies against the divine oracles? For when our Lord Jesus Christ had been
among us, we indeed were promoted, as rescued from sin; but He is the same ; nor did He
alter, when He became man (to repeat what I have said), but, as has been written, `The
Word of God abideth for ever .' Surely as, before His becoming man, He, the Word,
dispensed to the saints the Spirit as His own , so also when made man, He sanctifies all
by the Spirit and says to His Disciples, `Receive ye the Holy Ghost.' And He gave to Moses
and the other seventy; and through Him David prayed to the Father, saying, `Take not Thy
Holy Spirit from me .' On the other hand, when made man, He said, `I will send to you the
Paraclete, the Spirit of truth ;' and He sent Him, He, the Word of God, as being faithful.

Therefore `Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever ,' remaining
unalterable, and at once gives and receives, giving as God's Word, receiving as man. It is
not the Word then, viewed as the Word, that is promoted; for He had all things and has
them always; but men, who have in Him and through Him their origin of receiving them. For,
when He is now said to be anointed in a human respect, we it is who in Him are anointed;
since also when He is baptized, we it is who in Him are baptized. But on all these things
the Saviour throws much light, when He says to the Father, `And the glory which Thou
gavest Me, I have given to them, that they may be one, even as We are one .' Because of us
then He asked for glory, and the words occur, `took' and `gave' and `highly exalted,' that
we might take, and to us might be given, and we might be exalted. in Him; as also for us
He sanctifies Himself, that we might be sanctified in Him .

49. But if they take advantage of the word `wherefore,' as connected with the passage in
the Psalm, `Wherefore God, even Thy God, hath anointed Thee,' for their own purposes, let
these novices in Scripture and masters in irreligion know, that, as Before, the word
`wherefore' does not imply reward of virtue or conduct in the Word, but the reason why He
came down to us, and of the Spirit's anointing which took place in Him for our sakes. For
He says not, `Wherefore He anointed Thee in order to Thy being God or Kites or Son or
Word;' for so He was before and is for ever, as has been shewn; but rather, `Since Thou
art God and King,therefore Thou wast anointed, since none bat Thou couldest unite man to
the Holy Ghost, Thou the Image of the Father, in which we were made in the beginning; for
Thine is even the Spirit.' For the nature of things originate could give no warranty for
this, Angels having transgressed, and men disobeyed . Wherefore there was need of God and
the Word is God; that those who had become under a curse, He Himself might set free. If
then He was of nothing, He would not have been the Christ or Anointed, being one among
others and having fellowship as the rest .

But, whereas He is God, as being Son of God, and is everlasting King, and exists as
Radiance and Expression of the Father, therefore fitly is He the expected Christ, whom the
Father announces to mankind, by revelation to His holy Prophets; that as through Him we
have come to be, so also in Him all men might be redeemed from their sins, and by Him all
things might be ruled . And this is the cause of the anointing which took place in Him,
and of the incarnate presence of the Word , which the Psalmist foreseeing, celebrates,
first His Godhead and kingdom, which is the Father's, in these tones, `Thy throne, O God,
is for ever and ever; a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of Thy Kingdom ;' then
announces His descent to us thus, `Wherefore God, even Thy God, hath anointed Thee with
the oil of gladness above Thy, fellows .'

50. What is there to wonder at, what to disbelieve, if the Lord who gives the Spirit, is
here said Himself to be anointed with the Spirit, at a time when, necessity requiring it,
He did not refuse in respect of His manhood to call Himself inferior to the Spirit? For
the Jews saying that He east out devils in Beelzebub, He answered and said to them, for
the exposure of their blasphemy, `But if 1 through the Spirit of God cast out demons .'
Behold, the Giver of the Spirit here says that He cast out demons in the Spirit; but this
is not said, except because of His flesh. For since man's nature is not equal of itself to
casting out demons, but only in power of the Spirit, therefore as man He said, `But if I
through the Spirit of God cast out demons.' Of course too He signified that the blasphemy
offered to the Holy Ghost is greater than that against His humanity, when He said,
`Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him;' such as
were those who said, `Is not this the carpenter's son ?' but they who blaspheme against
the Holy Ghost, and ascribe the deeds of the Word to the devil, shall have inevitable
punishment . This is what the Lord spoke to the Jews, as man;

but to the disciples shewing His Godhead and His majesty, and intimating that He was not
inferior but equal to the Spirit, He gave the Spirit and said, `Receive ye the Holy
Ghost,' and `I send Him,' and `He shall glorify Me,' and `Whatsoever He heareth, that He
shall speak .' As then in this place the Lord Himself, the Giver of the Spirit, does not
refuse to say that through the Spirit He casts out demons, as man; in like manner He the
same, the Giver of the Spirit. refused not to say, `The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
because He hath anointed Me ,' in respect of His having become flesh, as John hath said;
that it might be shewn in both these particulars, that we are they who need the Spirit's
grace in our sanctification, and again who are unable to cast oat demons without the
Spirit's power. Through whom then and from whom behoved it that the Spirit should be given
but through the Son, whose also the Spirit is? and when were we enabled to receive It,
except when the Word became man? and,as the passage of the Apostle shews, that we had not
been redeemed and highly exalted,, had not He who exists in form od God taken a servant's
form, so David also shews, that no otherwise should we have partaken the Spirit and been
sanctified, but that the Giver of the Spirit, the Word Himself, hast spoken of Himself as
anointed with the Spirit for us.

And therefore have we securely received it, He being said to i he anointed in the flesh;
for the flesh being first sanctified in Him , and He being said, as man, to have received
for its sake, we have the sequel of the Spirit grace, receiving `out of His fulness .' 51.
Nor do the words, `Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity,' which are added in
the Psalm, show, as again you suppose, that the Nature of the Word is alterable, but
rather by their very force signify His unalterableness. For since of things originate the
nature is alterable, and the one portion had transgressed and the other disobeyed, as has
been said, and it is not certain how they will act, but it often happens that he who is
now good afterwards alters anti becomes different, so that one who was but now righteous,
soon is found unrighteous, wherefore there i was here also need of one unalterable, that
men might have the immutability of the righteousness of the Word as an image and type for
virtue . And this thought commends itself strongly to the right-minded. For since the
first man Adam altered, and through sin death came into the world, therefore it became the
second Adam to be unalterable; that, should the Serpent again assault, even the Serpent's
deceit might be baffled, and, the Lord being unalterable and unchangeable, the Serpent
might become powerless in his assault against all. For as when Adam had transgressed.

i, his sin reached unto all men, so, when the Lord had become man and had overthrown the
Serpent, that so great strength of His is to extend through all men, so that each of us
may say, `For we are not ignorant of his devices ' Good reason then that the Lord, who
ever is in nature unalterable, loving righteousness and hating iniquity, should be
anointed and Himself sent, that, He, being and remaining the same , by taking this
alterable flesh, `might condemn sin in it ,' and might secure its freedom, and its ability
henceforth `to fulfil the righteousness of the law' in itself, so as to be able to say,
`But we are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth
in us .' 52. Vainly then, here again, O Arians, have ye made this conjecture, and vainly
alleged the words of Scripture; for God's Word is unalterable, and is ever in one state,
not as it may happen , but as the Father is; since how. He like the Father, unless He be
thus? or how is all that is the Father's the Son's also, if He has not the unalterableness
and unchangeableness of the Father ? Not as being subject to laws , and biassed to one
side, does He love the one and hate the other, lest, if from fear of falling away He
chooses the one, We admit that He is alterable otherwise also; but, as being God and the
Father's Word, He is a just judge and lover of virtue, or rather its dispenser. Therefore
being just and holy by nature, on this account He is sail to love righteousness and to
hate iniquity; as much as to say, that He loves and chooses the virtuous, and rejects and
hates the unrighteous. And divine Scripture says the same of the Father; `The Righteous
Lord loveth righteousness; Thou hatest all them that work iniquity ,' and `The Lord loveth
the gates of Sion, more than all the dwellings of Jacob ;' and, `Jacob have I loved, but
Esau have I hated ;' and in Isaiah there is tile voice of God again saying, `I the Lord
love righteousness, and hate robbery of unrighteousness .' Let them then expound those
former words as these latter;

for the former also are written of the Image of God else, misinterpreting these as those,
they will conceive that the Father too is alterable. But since the very hearing others say
this is not without peril, we do well to think that God is said to love righteousness and
to hate robbery of unrighteousness, not as if biassed to one side, and capable of the
contrary, so as to select the latter and not choose the farmer, for this belongs to things
originated, but that, as a judge, He loves and takes to Him the righteous and withdraws
from the bad. It follows then to think tile same concerning the Image of God also, that He
loves and hates no otherwise than thus. For such must be the nature of the Image as is Its
Father, though the Arians in their blindness fail to see either that image or any other
truth of the divine oracles. For being forced from the conceptions or rather
misconceptions of their own hearts, they fall back upon passages of divine Scripture, and
here too from want of understanding, according to their wont, they discern not their
meaning; but laying down their own irreligion as a sort of canon of interpretation , they
wrest the whole of the divine oracles into accordance with it.

And so on the bare mention of such doctrine, they deserve nothing but the reply, `Ye do
err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God ;' and if they persist in it, they
must be put to silence, by the words, `Render to' man `the things that are' man's, `and to
God the things that are' God's .

CHAPTER XIII. TEXTS EXPLAINED; THIRDLY, HEBREWS I. 4.

Additional texts brought as objections; e.g. Heb. i. 4; vii. 22. Whether the word `better'
implies likeness to the Angels; and `made' or `become' implies creation. Necessary to
consider the circumstances under which Scripture speaks. Difference between `better' and
`greater;' texts in proof. `Made' or `become' a general word. Contrast in Heb. i. 4,
between the Son and the Works in point of nature. The difference of the punishments under
the two Covenants shews the difference of the natures of the Son and the Angels. `Become'
relates not to the nature of the Word, but to His manhood and office and relation towards
us. Parallel passages in which the term is applied to the Eternal Father. 53. But it is
written, say they, in the Proverbs, `The Lord created me the beginning of His ways, for
His Works ;' and in the Epistle to the Hebrews the Apostle says, `Being made so much
better than the Angels, as He hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent Name than they
.' And soon after, `Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider
the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus, who was faithful to Him that
made Him .' And in the Acts, `Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that
God hath made that same Jesus whom ye have crucified both Lord and Christ .' These
passages they brought forward at every turn, mistaking their sense, under the idea that
they proved that the Word of God was a creature and work and one of things originate; and
thus they deceive the thoughtless, making the language of Scripture their pretence, but
instead of the true sense sowing upon it the poison of their own heresy. For had they
known, they would not have been irreligious against `the Lord of glory ,' nor have wrested
the good words of Scripture. If then henceforward openly adopting Caiaphas's way, they
have determined on judaizing, and are ignorant of the text, that verily God shall dwell
upon the earth , let them not inquire into the Apostolical sayings; for this is not the
manner of Jews.

But if, mixing themselves up with the godless Manichees , they deny that `the Word was
made flesh,' and His Incarnate presence, then let them not bring forward the Proverbs, for
this is out of place with the Manichees. But if for preferment-sake, and the lucre of
avarice which follows , and the desire for good repute, they venture not on denying the
text, `The Word was made flesh,' since so it is written, either let them rightly interpret
the words of Scripture, of the embodied presence of the Saviour, or, if they deny their
sense, let them deny that the Lord became man at all. For it is unseemly, while confessing
that `the Word became flesh,' yet to be ashamed at what is written of Him, and on that
account to corrupt the sense. 54. For it is written, `So much better than the Angels;' let
us then first examine this.Now it is right and necessary, as in all divine Scripture, so
here, faithfully to expound the time of which the Apostle wrote, and the person , and the
point; lest the reader, from ignorance missing either understood that inquiring eunuch,
when he thus besought Philip, `I pray thee, of whom doth the Prophet speak this? of
himself, or of some other man ?' for he feared lest, expounding the lesson unsuitably
lethe person, he should wander from the right sense. And the disciples, wishing to learn
the time of what was Bretold, besought the Lord, `Tell us,' said they, `when shale these
things be? and what is the sign of Thy coming ?' And again, hearing from the Saviour the
events of the end, they desired to learn the time of it, that they might be kept from
error themselves, and might be able to teach others; as, for instance, when they had
learned, they set right the Thessalonians , who were going wrong. When then one knows
properly these points, his understanding of the faith is right and healthy; but if he
mistakes any such points, forthwith he falls into heresy. Thus Hymenaeus and Alexander and
their fellow were beside the time, when they said that the resurrection had already been;
and the Galatians were after the time, in making much of circumcision now.

And to miss the person was the lot of the Jews, and is still, who think that of one of
themselves is said, `Behold, the Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son, and they shall
call his Name Emmanuel, which is being interpreted, God with us ;' and that, `A prophet
shall the Lord your God raise up to you ,' is spoken of one of the Prophets; and who, as
to the words, `He was led as a sheep to the slaughter ,' instead of learning from Philip,
conjecture them spoken of Isaiah or some other of the former Prophets . 55. (3. Such has
been the state of mind under which Christ's enemies have fallen into their execrable
heresy. For had they known the person, and the subject, and the season of the Apostle's
words, they would not have expounded of Christ's divinity what belongs to His manhood, nor
in their folly have committed so great an act of irreligion. Now this will be readily
seen, if one expounds properly the beginning of this lectin. For the Apostle says, `God
who at sundry times and divers manners spake in times past unto the fathers by the
prophets, hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son ;' then again shortly after he
says, `when He had by Himself purged our sins, He sat down on the right hand of the
Majesty on high, having become so much better than the Angels, as He hath by inheritance
obtained a more excellent Name than they .' It appears then that the Apostle's words make
mention of that time, when God spoke unto us by His Son, and when a purging of sins took
place. Now when did He speak unto us by His Son, and when did purging of sins take place?
and when did He become man? when, but subsequently to the Prophets in the last days?

Next, proceeding with his account of the economy in which we were concerned, and speaking
of the last times, he is naturally led to observe that not even in the former times was
God silent with men, but spoke to them by the Prophets. And, whereas the prophets
ministered, and the Law was spoken by Angels, while the Son too came on earth, and that in
order to minister, he was forced to add, `Become so much better than the Angels,' wishing
to shew that, as much as the son excels a servant, so much also the ministry of the Son is
better than the ministry of servants. Contrasting then the old ministry and the new, the
Apostle deals freely with the Jews, writing and saying, `Become so much better than the
Angels.' This is why throughout he uses no comparison, such as `become greater,' or `more
honourable,' lest we test we should think of Him and them as one in kind, but `better' is
his word, by way of marking the difference of the Son's nature from things originated. And
of this we have proof from divine Scripture; David, for instance, saying in the Psalm.
`One day in Thy courts is better than a thousand :' and Solomon crying out, `Receive my
instruction and not silver, and knowledge rather than choice gold. For wisdom is better
than rubies; and all the things that may be desired are not to be compared to it .' Are
not wisdom and stones of the earth different in essence and separate in nature?

Are heavenly courts at all akin to earthly houses? Or is there any similarity between
things eternal and spiritual, and things temporal and mortal? And this is what Isaiah
says, `Thus saith the Lord unto the eunuchs that keep My sabbaths, and choose the things
that please Me, and take hold of My Covenant; even unto them will I give in Mine house,
and within My walls, a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give
them an everlasting name that shall not be cut off .' In like manner there is nought akin
between the Son and the Angels; so that the word `better' is not used to compare but to
contrast, because of the difference of His nature from them. And therefore the Apostle
also himself, when he interprets the word `better,' places its force in nothing short of
the Son's excellence over things originated, calling the one Son, the other servants; the
one, as a Son with the Father, sitting on the right; and the others, as servants, standing
before Him, and being sent, and fulfilling offices.

56. Scripture, in speaking thus, implies, O Arians, not that the Son is originate, but
rather other than things originate, and proper to the Father, being in His bosom. (4.) Nor
does even the expression `become,' which here occurs, shew that the Son is originate, as
ye suppose. If indeed it were simply `become' and no more, a case might stand for the
Arians; but, whereas they are forestalled with the word `Son' throughout the passage,
shewing that He is other than things originate, so again not even the word `become' occurs
absolutely , but `better' is immediately subjoined. For the writer thought the expression
immaterial, knowing that in the case of one who was confessedly a genuine Son, to say
`become' is the same with saying that He had been made, and is, `better.' For it matters
not even if we speak of what is generate, as `become' or `made;' but on the contrary,
things originate cannot be called generate, God's handiwork as they are, except so far as
after their making they partake of the generate Son, and are therefore said to have been
generated also, not at all in their own nature, but because of their participation of the
Son in the Spirit . And this again divine Scripture recognises; for it says in the case of
things originate, `All things came to be through Him, and without Him nothing came to be
,' and, `In wisdom hast Thou made them all ;' but in the case of sons which are generate,
`To Job there came to be seven sons and three daughters ,' and, `Abraham was an hundred
years old when there came to be to him Isaac his son ;' and Moses said , `If to any one
there come to be sons.' Therefore since the Son is other than things originate, alone the
proper offspring of the Father's essence, this plea of the Arians about the word `become'
is worth nothing.

(5. If moreover, baffled so far, they should still violently insist that the language is
that of comparison, and that comparison in consequence implies oneness of kind, so that
the Son is of the nature of Angels, they will in the first price incur the disgrace of
rivalling and repeating what Valentinus held, and Carpocrates, and those other heretics,
of whom the former said that the Angels were one in kind with the Christ, and Carpocrates
that Angels are framers of the world . Perchance it is under the instruction of these
masters that they compare the Word of God with the Angels.57. Though surely amid such
speculations, they will be moved by the sacred poet, saying, `Who is he among the gods
that shall be like unto the Lord ,' and, `Among the gods there is none like unto Thee, O
Lord .' However, they must be answered, with the chance of their profiting by it, that
comparison confessedly does belong to subjects one in kind, not to those which differ. No
one, for instance, would compare God with man, or again man with brutes, nor wood with
stone, because their natures are unlike; but God is beyond comparison, and man is compared
to man, and wood to wood, and stone to stone. Now in such cases we should not speak of
`better,' but of `rather' and `more;' thus Joseph was comely rather than his brethren, and
Rachel than Leah; star is not better than star, but is the rather excellent in glory;

whereas in bringing together things which differ in kind, then `better' is used to mark
the difference, as has been said in the case of wisdom and jewels. Had then the Apostle
said, `by so much has the Son precedence of the Angels,' or `by so much greater,' you
would have had a plea, as if the Son were compared with the Angels; but, as it is, in
saying that He is `better,' and differs as far as Son from servants, the Apostle shews
that He is other than the Angels in nature. (6. Moreover by saying that He it is who has
`laid the foundation of all things ,' he shews that He is other than all things originate.
But if He be other and different in essence from their nature, what comparison of His
essence can there be, or what likeness to them? though, even if they have any such
thoughts, Paul shall refute them, who speaks to the very point, `For unto which of the
Angels said He at any time, Thou art My Son, this day have I begotten Thee? And of the
Angels He saith, Who maketh His Angels spirits, and His ministers a flame of fire .'58.
Observe here, the word `made' belongs to things originate, and he calls them things made;

but to the Son he speaks not of making, nor of becoming, hut of eternity and kingship, and
a Framer's office, exclaiming, `Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and ever;' and, `Thou,
Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the
works of Thine hands; they shall perish, but Thou remainest.' From which words even they,
were they but willing, might perceive that the Framer is other than things framed, the
former God, the latter things originate, made out of nothing. For what has been said,
`They shall perish,' is said, not as if the creation were destined for destruction, but to
express the nature of things originate by the issue to which they tend . For things which
admit of perishing, though through the grace of their Maker they perish not, yet have come
out of nothing, and themselves witness that they once were not. And on this account, since
their nature is such, it is said of the Son, `Thou remainest,' to shew His eternity; for
not having the capacity of perishing, as things originate have, but having eternal
duration, it is foreign to Him to have it said, `He was not before His generation,' but
proper to Him to be always, and to endure together with the Father. And though the Apostle
had not thus written in his Epistle to the Hebrews, still his other Epistles, and the
whole of Scripture, would certainly forbid their entertaining such notions concerning the
Word.

But since he has here expressly written it, and, as has been above shewn, the Son is
Offspring of the Father's essence, and He is Framer, and other things are framed by Him,
and He is the Radiance and Word and Image and Wisdom of the Father, and things originate
stand and serve in their place below the Triad, therefore the Son is different in kind and
different in essence from things originate, and on the contrary is proper to the Father's
essence and one in nature with it . And Hence it is that the Son too says not, `My Father
is better than I ,' lest we should conceive Him to be foreign to His Nature, but
`greater,' not indeed in greatness, nor in time, but because of His generation from the
Father Himself , nay, in saying `greater' He again shows that He is proper to His essence.

59.(7). And the Apostle's own reason for saying, `so much better than the Angels,' was not
any wish in the first instance to compare the essence of the Word to things originate (for
He cannot be compared, rather they are incommeasurable), but regarding the Word's
visitation in the flesh, and the Economy which He then sustained, he wished to show that
He was not like those who had gone before Him; so that, as much as He excelled in nature
those who were sent afore by Him, by so much also the grace which came from and through
Him was better than the ministry through Angels . For it is the function of servants, to
demand the fruits and no more; but of the Son and Master to forgive the debts and to
transfer the vineyard. (8. Certainly what the Apostle proceeds to say shews the excellence
of the Son over things originate; `Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the
things which we have heard. lest at any time we should let them slip. For if the word
spoken by Angels was stedfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just
recompense of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the
first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him .'
But if the Son were in the number of things originate, He was not better than they, nor
did disobedience involve increase of punishment because of Him; any more than in the
Ministry of Angels there was not, according to each Angel, greater or less guilt in the
transgressors, but the Law was one, and one was its vengeance on transgressors. But,
whereas the Word is not in the number of originate things, but is Son of the Father,
therefore, as He Himself is better and His acts better and transcendent, so also the
punishment is worse. Let them contemplate then the grace which is through the Son, and let
them acknowledge the witness which He gives even from His works. that He is other than
things originated, and alone the very Son in the Father and the Father in Him. And the Law
was spoken by Angels, and perfected no one , needing the visitation of the Word, as Paul
hath said;

but that visitation has perfected the work of the Father. And then, from Adam unto Moses
death reigned ; but the presence of the Word abolished death . And no longer in Adam are
we all dying ; but in Christ we are all reviving And then, from Dan to Beersheba was the
Law proclaimed, and in Judaea only was God known; but now, unto all the earth has gone
forth their voice, and all the earth has been filled with the knowledge of God , and the
disciples have made disciples of all the nations , and now is fulfilled what is written,
`They shall be all taught of God .' And then what was revealed was but a type; but now the
truth has been manifested. And this again the Apostle himself describes afterwards more
clearly, saying, `By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament;' and again,
`But now hath He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the Mediator
of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.' And, `For the Law made
nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did.' And again he says, `It was
therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with
these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these .' Both in the
verse before us, then, and throughout, does he ascribe the word `better' to the Lord, who
is better and other than originated things.

For better is the sacrifice through Him, better the hope in Him; and also the promises
through Him, not merely as great compared with small, but the one differing from the other
in nature, because He who conducts this economy, is `better' than things originated. 60.
(9. Moreover the words `He is become surety' denote the pledge in our behalf which He has
provided. For as, being the `Word,' He `became flesh ' and `become' we ascribe to the
flesh, for it is originated and created, so do we here the expression `He is become,'
expounding it according to a second sense, viz. because He has become man. And let these
contentious men know, that they fail in this their perverse purpose; let them know that
Paul does not signify that His essence has become, knowing, as he did, that He is Son and
Wisdom and Radiance and Image of the Father; but here too he refers the word `become' to
the ministry of that covenant, in which death which once ruled is abolished. Since here
also the ministry through Him has become better, in that `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 ,' ridding it of the trespass, in which,
being continually held captive, it admitted not the Divine mind.

And having rendered the flesh capable of the Word, He made us walk, no longer according to
the flesh, but according to the Spirit, and say again and again, `But we are not in the
flesh but in the Spirit,' and, `For the Son of God came into the world, not to judge the
world, but to redeem all men, and that the world might be saved through Him .' Formerly
the world, as guilty, was under judgment from the Law; but now the Word has taken on
Himself the judgment, and having suffered in the body for all, has bestowed salvation to
all . With a view to this has John exclaimed, `The law was given by Moses, but grace and
truth came by Jesus Christ .' Better is grace than the Law, and truth than the shadow. 61.
(10.) `getter' then, as has been said, could not have been brought to pass by any other
than the Son, who sits on the right hand of the Father. And what does this denote but the
Son's genuineness, and that the Godhead of the Father is the same as the Son's ? For in
that the Son reigns in His Father's kingdom, is seated upon the same throne as the Father,
and is contemplated in the Father's Godhead, therefore is the Word God, and whose beholds
the Son, beholds the Father; and thus there is one God. Sitting then on the right, yet He
does not place His Father on the left ; but whatever is right and precious in the Father,
that also the Son has, and says, `All things that the Father hath are Mine .' Wherefore
also the Son, though sitting on the right, also sees the Father on the right, though it be
as become man that He says, `I saw the Lord always before My face, for He is on My right
hand, therefore I shall not fall .' This shews moreover that the Son is in the Father and
the Father in the Son; for the Father being on the right, the Son is on the right; and
while the Son sits on the right of the Father, the Father is in the Son. And the Angels
indeed minister ascending and descending;

but concerning the Son he saith, `And let all the Angels of God worship Him .' And when
Angels minister, they say, `I am sent unto thee,' and, `The Lord has commanded;' but the
Son, though He say in human fashion, `I am sent ,' and comes to finish the work and to
minister, nevertheless says, as being Word and Image, `I am in the Father, and the Father
in Me;' and, `He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father;' and, `The Father that abideth
in Me. He doeth the works ;' for what we behold in that Image are the Father's works.
(11.) What has been already said ought to shame those persons who are fighting against the
very truth; however, if, because it is written, `become better,' they refuse to understand
`become,' as used of the Son, as `has been and is ;' or again as referring to the better
covenant having come to be , as we have said, but consider from this expression that the
Word is called originate, let them hear the same again in a concise form, since they have
forgotten what has been said.

62. If the Son be in the number of the Angels, then let the word `become' apply to Him as
to them, and let Him not differ at all from them in nature; but be they either sons with
Him, or be He an Angel with them; sit they one and all together on the right hand of the
Father, or be the Son standing with them all as a ministering Spirit, sent forth to
minister Himself as they are. But if on the other hand Paul distinguishes the Son from
things originate, saying, `To which of the Angels said He at any time, Thou art My Son?'
and the one frames heaven and earth, but they are made by Him; and He sitteth with the
Father, but they stand by ministering, who does not see that he has not used the word
`become' of the essence of the Word, but of the ministration come through Him? For as,
being the `Word,' He `became flesh,' so when become man, He became by so much better in
His ministry, than the ministry which came by the Angels, as Son excels servants and
Framer things framed. Let them cease therefore to take the word `become' of the substance
of the Son, for He is not one of originated things; and let them acknowledge that it is
indicative of His ministry and the Economy which came to pass.

(12.) But how He became better in His ministry, being better in nature than things
originate, appears from what has been said before, which, I consider, is sufficient in
itself to put them to shame. But if they carry on the contest, it will be proper upon
their rash daring to close with them, and to oppose to them those similar expressions
which are used concerning the Father Himself. This may serve to shame them to refrain
their tongue from evil, or may teach them the depth of their folly. Now it is written,
`Become my strong rock and house of defence, that Thou mayest save me .' And again, `The
Lord became a defence for the oppressed ,' and the like which are found in divine
Scripture. If then they apply these passages to the Son, which perhaps is nearest to the
truth, then let them acknowledge that the sacred writers ask Him, as not being originate,
to become to them `a strong rock and house of defence;' and for the future let them
understand `become,' and `He made,' and `He created,' of His incarnate presence. For then
did He become `a strong rock and house of defence,' when He bore our sins in His own body
upon the tree, and said, `Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will
give you rest .'

63. But if they refer these passages to the Father, will they, when it is here also
written, `Become' and `He became,' venture so far as to affirm that God is originate? Yea,
they will dare, as they thus argue concerning His Word; for the course of their argument
carries them on to conjecture the same things concerning the Father, as they devise
concerning His Word. But far be such a notion ever from the thoughts of all the faithful!
for neither is the Son in the number of things originated, nor do the words of Scripture
in question, `Become,' and `He became,' denote beginning of being, but that succour which
was given to the needy. For God is always, and one and the same; but men have come to be
afterwards through the Word, when the Father Himself willed it; and God is invisible and
inaccessible to originated things, anti especially to men upon earth. When then men in
infirmity invoke Him, when in persecution they ask help, when under injuries they pray,
then the Invisible, being a lover of man, shines forth upon them with His beneficence.
which He exercises through and in His proper Word.

And forthwith the divine manifestation is made to every one according to his need, and is
made to the weak health, and to the persecuted a `refuge' and `house of defence;' and to
the injured He says, `While thou speakest I will say, Here I am .' Whatever defence then
comes to each through the Son, that each says that God has come to be to himself, since
succour comes from God Himself through the Word. Moreover the usage of men recognises
this, and every one will confess its propriety. Often succour comes from man to man; one
has undertaken toil for the injured, as Abraham for Lot; and another has opened his home
to the persecuted, as Obadiah to the sons of the prophets; and another has entertained a
stranger, as Lot the Angels; and another has supplied the needy, as Job those who begged
of him. And then, should one and the other of these benefited persons say, `Such a one
became an assistance to me,' and another `and to me a refuge,' and `to another a supply,'
yet in so saying would not be speaking of the original becoming or of the essence of their
benefactors, but of the beneficence coming to themselves from them; so also when the
saints say concerning God, `He became' and `become Thou,' they do not denote any original
becoming, for God is without beginning and unoriginate, but the salvation which is made to
be unto men from Him.

64. This being so understood, it is parallel also respecting the Son, that whatever, and
however often, is said, such as, `He became' and `become,' should ever have the same
sense: so that as, when we hear the words in question, `become better than the Angels' and
`He became,' we should not conceive any original becoming of the Word, nor in any way
fancy from such terms that He is originate; but should understand Paul's words of His
ministry and Economy when He became man. For when `the Word became flesh and dwelt among
us ' and came to minister and to grant salvation to all, then He became to us salvation,
and became life, and became propitiation; then His economy in our behalf became much
better than the Angels, and He became the Way and became the Resurrection. And as the
words `Become my strong rock' do not denote that the essence of God Himself became, but
His lovingkindness, as has been said, so also here the `having become better than the
Angels,' and, `He became,' and, `by so much is Jesus become a better surety,' do not
signify that the essence of the Word is originate (perish the thought!), but the
beneficence which towards us came to be through His becoming Man; unthankful though the
heretics be, and obstinate in behalf of their irreligion.


FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS
==================================

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

CHAPTER XIV. TEXTS EXPLAINED; FOURTHLY, HEBREWS III. 2.

Introduction; the Regula Fidei counter to an Arian sense of the text; which is not
supported by the word `servant,' nor by `made' which occurs in it; (how can the Judge be
among the `works' which `God will bring into judgment?') nor by `faithful;' and is
confuted by the immediate context, which is about Priesthood; and by the foregoing
passage, which explains the word `faithful' as meaning trustworthy, as do 1 Pet. iv. fin.
and other texts. On the whole made may safely be understood either of the divine
generation or the human creation. 1.I Did indeed think that enough had been said already
against the hollow professors of Arius's madness, whether for their refutation or in the
truth's behalf, to insure a cessation and repentance of their evil thoughts and words
about the Saviour. They, however, for whatever reason, still do not succumb; but, as swine
and dogs wallow in their own vomit and their own mire, rather invent new expedients for
their irreligion. Thus they misunderstand the passage in the Proverbs, `The Lord hath
created me a beginning of His ways for His works ,' and the words of the Apostle, `Who was
faithful to Him that made Him ,' and straightway argue, that the Son of God is a work and
a creature.

But although they might have learned from what is said above, had they not utterly lost
their power of apprehension, that the Son is not from nothing nor in the number of things
originate at all, the Truth witnessing it (for, being God, He cannot be a work, and it is
impious to call Him a creature, and it is of creatures and works that we say, `out of
nothing,' and `it was not before its generation'), yet since, as if dreading to desert
their own fiction, they are accustomed to allege the aforesaid passages of divine
Scripture, which have a good meaning, but are by them practised on, let us proceed afresh
to take up the question of the sense of these, to remind the faithful, and to shew from
each of these passages that they have no knowledge at all of Christianity. Were it
otherwise, they would not have shut themselves up in the unbelief of the present Jews ,
but would have inquired and learned that, whereas `In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God,' in consequence, it was when at the good pleasure
of the Father the Word became man, that it was said of Him, as by John, `The Word became
flesh ;' so by Peter, `He hath made Him Lord and Christ ';-as by means of Solomon in the
Person of the Lord Himself, `The Lord created me a beginning of His ways for His works ;'
so by Paul, `Become so much better than the Angels ;' and again, `He emptied Himself, and
took upon Him the form of a servant ;' and again, `Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of
the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Jesus, who
was faithful to Him that made Him .' For all these texts have the same force and meaning,
a religious one, declarative of the divinity of the Word, even those of them which speak
humanly concerning Him, as having become the Son of man.

But, though this distinction is sufficient for their refutation, still, since from a
misconception of the Apostle's words (to mention them first), they consider the Word of
God to be one of the works, because of its being written, `Who was faithful to Him that
made Him,' I have thought it needful to silence this further argument of theirs, taking in
hand , as before, their statement. 2. If then He be not a Son, let Him be called a work,
and let all that is said of works be said of Him, nor let Him and Him alone be called Son,
nor Word, nor Wisdom; neither let God be called Father, but only Framer and Creator of
things which by Him come to be; and let the creature be Image and Expression of His
framing will, and let Him, as they would have it, be without generative nature, so that
there be neither Word, nor Wisdom, no, nor Image, of His proper substance. For if He be
not Son , neither is He Image . But if there be not a Son, how then say you that God is a
Creator? since all things that come to be are through the Word and in Wisdom, and without
This nothing can be, whereas you say He hath not That in and through which He makes all
things. For if the Divine Essence be not fruitful itself , but barren, as they hold, as a
light that lightens not, and a dry fountain, are they not ashamed to speak of His
possessing framing energy? and whereas they deny what is by nature, do they not blush to
place before it what is by will ? But if He frames things that are external to Him and
before were not, by willing them to he, and becomes their Maker, much more will He first
be Father of an Offspring from His proper Essence.

For if they attribute to God the willing about things which are not, why recognise they
not that in God which lies above the will? now it is a something that surpasses will, that
He should be by nature, and should be Father of His proper Word. If then that which comes
first, which is according to nature, did not exist, as they would have it in their folly,
how could that which is second come to be, which is according to will? for the Word is
first, and then the creation. On the contrary the Word exists, whatever they affirm, those
irreligious ones; for through Him did creation come to be, and God, as being Maker,
plainly has also His framing Word, not external, but proper to Him;-for this must be
repeated. If He has the power of will, and His will is effective, and suffices for the
consistence of the things that come to be, and His Word is effective, and a Framer, that
Word must surely be the living Will of the Father, and an essential energy, and a real
Word, in whom all things both consist and are excellently governed. No one can even doubt,
that He who disposes is prior to the disposition and the things disposed. And thus, as I
said, God's creating is second to His begetting; for Son implies something proper to Him
and truly from that blessed and everlasting Essence;

but what is from His will, comes into consistence from without, and is framed through His
proper Offspring who is from It. 3. As we have shewn then they are guilty of great
extravagance who say that the Lord is not Son of God, but a work, and it follows that we
all of necessity confess that He is Son. And if He be Son, as indeed He is, and a son is
confessed to be not external to his father but from him, let them not question about the
terms, as I said before, which the sacred writers use of the Word Himself, viz. not `to
Him that begat Him,' but `to Him that made Him;' for while it is confessed what His nature
is, what word is used in such instances need raise no question . For terms do not
disparage His Nature; rather that Nature draws to Itself those terms and changes them. For
terms are not prior to essences, but essences are first, and terms second. Wherefore also
when the essence is a work or creature, then the words `He made,' and `He became,' and `He
created,' are used of it properly, and designate the work. But when the Essence is an
Offspring and Son, then `He made,' and `He became,' and `He created,' no longer properly
belong to it, nor designate a work; but `He made' we use without question for `He begat.'
Thus fathers often call the sons born of them their servants, yet without denying the
genuineness of their nature; and often they affectionately call their own servants
children, yet without putting out of sight their purchase of them originally;

for they use the one appellation from their authority as being fathers, but in the other
they speak from affection. Thus Sara called Abraham lord, though not a servant but a wife;
and while to Philemon the master the Apostle joined Onesimus the servant as a brother,
Bathsheba, although mother, called her son servant, saying to his father, `Thy servant
Solomon ;'-afterwards also Nathan the Prophet came in and repeated her words to David,
`Solomon thy servant .' Nor did they mind calling the son a servant, for while David heard
it, he recognised the `nature,' and while they spoke it, they forgot not the
`genuineness,' praying that he might be made his father's heir, to whom they gave the name
of servant; for to David he was son by nature. 4. As then, when we read this, we interpret
it fairly, without accounting Solomon a servant because we hear him so called, but a son
natural and genuine, so also, if, concerning the Saviour, who is confessed to be in truth
the Son, and to be the Word by nature, the saints say, `Who was faithful to Him that made
Him,' or if He say of Himself, `The Lord created me,' and, `I am Thy servant and the Son
of Thine handmaid ,' and the like, let not any on this account deny that He is proper to
the Father and from Him; but, as in the case of Solomon and David, let them have a right
idea of the Father and the Son. For if, though they hear Solomon called a servant, they
acknowledge him to be a son, are they not deserving of many deaths , who, instead of
preserving the same explanation in the instance of the Lord, whenever they hear
`Offspring,' and `Word,' and `Wisdom,' forcibly misinterpret and deny the generation,
natural and genuine, of the Son from the Father; but on hearing words and terms proper to
a work, forthwith drop down to the notion of His being by nature a work, and deny the
Word; and this, though it is possible, from His having been made man, to refer all these
terms to His humanity?

And are they not proved to be `an abomination' also `unto the Lord,' as having `diverse
weights ' with them, and with this estimating those other instances, and with that
blaspheming the Lord? But perhaps they grant that the word `servant' is used under a
certain understanding, but lay stress upon `Who made' as some great support of their
heresy. But this stay of theirs also is but a broken reed; for if they are aware of the
style of Scripture, they must at once give sentence against themselves. For as Solomon,
though a son, is called a servant, so, to repeat what was said above, although parents
call the sons springing from themselves `made' and `created' and `becoming,' for all this
they do not deny their nature. Thus Hezekiah, as it is written in Isaiah, said in his
prayer, `From this day I will make children, who shall declare Thy righteousness, O God of
my salvation .' He then said, `I will make;' but the Prophet in that very book and the
Fourth of Kings, thus speaks, `And the sons who shall come forth of thee .' He uses then
`make' for `beget,' and he calls them who were to spring from him, `made,' and no one
questions whether the term has reference to a natural offspring.

Again, Eve on bearing Cain said, `I have gotten a man from the Lord ;' thus she too used
`gotten' for `brought forth.' For, first she saw the child, yet next she said, `I have
gotten.' Nor would any one consider, because of `I have gotten,' that Cain was purchased
from without, instead of being born of her. Again, the Patriarch Jacob said to Joseph,
`And now thy two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, which became thine in Egypt, before I came
unto thee into Egypt, are mine .' And Scripture says about Job, `And there came to him
seven sons and three daughters .' As Moses too has said in the Law, `If sons become to any
one,' and `If he make a son .' Here again they speak of those who are begotten, as
`become' and `made,' knowing that, while they are acknowledged to be sons, we need not
make a question of `they became,' or `I have gotten,' or `I made .' For nature and truth
draw the meaning to themselves.

5. This being so , when persons ask whether the Lord is a creature or work, it is proper
to ask of them this first, whether He is Son and Word and Wisdom. For if this is shewn,
the surmise about work and creation falls to the ground at once and is ended. For a work
could never be Son and Word; nor could the Son be a work. And again, this being the state
of the case, the proof is plain to all, that the phrase, `To Him who made Him' does not
serve their heresy, but rather condemns it. For it has been shewn that the expression `He
made' is applied in divine Scripture even to children genuine and natural; whence, the
Lord being proved to be the Father's Son naturally and genuinely, and Word, and Wisdom,
though `He made' be used concerning Him, or `He became,' this is not said of Him as if a
work, but the saints make no question about using the expression,-for instance in the case
of Solomon, and Hezekiah's children. For though the fathers had begotten them from
themselves, still it is written, `I have made,' and `I have gotten,' and `He became.'
Therefore God's enemies, in spite of their repeated allegation of such phrases , ought
now, though late in the day, after what has been said, to disown their irreligious
thoughts, and think of the Lord as of a true Son, Word, and Wisdom of the Father, not a
work, not a creature.

For if the Son be a creature, by what word then and by what wisdom was He made Himself ?
for all the works were made through the Word and the Wisdom, as it is written, `In wisdom
hast Thou made them all,' and, `All things were made by Him, and without Him was not
anything made .' But if it be He who is the Word and the Wisdom, by which all things come
to be, it follows that He is not in the number of works, nor in short of things originate,
but the Offspring of the Father. 6. For consider how grave an error it is, to call God's
Word a work. Solomon says in one place in Ecclesiastes, that `God shall bring every work
into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil .' If
then the Word be a work, do you mean that He as well as others will be brought into
judgment? and what room is there for judgment, when the Judge is on trial? who will give
to the just their blessing, who to the unworthy their punishment, the Lord, as you must
suppose, standing on trial with the rest? by what law shall He, the Lawgiver, Himself be
judged? These things are proper to the works, to be on trial, to be blessed and to be
punished by the Son. Now then fear the Judge, and let Solomon's words convince you. For if
God shall bring the works one and all into judgment, but the Son is not in the number of
things put on trial, but rather is Himself the Judge of works one and all, is not the
proof clearer than the sun, that the Son is not a work but the Father's Word, in whom all
the works both come to be and come into judgment?

Further, if the expression, `Who was faithful,' is a difficulty to them, from the thought
that `faithful' is used of Him as of others, as if He exercises faith and so receives the
reward of faith, they must proceed at this rate to find fault with Moses for saying, `God
faithful and true ,' and with St. Paul for writing, `God is faithful, who will not suffer
you to be tempted above that ye are able .' But when the saints spoke thus, they were not
thinking of God in a human way, but they acknowledged two senses of the word `faithful' in
Scripture, first `believing,' then `trustworthy,' of which the former belongs to man, the
latter to God. Thus Abraham was faithful, because He believed God's word; and God
faithful, for, as David says in the Psalm, `The Lord is faithful in all His words ,' or is
trustworthy, and cannot lie. Again, `If any faithful woman have widows ,' she is so called
for her right faith; but, `It is a faithful saying ,' because what He hath spoken has a
claim on our faith, for it is true, and is not otherwise. Accordingly the words, `Who is
faithful to Him that made Him,' implies no parallel with others, nor means that by having
faith He became well-pleasing; but that, being Son of the True God, He too is faithful,
and ought to be believed in all He says and does, Himself remaining unalterable and not
changed in His human Economy and fleshly presence.

7. Thus then we may meet these men who are shameless, and from the single expression `He
made,' may shew that they err in thinking that the Word of God is a work. But further,
since the drift also of the context is orthodox, shewing the time and the relation to
which this expression points, I ought to shew from it also how the heretics lack reason;
viz. by considering, as we have done above, the occasion when it was used and for what
purpose. Now the Apostle is not discussing things before the creation when he thus speaks,
but when `the Word became flesh;' for thus it is written, `Wherefore, holy brethren,
partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession
Jesus, who was faithful to Him that made Him.' Now when became He `Apostle,' but when He
put on our flesh? and when became He `High Priest of our profession,' but when, after
offering Himself for us, He raised His Body from the dead, and, as now, Himself brings
near and offers to the Father those who in faith approach Him, redeeming all, and for all
propitiating God? Not then as wishing to signify the Essence of the Word nor His natural
generation from the Father, did the Apostle say, `Who was faithful to Him that made
Him'-(perish the thought! for the Word is not made, but makes)-but as signifying His
descent to mankind and High-priesthood which did `become'-as one may easily see from the
account given of the Law and of Aaron.

I mean, Aaron was not born a high-priest, but a man; and in process of time, when God
willed, he became a high-priest; yet became so, not simply, nor as betokened by his
ordinary garments, but putting over them the ephod, the breastplate , the robe, which the
women wrought at God's command, and going in them into the holy place, he offered the
sacrifice for the people; and in them, as it were, mediated between the vision of God and
the sacrifices of men. Thus then the Lord also, `In the beginning was the Word, and the
Word was with God, and the Word was God;' but when the Father willed that ransoms should
be paid for all and to all, grace should be given, then truly the Word, as Aaron his robe,
so did He take earthly flesh, having Mary for the Mother of His Body as if virgin earth ,
that, as a High Priest, having He as others an offering, He might offer Himself to the
Father, and cleanse us all from sins in His own blood, and might rise from the dead.

8. For what happened of old was a shadow of this; and what the Saviour did on His coming,
this Aaron shadowed out according to the Law. As then Aaron was the same and did not
change by putting on the high-priestly dress , but remaining the same was only robed, so
that, had any one seen him offering, and had said, `Lo, Aaron has this day become high-
priest,' he had not implied that he then had been born man, for man he was even before he
became high-priest, but that he had been made high-priest in his ministry, on putting on
the garments made and prepared for the high-priesthood; in the same way it is possible in
the Lord's instance also to understand aright, that He did not become other than Himself
on taking the flesh, but, being the same as before, He was robed in it; and the
expressions `He became' and `He was made,' must not be understood as if the Word,
considered as the Word , were made, but that the Word, being Framer of all, afterwards was
made High Priest, by putting on a body which was originate and made, and such as He can
offer for us; wherefore He is said to be made. If then indeed the Lord did not become man
, that is a point for the Arians to battle;

but if the `Word became flesh,' what ought to have been said concerning Him when become
man, but `Who was faithful to Him that made Him?' for as it is proper to the Word to have
it said of Him, `In the beginning was the Word,' so it is proper to man to `become' and to
be `made.' Who then, on seeing the Lord as a man walking about, and yet appearing to be
God from His works, would not have asked, Who made Him man? and who again, on such a
question, would not have answered, that the Father made Him man, and sent Him to us as
High Priest? And this meaning, and time, and character, the Apostle himself, the writer of
the words, `Who is faithful to Him that made Him,' will best make plain to us, if we
attend to what goes before them. For there is one train of thought, and the lection is all
about One and the Same. He writes then in the Epistle to the Hebrews thus; `Forasmuch then
as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of
the same; that through death He might destroy him that had the power of death, that is,
the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to
bondage. For verily He took not on Him the nature of Angels; but He took on Him the seed
of Abraham.

Wherefore in all things it behoved Him to be made like unto His brethren, that He might be
a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation
for the sins of the people. For in that He Himself hath suffered being tempted, He is able
to succour them that are tempted. Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly
calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Jesus; who was faithful
to Him that made Him .' 9. Who can read this whole passage without condemning the Arians,
and admiring the blessed Apostle, who has spoken well? for when was Christ `made,' when
became He `Apostle,' except when, like us, He `took part in flesh and blood?' And when
became He `a merciful and faithful High Priest,' except when `in all things He was made
like unto His brethren?' And then was He `made like,' when He became man, having put upon
Him our flesh. Wherefore Paul was writing concerning the Word's human Economy, when he
said, `Who was faithful to Him that made Him,' and not concerning His Essence. Have not
therefore any more the madness to say that the Word of God is a work; whereas He is Son by
nature Only-begotten, and then had `brethren,' when He took on Him flesh like ours; which
moreover, by Himself offering Himself, He was named and became `merciful and
faithful,'-merciful, because in mercy to us He offered Himself for us, and faithful, not
as sharing faith with us, nor as having faith in any one as we have, but as deserving to
receive faith in all He says and does, and as offering a faithful sacrifice, one which
remains and does not come to nought. For those which were offered according to the Law,
had not this faithfulness, passing away with the day and needing a further cleansing; but
the Saviour's sacrifice, taking place once, has perfected everything, and is become
faithful as remaining for ever.

And Aaron had successors, and in a word the priesthood under the Law exchanged its first
ministers as time and death went on; but the Lord having a high priesthood without
transition and without succession, has become a `faithful High Priest,' as continuing for
ever; and faithful too by promise, that He may hear and not mislead those who come to Him.
This may be also learned from the Epistle of the great Peter, who says, `Let them that
suffer according to the will of God, commit their souls to a faithful Creator .' For He is
faithful as not changing, but abiding ever, and rendering what He has promised. 10. Now
the so-called gods of the Greeks, unworthy the name, are faithful neither in their essence
nor in their promises; for the same are not everywhere, nay, the local deities come to
nought in course of time, and undergo a natural dissolution; wherefore the Word cries out
against them, that `faith is not strong in them,' but they are `waters that fail,' and
`there is no faith in them.' But the God of all, being one really and indeed and true, is
faithful, who is ever the same, and says, `See now, that I, even I am He,' and I `change
not ;' and therefore His Son is `faithful,' being ever the same and unchanging, deceiving
neither in His essence nor in His promise;-as again says the Apostle writing to the
Thessalonians, `Faithful is He who calleth you, who also will do it ;' for in doing what
He promises, `He is faithful to His words.' And he thus writes to the Hebrews as to the
word's meaning `unchangeable;' `If we believe not, yet He abideth faithful; He cannot deny
Himself .' Therefore reasonably the Apostle, discoursing concerning the bodily presence of
the Word, says, an `Apostle and faithful to Him that made Him,' shewing us that, even when
made man, `Jesus Christ' is `the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever ' is
unchangeable.

And as the Apostle makes mention in his Epistle of His being made man when mentioning His
High Priesthood, so too he kept no long silence about His Godhead, but rather mentions it
forthwith, furnishing to us a safeguard on every side, and most of all when he speaks of
His humility, that we may forthwith know His loftiness and His majesty which is the
Father's. For instance, he says, `Moses as a servant, but Christ as a Son ;' and the
former `faithful in his house,' and the latter `over the house,' as having Himself built
it, and being its Lord and Framer, and as God sanctifying it. For Moses, a man by nature,
became faithful, in believing God who spoke to Him by His Word; but the Word was not as
one of things originate in a body, nor as creature in creature, but as God in flesh , and
Framer of all and Builder in that which was built by Him. And men are clothed in flesh in
order to be and to subsist; but the Word of God was made man in order to sanctify the
flesh, and, though He was Lord, was in the form of a servant; for the whole creature is
the Word's servant, which by Him came to be, and was made.

11. Hence it holds that the Apostle's expression, `He made,' does not prove that the Word
is made, but that body, which He took like ours; and in consequence He is called our
brother, as having become man. But if it has been shewn, that, even though the word `made'
be referred to the Very Word, it is used for `begat,' what further perverse expedient will
they be able to fall upon, now that the present discussion has cleared up the word in
every point of view, and shewn that the Son is not a work, but in Essence indeed the
Father's offspring, while in the Economy, according to the good pleasure of the Father, He
was on our behalf made, and consists as man? For this reason then it is said by the
Apostle, `Who was faithful to Him that made Him;' and in the Proverbs, even creation is
spoken of. For so long as we are confessing that He became man, there is no question about
saying, as was observed before, whether `He became,' or `He has been made,' or `created,'
or `formed,' or `servant,' or `son of an handmaid,' or `son of man,' or `was constituted,'
or `took His journey,' or `bridegroom,' or `brother's son,' or `brother.' All these terms
happen to be proper to man's constitution; and such as these do not designate the Essence
of the Word, but that He has become man.

CHAPTER XV. TEXTS EXPLAINED; FIFTHLY, ACTS II. 36.

The Regula Fidei must be observed; made applies to our Lord's manhood; and to His
manifestation; and to His office relative to us; and is relative to the Jews. Parallel
instance in Gen. xxvii. 29, Gen. xxvii. 37. The context contradicts the Arian
interpretation. 11(continued). The same is the meaning of the passage in the Acts which
they also allege, that in which Peter says, that `He hath made both Lord and Christ that
same Jesus whom ye have crucified.' For here too it is not written, `He made for Himself a
Son,' or `He made Himself a Word,' that they should have such notions. If then it has not
escaped their memory, that they speak concerning the Son of God, let them make search
whether it is anywhere written. `God made Himself a Son,' or `He created for Himself a
Word;' or again, whether it is anywhere written in plain terms, `The Word is a work or
creation;' and then let them proceed to make their case, the insensate men, that here too
they may receive their answer. But if they can produce nothing of the kind, and only catch
at such stray expressions as `He made' and `He has been made,' I fear lest, from hearing,
`In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth,' and `He made the sun and the moon,'
and `He made the sea,' they should come in time to call the Word the heaven, and the Light
which took place on the first day, and the earth, and each particular thing that has been
made, so as to end in resembling the Stoics, as they are called, the one drawing out their
God into all things , the other ranking God's Word with each work in particular; which
they have well nigh done already, saying that He is one of His works.

12. But here they must have the same answer as before, and first be told that the Word is
a Son, as has been said above , and not a work, and that such terms are not to be
understood of His Godhead, but the reason and manner of them investigated. To persons who
so inquire, the human Economy will plainly present itself, which He undertook for our
sake. For Peter, after saying, `He hath made Lord and Christ,' straightway added, `this
Jesus whom ye crucified;' which makes it plain to any one, even, if so be, to them,
provided they attend to the context, that not the Essence of the Word, but He according to
His manhood is said to have been made. For what was crucified but the body? and how could
be signified what was bodily in the Word, except by saying `He made?' Especially has that
phrase, `He made,' a meaning consistent with orthodoxy; in that he has not said, as I
observed before, `He made Him Word,' but `He made Him Lord,' nor that in general terms ,
but `towards' us, and `in the midst of' us, as much as to say, `He manifested Him.' And
this Peter himself, when he began this primary teaching, carefully expressed, when he said
to them, `Ye men of Israel, hear these words:

Jesus of Nazareth, a man manifested of God towards you by miracles, and wonders, and
signs, which God did by Him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves know .' Consequently the
term which he uses in the end, `made', this He has explained in the beginning by
`manifested,' for by the signs and wonders which the Lord did, He was manifested to be not
merely man, but God in a body and Lord also, the Christ. Such also is the passage in the
Gospel according to John, `Therefore the more did the Jews persecute Him, because He not
only broke the Sabbath, but said also that God was His own Father, making Himself equal
with God .' For the Lord did not then fashion Himself to be God, nor indeed is a made God
conceivable, but He manifested it by the works, saying, `Though ye believe not Me, believe
My works, that ye may know that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me .' Thus then the
Father has `made' Him Lord and King in the midst of us, and towards us who were once
disobedient; and it is plain that He who is now displayed as Lord and King, does not then
begin to be King and Lord, but begins to shew His Lordship, and to extend it even over the
disobedient.

13. If then they suppose that the Saviour was not Lord and King, even before He became man
and endured the Cross, but then began to be Lord, let them know that they are openly
reviving the statements of the Samosatene. But if, as we have quoted and declared above,
He is Lord and King everlasting, seeing that Abraham worships Him as Lord, and Moses says,
`Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the Lord out of
heaven ;' and David in the Psalms, `The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand
;' and, `Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and ever; a sceptre of righteousness is the
sceptre of Thy Kingdom ;' and, `Thy Kingdom is an everlasting Kingdom ;' it is plain that
even before He became man, He was King and Lord everlasting, being Image and Word of the
Father. And the Word being everlasting Lord and King, it is very plain again that Peter
said not that the Essence of the Son was made, but spoke of His Lordship over us, which
`became' when He became man, and, redeeming all by the Cross, became Lord of all and King.
But if they continue the argument on the ground of its being written, `He made,' not
willing that `He made' should be taken in the sense of `He manifested,' either from want
of apprehension, or from their Christ-opposing purpose, let them attend to another sound
exposition of Peter's words.

For he who becomes Lord of others, comes into the possession of beings already in
existence; but if the Lord is Framer of all and everlasting King, and when He became man,
then gained possession of us, here too is a way in which Peter's language evidently does
not signify that the Essence of the Word is a work, but the after-subjection of all
things, and the Saviour's Lordship which came to be over all. And this coincides with what
we said before ; for as we then introduced the words, `Become my God and defence,' and
`the Lord became a refuge for the oppressed ,' and it stood to reason that these
expressions do not shew that God is originate, but that His beneficence `becomes' towards
each individual, the same sense has the expression of Peter also. 14. For the Son of God
indeed, being Himself the Word, is Lord of all; but we once were subject from the first to
the slavery of corruption and the curse of the Law, then by degrees fashioning for
ourselves things that were not, we served, as says the blessed Apostle, `them which by
nature are no Gods ,' and, ignorant of the true God, we preferred things that were not to
the truth; but afterwards, as the ancient people when oppressed in Egypt groaned, so, when
we too had the Law `engrafted ' in us, and according to the unutterable sighings of the
Spirit made our intercession, `O Lord our God, take possession of us ,' then, as `He
became for a house of refuge' and a `God and defence,' so also He became our Lord. Nor did
He then begin to be, but we began to have Him for our Lord. For upon this, God being good
and Father of the Lord, in pity, and desiring to be known by all, makes His own Son put on
Him a human body and become man, and be called Jesus, that in this body offering Himself
for all, He might deliver all from false worship and corruption, and might Himself become
of all Lord and King.

His becoming therefore in this way Lord and King, this it is that Peter means by, `He hath
made Him Lord,' and `hath sent Christ;' as much as to say, that the Father in making Him
man (for to be made belongs to man), did not simply make Him man, but has made Him in
order to His being Lord of all men, and to His hallowing all through the Anointing. For
though the Word existing in the form of God took a servant's form, yet the assumption of
the flesh did not make a servant of the Word, who was by nature Lord; but rather, not only
was it that emancipation of all humanity which takes place by the Word, but that very Word
who was by nature Lord, and was then made man, hath by means of a servant's form been made
Lord of all and Christ, that is, in order to hallow all by the Spirit. And as God, when
`becoming a God and defence,' and saying, `I will be a God to them,' does not then become
God more than before, nor then begins to become God, but, what He ever is, that He then
becomes to those who need Him, when it pleaseth Him, so Christ also being by nature Lord
and King everlasting, does not become Lord more than He was at the time He is sent forth,
nor then begins to be Lord and King, but what He is ever, that He then is made according
to the flesh;

and, having redeemed all, He becomes thereby again Lord of quick and dead. For Him
henceforth do all things serve, and this is David's meaning in the Psalm, `The Lord said
unto my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, until I make Thine enemies Thy footstool .' For
it was fitting that the redemption should take place through none other than Him who is
the Lord by nature, lest, though created by the Son, we should name another Lord, and fall
into the Arian and Greek folly, serving the creature beyond the all-creating God . 15.
This, at least according to my nothingness, is the meaning of this passage; moreover, a
true and a good meaning have these words of Peter as regards the Jews. For Jews, astray
from the truth, expect indeed the Christ as coming, but do not reckon that He undergoes a
passion, saying what they understand not; `We know that, when the Christ cometh, He
abideth for ever, and how sayest Thou, that He must be lifted up ?' Next they suppose Him,
not the Word coming in flesh, but a mere man, as were all the kings. The Lord then,
admonishing Cleopas and the other, taught them that the Christ must first suffer; and the
rest of the Jews that God was come among them, saying, `If He called them gods to 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
?'

16. Peter then, having learned this from the Saviour, in both points set the Jews right,
saying, "O Jews, the divine Scriptures announce that Christ cometh, and you consider Him a
mere man as one of David's descendants, whereas what is written of Him shews Him to be not
such as you say, but rather announces Him as Lord and God, and immortal, and dispenser of
life. For Moses has said, `Ye shall see your Life hanging before your eyes .' And David in
the hundred and ninth Psalm, `The Lord said unto My Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, till
I make Thine enemies Thy footstool ;' and in the fifteenth, `Thou shalt not leave my soul
in hades, neither shalt Thou suffer Thy Holy One to see corruption .' Now that these
passages have not David for their scope he himself witnesses, avowing that He who was
coming was His own Lord. Nay you yourselves know that He is dead, and His remains are with
you. That the Christ then must be such as the Scriptures say, you will plainly confess
yourselves. For those announcements come from God, and in them falsehood cannot be. If
then ye can state that such a one has come before, and can prove him God from the signs
and wonders which he did, ye have reason for maintaining the contest, but if ye are not
able to prove His coming, but are expecting such an one still, recognise the true season
from Daniel, for his words relate to the present time.

But if this present season be that which was of old, afore-announced, and ye have seen
what has taken place among us, be sure that this Jesus, whom ye crucified, this is the
expected Christ. For David and all the Prophets died, and the sepulchres of all are with
you, but that Resurrection which has now taken place, has shewn that the scope of these
passages is Jesus. For the crucifixion is denoted by `Ye shall see your Life hanging,' and
the wound in the side by the spear answers to `He was led as a sheep to the slaughter ,'
and the resurrection, nay more, the rising of the ancient dead from out their sepulchres
(for these most of you have seen), this is, `Thou shall not leave My soul in hades,' and
`He swallowed up death in strength ,' and again, `God will wipe away.' For the signs which
actually took place shew that He who was in a body was God, and also the Life and Lord of
death. For it became the Christ, when giving life to others, Himself not to be detained by
death; but this could not have happened, had He, as you suppose, been a mere man. But in
truth He is the Son of God, for men are all subject to death.

Let no one therefore doubt, but the whole house of Israel know assuredly that this Jesus,
whom ye saw in shape a man, doing signs and such works, as no one ever yet had done, is
Himself the Christ and Lord of all. For though made man, and called Jesus, as we said
before, He received no loss by that human passion, but rather, in being made man, He is
manifested as Lord of quick and dead. For since, as the Apostle said, `in the wisdom of
God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to
save them that believe .' And so, since we men would not acknowledge God through His Word,
nor serve the Word of God our natural Master, it pleased God to shew in man His own
Lordship, and so to draw all men to Himself. But to do this by a mere man be-seemed not ;
lest, having man for our Lord, we should become worshippers of man . Therefore the Word
Himself became flesh, and the Father called His Name Jesus, and so `made' Him Lord and
Christ, as much as to say, `He made Him to rule and to reign;' that while in the Name of
Jesus, whom ye crucified, every knee bows, we may acknowledge as Lord and King both the
Son and through Him the Father."

17. The Jews then, most of them , hearing this, came to themselves and forthwith
acknowledged the Christ, as it is written in the Acts. But, the Ario-maniacs on the
contrary choose to remain Jews, and to contend with Peter; so let us proceed to place
before them some parallel phrases; perhaps it may have some effect upon them, to find what
the usage is of divine Scripture. Now that Christ is everlasting Lord and King, has become
plain by what has gone before, nor is there a man to doubt about it; for being Son of God,
He must be like Him , and being like, He is certainly both Lord and King, for He says
Himself, `He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father.' On the other hand, that Peter's
there words, `He hath made Him both Lord and Christ,' do not imply the Son to be a
creature, may be seen from Isaac's blessing, though this illustration is but a faint one
for our subject. Now he said to Jacob, `Become thou lord over thy brother;' and to Esau,
`Behold, I have made him thy lord .' Now though the word `made' had implied Jacob's
essence and the coming into being, even then it would not be right in them as much as to
imagine the same of the Word of God, for the Son of God is no creature as Jacob was;
besides, they might inquire and so rid themselves of that extravagance.

But if they, do not understand it of his essence nor of his coming into being, though
Jacob was by nature creature and work, is not their madness worse than the Devil's , if
what they dare not ascribe in consequence of a like phrase even to things by nature
originate, that they attach to the Son of God, saying that He is a creature? For Isaac
said `Become' and `I have made,' signifying neither the coming into being nor the essence
of Jacob (for after thirty years and more from his birth he said this); but his authority
over his brother, which came to pass subsequently. 18. Much more then did Peter say this
without meaning that the Essence of the Word was a work; for he knew Him to be God's Son,
confessing, `Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God ;' but he meant His Kingdom
and Lordship which was formed and came to be according to grace, and was relatively to us.
For while saying this, he was not silent about the Son of God's everlasting Godhead which
is the Father's; but He had said already, that He had poured the Spirit on us; now to give
the Spirit with authority, is not in the power of creature or work, but the Spirit is
God's Gift . For the creatures arehallowed by the Holy Spirit; but the Son, in that He is
not hallowed by the Spirit, but on the contrary Himself the Giver of it to all , is
therefore no creature, but true Son of the Father. And yet He who gives the Spirit, the
same is said also to be made; that is, to be made among us Lord because of His manhood,
while giving the Spirit because He is God's Word. For He ever was and is, as Son, so also
Lord and Sovereign of all, being like in all things to the Father, and having all that is
the Father's as He Himself has said .

CHAPTER XVI. INTRODUCTORY TO PROVERBS VIII. 22, THAT THE SON IS NOT A CREATURE.

Arian formula, a creature but not as one of the creatures; but each creature is unlike all
other creatures; and no creature can create. The Word then differs from all creatures in
that in which they, though otherwise differing, all agree together, as creatures; viz. in
being an efficient cause; in being the one medium or instrumental agent in creation;
moreover in being the revealer of the Father; and in being the object of worship. 18.
(continued). Now in the next place let us consider the passage in the Proverbs, `The Lord
created me a beginning of His ways for His works ;' although in shewing that the Word is
no work, it has been also shewn that He is no creature. For it is the same to say work or
creature, so that the proof that He is no work is a proof also that He is no creature.
Whereas one may marvel at these men, thus devising excuses to be irreligious, and nothing
daunted at the refutations which meet them upon every point. For first they set about
deceiving the simple by their questions `Did He who is make from that which was not one
that was not or one that was ?'and, `Had you a son before begetting him ?'And when this
had been proved worthless,next they invented the question, `Is the Unoriginate one or two
?' Then, when in this they had been confuted, straightway they formed another, `Has He
free-will and an alterable nature ?' But being forced to give up this, next they set about
saying, `Being made so much better than the Angels ;' and when the truth exposed this
pretence, now again, collecting them all together, they think to recommend their heresy by
`work' and `creature .' For they mean those very things over again, and are true to their
own perverseness, putting into various shapes and turning to and fro the same errors, if
so be to deceive some by that variousness.

Although then abundant proof has been given above of this their reckless expedient, yet,
since they make all places sound with this passage from the Proverbs, and to many who are
ignorant of the faith of Christians, seem to say somewhat it is necessary to examine
separately, `He created' as well as `Who was faithful to Him that made Him ;' that, as in
all others, so in this text also, they may be proved to have got no further than a
fantasy. 19. And first let us see the answers, which they returned to Alexander of blessed
memory, in the outset, while their heresy was in course of formation. They wrote thus: `He
is a creature, but not as one of the creatures; a work, but not as one of the works; an
offspring, but not as one of the offsprings .' Let every one consider the profligacy and
craft of this heresy; for knowing the bitterness of its own malignity, it makes an effort
to trick itself out with fair words, and says, what indeedit means, that He is a creature,
yet thinks to be able to screen itself by adding, `but not as one of the creatures.'
However, in thus writing, they rather convict themselves of irreligion; for if, in your
opinion, He is simply a creature, why add the pretence , `but not as one of the
creatures?' And if He is simply a work, how `not as one of the works?' In which we may see
the poison of the heresy. For by saying, `offspring, but not as one of the offsprings,'
they reckon many sons, and one of these they pronounce to be the Lord; so that according
to them He is no more Only begotten, but one out of many brethren, and is called offspring
and son. What use then is this pretence of saying that He is a creature and not a
creature? for though ye shall say, Not as `one of the creatures,' I will prove this
sophism of yours to be foolish.

For still ye pronounce Him to be one of the creatures; and whatever a man might say of the
other creatures, such ye hold concerning the Son, ye truly `fools and blind .' For is any
one of the creatures just what another is , that ye should predicate this of the Son as
some prerogative ? And all the visible creation was made in six days:-in the first, the
light which He called day; in the second the firmament; in the third, gathering together
the waters, He bared the dry land, and brought out the various fruits that are in it; and
in the fourth, He made the sun and the moon and all the host of the stars; and on the
fifth, He created the race of living things in the sea, and of birds in the air; and on
the sixth, He made the quadrupeds on the earth, and at length man. And `the invisible
things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the
things that are made ;' and neither the light is as the night, nor the sun as the moon;
nor the irrational as rational man; nor the Angels as the Thrones, nor the Thrones as the
Authorities, yet they are all creatures, but each of the things made according to its kind
exists and remains in its own essence, as it was made.

20. Let the Word then be excepted from the works, and as Creator be restored to the
Father, and be confessed to be Son by nature; or if simply He be a creature, then let Him
be assigned the same condition as the rest one with another, and let them as well as He be
said every one of them to be `a creature but not as one of the creatures, offspring or
work, but not as one of the works or offsprings.' For ye say that an offspring is the same
as a work, writing `generated or made .' For though the Son excel the rest on a
comparison, still a creature He is nevertheless, as they are; since in those which are by
nature creatures one may find some excelling others. Star, for instance, differs from star
in glory, and the rest have all of them their mutual differences when compared together;
yet it follows not for all this that some are lords, and others servants to the superior,
nor that some are efficient causes , others by them come into being, but all have a nature
which comes to be and is created, confessing in their own selves their Framer: as David
says in the Psalms, `The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth His
handy work ;' and as Zorobabel the wise says, `All the earth calleth upon the Truth, and
the heaven blesseth it:

all works shake and tremble at it .' But if the whole earth hymns the Framer and the
Truth, and blesses, and fears it, and its Framer is the Word, and He Himself says, `I am
the Truth ,' it follows that the Word is not a creature, but alone proper to the Father,
in whom all things are disposed, and He is celebrated by all, as Framer; for `I was by Him
disposing ;' and `My Father worketh hitherto, and I work .' And the word `hitherto' shews
His eternal existence in the Father as the Word; for it is proper to the Word to work the
Father's works and not to be external to Him. 21. But if what the Father worketh, that the
Son worketh also , and what the Son createth, that is the creation of the Father, and yet
the Son be the Father's work or creature, then either He will work His own self, and will
be His own creator (since what the Father worketh is the Son's work also), which is absurd
and impossible; or, in that He creates and worketh the things of the Father, He Himself is
not a work nor a creature; for else being Himself an efficient cause , He may cause that
to be in the case of things caused, which He Himself has become, or rather He may have no
power to cause at all.

For how, if, as you hold, He is come of nothing, is He able to frame things that are
nothing into being? or if He, a creature, withal frames a creature, the same will be
conceivable in the case of every creature, viz. the power to frame others. And if this
pleases you, what is the need of the Word, seeing that things inferior can be brought to
be by things superior? or at all events, every thing that is brought to be could have
heard in the beginning God's words,`Become' and `be made,' and so would have been framed.
But this is not so written, nor could it be. For none of things which are brought to be is
an efficient cause, but all things were made through the Word: who would not have wrought
all things, were He Himself in the number of the creatures. For neither would the Angels
be able to frame, since they too are creatures, though Valentinus, and Marcion, and
Basilides think so, and you are their copyists; nor will the sun, as being a creature,
ever make what is not into what is; nor will man fashion man, nor stone devise stone, nor
wood give growth to wood. But God is He who fashions man in the womb, and fixes the
mountains, and makes wood grow; whereas man, as being capable of science, puts together
and arranges that material, and works things that are, as he has learned; and is satisfied
if they are but brought to be, and being conscious of what his nature is, if he needs
aught, knows to ask it of God.

22. If then God also wrought and compounded out of materials, this indeed is a gentile
thought, according to which God is an artificer and not a Maker, but yet even in that case
let the Word work the materials, at the bidding and in the service of God . But if He
calls into existence things which existed not by His proper Word, then the Word is not in
the number of things non-existing and called; or we have to seek another Word , through
whom He too was called; for by the Word the things which were not have come to be. And if
through Him He creates and makes He is not Himself of things created and made but rather
He is the Word of the Creator God and is known from the Father's works which He Himself
worketh, to be `in the Father and the Father in Him,' and `He that hath seen Him hath seen
the Father ,' because the Son's Essence is proper to the Father, and He in all points like
Him . How then does He create through Him, unless it be His Word and His Wisdom? and how
can He be Word and Wisdom, unless He be the proper offspring of His Essence , and did not
come to be, as others, out of nothing?

And whereas all things are from nothing, and are creatures, and the Son, as they say, is
one of the creatures too and of things which once were not, how does He alone reveal the
Father, and none else but He know the Father? For could He, a work possibly know the
Father, then must the Father be also known by all according to the proportion of the
measures of each: for all of them are works as He is. But if it be impossible for things
originate either to see or to know, for the sight and the knowledge of Him surpasses all
(since God Himself says, `No one shall see My face and live '), yet the Son has declared,
`No one knoweth the Father, save the Son ,' therefore the Word is different from all
things originate, in that He alone knows and alone sees the Father, as He says, `Not that
any one hath seen the Father, save He that is from the Father,' and `no one knoweth the
Father save the Son ,' though Arius think otherwise. How then did He alone know, except
that He alone was proper to Him? and how proper, if He were a creature, and not a true Son
from Him? (For one must not mind saying often the same thing for religion's sake.
Therefore it is irreligious to think that the Son is one of all things;

and blasphemous and unmeaning to call Him `a creature, but not as one of the creatures,
and a work, but not as one of the works, an offspring, but not as one of the offsprings;'
for how not as one of these, if, as they say, He was not before His generation ? for it is
proper to the creatures and works not to be before their origination, and to subsist out
of nothing, even though they excel other creatures in glory; for this difference of one
with another will be found in all creatures, which appears in those which are visible .
23. Moreover if, as the heretics hold, the Son were creature or work, but not as one of
the creatures, because of His excelling them inglory, it were natural that Scripture
should describe and display Him by a comparison in His favour with the other works; for
instance, that it should say that He is greater than Archangels, and more honourable than
the Thrones, and both brighter than sun and moon, and greater than the heavens. But he is
not in fact thus referred to; but the Father shews Him to be His own proper and only Son,
saying, `Thou art My Son,' and `This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased '
Accordingly the Angels ministered unto Him, as being one beyond themselves; and they
worship Him, not as being greater in glory, but as being some one beyond all the
creatures, and beyond themselves, and alone the Father's proper Son according to essence .
For if He was worshipped as excelling them in glory, each of things subservient ought to
worship what excels itself. But this is not the case ; for creature does not worship
creature, but servant Lord, and creature God. Thus Peter the Apostle hinders Cornelius who
would worship him, saying, `I myself also am a man .' And an Angel, when John would
worship him in the Apocalypse, hinders him, saying, `See thou do it not; for I am thy
fellow-servant, and of thy brethren the Prophets, and of them that keep the sayings of
this book:

worship God .' Therefore to God alone appertains worship, and this the very Angels know,
that though they excel other beings in glory, yet they are all creatures and not to be
worshipped , but worship the Lord. Thus Manoah, the father of Samson, wishing to offer
sacrifice to the Angel, was thereupon hindered by him, saying, `Offer not to me, but to
God .' On the other hand, the Lord is worshipped even by the Angels; for it is written,
`Let all the Angels of God worship Him ;' and by all the Gentiles, as Isaiah says, `The
labour of Egypt and merchandize of Ethiopia and of the Subeans, men of stature, shall come
over unto thee, and they shall be thy servants;' and then, `they shall fall down unto
thee, and shall make supplication unto thee, saying, Surely God is in thee, and there is
none else, there is no God .' And He accepts His disciples' worship, and certifies them
who He is, saying, `Call ye Me not Lord and Master? and ye say well, for so I am.' And
when Thomas said to Him, `My Lord and my God ,' He allows his words, or rather accepts him
instead of hindering him. For He is, as the other Prophets declare, and David says in the
Psalm, `the Lord of hosts, the Lord of Sabaoth,' which is interpreted, `the Lord of
Armies,' and God True and Almighty, though the Arians burst at the tidings.

24. But He had not been thus worshipped, nor been thus spoken of, were He a creature
merely. But now since He is not a creature, but the proper offspring of the Essence of
that God who is worshipped, and His Son by nature, therefore He is worshipped and is
believed to be God, and is Lord of armies, and in authority, and Almighty, as the Father
is; for He has said Himself, `All things that the Father hath, are Mine .' For it is
proper to the Son, to have the things of the Father, and to be such that the Father is
seen in Him, and that through Him all things were made, and that the salvation of all
comes to pass and consists in Him.

CHAPTER XVII. INTRODUCTION TO PROVERBS VIII. 22 CONTINUED.

Absurdity of supposing a Son or Word created in order to the creation of other creatures;
as to the creation being unable to bear God's immediate hand, God condescends to the
lowest. Moreover, if the Son a creature, He too could not bear God's hand, and an infinite
series of media will be necessary. Objected, that, as Moses who led out the Israelites was
a man, so our Lord; but Moses was not the Agent in creation:-again, that unity is found in
created ministrations, but all such ministrations are defective and dependent:-again, that
He learned to create, yet could God's Wisdom need teaching? and why should He learn, if
the Father worketh hitherto? If the Son was created to create us, He is for our sake, not
we for His. 24 (continued). And here it were well to ask them also this question , for a
still clearer refutation of their heresy;-Wherefore, when all things are creatures, and
all are brought into consistence from nothing, and the Son Himself, according to you, is
creature and work, and once was not, wherefore has He made `all things through Him' alone,
`and without Him was made not one thing ?' or why is it, when `all things' are spoken of,
that no one thinks the Son is signified in the number, but only things originate; whereas
when Scripture speaks of the Word, it does not understand Him as being in the number of
`all,' but places Him with the Father, as Him in whom Providence and salvation for `all'
are wrought and effected by the Father, though all things surely might at the same command
have come to be, at which He was brought into being by God alone? For God is not wearied
by commanding , nor is His strength unequal to the making of all things, that He should
alone create the only Son , and need His ministry and aid for the framing of the rest. For
He lets nothing stand over, which He wills to be done; but He willed only , and all things
subsisted, and no one `hath resisted His will .' Why then were not all things brought into
being by God alone at that same command, at which the Son came into being?

Or let them tell us, why did all things through Him come to be, who was Himself but
originate? How void of reason! however, they say concerning Him, that `God willing to
create originate nature, when He saw that it could not endure the untempered hand of the
Father, and to be created by Him, makes and creates first and alone one only, and calls
Him Son and Word, that, through Him as a medium, all things might thereupon be brought to
be .' This they not only have said, but they have dared to put it into writing, namely,
Eusebius, Arius, and Asterius who sacrificed . 25. Is not this a full proof of that
irreligion, with which they have drugged themselves with much madness, till they blush not
to be intoxicate against the truth? For if they shall assign the toil of making all things
as the reason why God made the Son only, the whole creation will cry out against them as
saying unworthy things of God; and Isaiah too who has said in Scripture, `The Everlasting
God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary: there
is no searching of His understanding .' And if God made the Son alone, as not deigning to
make the rest, but committed them to the Son as an assistant, this on the other hand is
unworthy of God, for in Him there is no pride. Nay the Lord reproves the thought, when He
says, `Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing?' and `one of them shall not fall on the
ground without your Father which is in heaven.' And again, `Take no thought for your life,
what ye shall eat, nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than
meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air, for they sow not, neither do
they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them; are ye not much
better than they? Which of you by taking thought, can add one cubit unto his stature? And
why take ye thought for raiment?

Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: and
yet I say unto you, that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
Wherefore if God so clothe the grass of the field which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast
into the oven, shall He not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith ?' If then it be
not unworthy of God to exercise His Providence, even down to things so small, a hair of
the head, and a sparrow, and the grass of the field, also it was not unworthy of Him to
make them. For what things are the subjects of His Providence, of those He is Maker
through His proper Word. Nay a worse absurdity lies before the men who thus speak; for
they distinguish between the creatures and the framing; and consider the latter the work
of the Father, the creatures the work of the Son; whereas either all things must be
brought to be by the with the Son, or if all that is originate comes to be through the
Son, we must not call Him one of the originated things.

26. Next, their folly may be exposed thus:-if even the Word be of originated nature, how,
whereas this nature is too feeble to be God's own handy work, could He alone of all endure
to be made by the unoriginate and unmitigated Essence of God, as ye say? for it follows
either that, if He could endure it, all could endure it, or, it being endurable by none,
it was not endurable by the Word, for you say that He is one of originate things. And
again, if because originate nature could not endure to be God's own handiwork, there arose
need of a mediator , it must follow, that, the Word being originate and a creature, there
is need of medium in His framing also, since He too is of that originate nature which
endures not to be made of God, but needs a medium. But if some being as a medium be found
for Him, then again a fresh mediator is needed for that second, and thus tracing back and
following out, we shall invent a vast crowd of accumulating mediators; and thus it will be
impossible that the creation should subsist, as ever wanting a mediator, and that medium
not coming into being without another mediator; for all of them will be of that originate
nature which endures not to be made of God alone, as ye say. How abundant is that folly,
which obliges them to hold that what has already come into being, admits not of coming! Or
perhaps they opine that they have not even come to be, as still seeking their mediator;
for, on the ground of their so irreligious and futile notion , what is would not have
subsistence, for want of the medium.

27. But again they allege this:-`Behold, through Moses too did He lead the people from
Egypt, and through him He gave the Law, yet he was a man; so that it is possible for like
to be brought into being by like.' They should veil their face when they say this, to save
their much shame. For Moses was not sent to frame the world, nor to call into being things
which were not, or to fashion men like himself, but only to be the minister of words to
the people, and to King Pharaoh. And this is a very different thing, for to minister is of
things originate as of servants, but to frame and to create is of God alone, and of His
proper Word and His Wisdom. Wherefore, in the matter of framing, we shall find none but
God's Word; for `all things are made in Wisdom,' and `without the Word was made not one
thing.' But as regards ministrations there are, not one only, but man out of their whole
number, whomever the Lord will send. For there are many Archangels, many Thrones, and
Authorities, and Dominions, thousands of thousands, and myriads of myriads, standing
before Him , ministering and ready to be sent. And many Prophets, and twelve Apostles, and
Paul. And Moses himself was not alone, but Aaron with him, and next other seventy were
filled with the Holy Ghost.

And Moses was succeeded by Joshua the son of Nun, and he by the Judges, and they not by
one, but by a number of Kings. If then the Son were a creature and one of things
originate, there must have been many such sons, that God might have many such ministers,
just as there is a multitude of those others. But if this is not to be seen, but while the
creatures are many, the Word is one, any one will collect from this, that the Son differs
from all, and is not on a level with the creatures, but proper to the Father. Hence there
are not many Words, but one only Word of the one Father, and one Image of the one God .
`But behold,' they say, `there is one sun only , and one earth.' Let them maintain,
senseless as they are, that there is one water and one fire, and then they may be told
that everything that is brought to be, is one in its own essence; but for the ministry and
service committed to it, by itself it is not adequate nor sufficient alone. For God said,
`Let there be lights in the firmament of heaven, to give light upon the earth and to
divide the day from the night;

and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years.' And then he says, `And
God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule
the night He made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven, to give
light upon the earth, and to rule over the day and over the night .' 28. Behold there are
many lights, and not the sun only, nor the moon only, but each is one in essence, and yet
the service of all is one and common; and what each lacks, is supplied by the other, and
the office of lighting is performed by all . Thus the sun has authority to shine
throughout the day and no more; and the moon through the night; and the stars together
with them accomplish the seasons and years, and become for signs, each according to the
need that calls for it. Thus too the earth is not for all things, but for the fruits only,
and to be a ground to tread on for the living things that inhabit it. And the firmament is
to divide between waters and waters, and to be a place to set the stars in. So also fire
and water, with other things, have been brought into being to be the constituent parts of
bodies; and in short no one thing is alone, but all things that are made, as if members of
each other, make up as it were one body, namely, the world. If then they thus conceive of
the Son, let all men throw stones atthem, considering the Word to be a part of this
universe, and a part insufficient without the rest for the service committed to Him.

But if this be manifestly irreligious, let them acknowledge that the Word is not in the
number of things originate, but the sole and proper Word of the Father, and their Framer.
`But,' say they, `though He is a creature and of things originate; yet as from a master
and artificer has He learned to frame, and thus ministered to God who taught Him.' For
thus the Sophist Asterius, on the strength of having learned to deny the Lord, has dared
to write, not observing the absurdity which follows. For if framing be a thing to be
taught, let them beware lest they say that God Himself be a Framer not by nature but by
science, so as to admitof His losing the power. Besides, if the Wisdom of God attained to
frame by teaching, how is He still Wisdom, when He needs to learn? and what was He before
He learned? For it was not Wisdom, if it needed teaching; it was surely but some empty
thing, and not essential Wisdom , but from advancement it had the name of Wisdom, and will
be only so long Wisdom as it can keep what it has learned. For what has accrued not by any
nature, but from learning, admits of being one time unlearned. But to speak thus of the
Word of God, is not the part of Christians but of Greeks.

29. For if the power of framing accrues to anyone from teaching, these insensate men are
ascribing jealousy and weakness to God;-jealousy, in that He has not taught many how to
frame, so that there may be around Him, as Archangels and Angels many, so framers many;
and weakness, in that He could not make by Himself, but needed a fellow-worker, or under-
worker; and that, though it has been already shewn that created nature admits of being
made by God alone, since they consider the Son to be of such a nature and so made. But God
is deficient in nothing: perish the thought! for He has said Himself, `I am full .' Nor
did the Word become Framer of all from teaching; but being the Image and Wisdom of the
Father, He does the things of the Father. Nor hath He made the Son for the making of
things created; for behold, though the Son exists, still the Father is seen to work, as
the Lord Himself says, `My Father worketh hitherto and I work .' If however, as you say,
the Son came into being for the purpose of making the things after Him, and yet the Father
is seen to work even after the Son, you must hold even in this light the making of such a
Son to be superfluous. Besides, why, when He would create us, does He seek for a mediator
at all, as if His will did not suffice to constitute whatever seemed good to Him?

Yet the Scriptures say, `He hath done whatsoever pleased Hires ,' and `Who hath resisted
His will ?' And if His mere will is sufficient for the framing of all things, you make the
office of a mediator superfluous; for your instance of Moses, and the sun and the moon has
been shewn not to hold. And here again is an argument to silence you. You say that God,
willing the creation of originated nature, and deliberating concerning it, designs and
creates the Son, that through Him He may frame us; now, if so, consider how great an
irreligion you have dared to utter. 30. First, the Son appears rather to have been for us
brought to be, than we for Him; for we were not created for Him, but He is made for us ;
so that He owes thanks to us, not we to Him, as the woman to the man. `For the man,' says
Scripture, `was not created for the woman, but the woman for the man.' Therefore, as `the
man is the image and glory of God, and the woman the glory of the man ,' so we are made
God's image and to His glory; but the Son is our image, and exists for our glory. And we
were brought into being that we might be; but God's Word was made, as you must hold, not
that He might be ; but as an instrument for our need, so that not we from Him, but He is
constituted from our need. Are not men who even conceive such thoughts, more than
insensate? For if for us the Word was made, He has not precedence of us with God; for He
did not take counsel about us having Him within Him, but having us in Himself, counselled,
as they say, concerning His own Word. But if so, perchance the Father had not even a will
for the Son at all; for not as having a will for Him, did He create Him, but with a will
for us, He formed Him for our sake;

for He designed Him after designing usso that, according to these irreligious men,
henceforth the Son, who was made as an instrument, is superfluous, now that they are made
for whom He was created. But if the Son alone was made by God alone, because He could
endure it, but we, because we could not, were made by the Word, why does He not first take
counsel about the Word, who could endure His making, instead of taking counsel about us?
or why does He not make more of Him who was strong, than of us who were weak? or why
making Him first, does He not counsel about Him first? or why counselling about us first,
does He not make us first, His will being sufficient for the constitution of all things?
But He creates Him first, yet counsels first about us; and He wills us before the
Mediator; and when He wills to create us, and counsels about us, He calls us creatures;
but Him, whom He frames for us, He calls Son and proper Heir. But we, for whose sake He
made Him, ought rather to be called sons; or certainly He, who is His Son, is rather the
object of His previous thoughts and of His will, for whom He makes all us. Such the
sickness, such the vomit of the heretics.


FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS
==================================

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

CHAPTER XVIII. INTRODUCTION TO PROVERBS VIII. 22 CONTINUED.

Contrast between the Father's operations immediately and naturally in the Son,
instrumentally by the creatures; Scripture terms illustrative of this. Explanation of
these illustrations; which should be interpreted by the doctrine of the Church; perverse
sense put on them by the Arians, refuted. Mystery of Divine Generation. Contrast between
God's Word and man's word drawn out at length. Asterius betrayed into holding two
Unoriginates; his inconsistency. Baptism how by the Son as well as by the Father. On the
Baptism of heretics. Why Arian worse than other heresies 31. But the sentiment of Truth in
this matter must not be hidden, but must have high utterance. For the Word of God was not
made for us, but rather we for Him, and `in Him all things were created .' Nor for that we
were weak, was He strong and made by the Father alone, that He might frame us by means of
Him as an instrument; perish the thought! it is not so. For though it had seemed good to
God not to make things originate, still had the Word been no less with God, and the Father
in Him. At the same time, things originate could not without the Word be brought to be;
hence they were made through Him,-and reasonably. For since the Word is the Son of God by
nature proper to His essence, and is from Him, and in Him , as He said Himself, the
creatures could not have come to be, except through Him. For as the light enlightens all
things by its radiance, and without its radiance nothing would be illuminated, so also the
Father, as by a hand , in the Word wrought all things, and without Him makes nothing. For
instance, God said, as Moses relates, `Let there be light,' and `Let the waters be
gathered together,' and `let the dry land appear,' and `Let Us make man ;' as also Holy
David in the Psalm, `He spake and they were made;

He commanded and they were created .' And He spoke , not that, as in the case of men, some
under-worker might hear, and learning the will of Him who spoke might go away and do it;
for this is what is proper to creatures, but it is unseemly so to think or speak of the
Word. For the Word of God is Framer and Maker, and He is the Father's Will . Hence it is
that divine Scripture says not that one heard and answered, as to the manner or nature of
the things which He wished made; but God only said, `Let it become,' and he adds, `And it
became;' for what He thought good and counselled, that forthwith the Word began to do and
to finish. For when God commands others, whether the Angels, or converses with Moses, or
commands Abraham, then the hearer answers; and the one says, `Whereby shall I know ?' and
the other, `Send some one else ;' and again, `If they ask me, what is His Name, what shall
I say to them ?' and the Angel said to Zacharias, `Thus saith the Lord ;' and he asked the
Lord, `O Lord of hosts, how long wilt Thou not have mercy on Jerusalem?' and waits to hear
good words and comfortable. For each of these has the Mediator Word, and the Wisdom of God
which makes known the will of the Father.

But when that Word Himself works and creates, then there is no questioning and answer, for
the Father is in Him and the Word in the Father; but it suffices to will, and the work is
done; so that the word `He said' is a token of the will for our sake, and `It was so,'
denotes the work which is done through the Word and the Wisdom, in which Wisdom also is
the Will of the Father. And `God said' is explained in `the Word,' for, he says, `Thou
hast made all things in Wisdom;' and `By the Word of the Lord were the heavens made fast;'
and `There is one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him .' 32. It is
plain from this that the Arians are not fighting with us about their heresy; but while
they pretend us, their real fight is against the Godhead Itself. For if the voice were
ours which says, `This it My Son ,' small were our complaint of them; but if it is the
Father's voice, and the disciples heard it, and the Son too says of Himself, `Before all
the mountains He begat me ,' are they not fighting against God, as the giants in story,
having their tongue, as the Psalmist says, a sharp sword for irreligion? For they neither
feared the voice of the Father, nor reverenced the Saviour's words, nor trusted the
Saints, one of whom writes, `Who being the Brightness of His glory and the Expression of
His subsistence,' and `Christ the power of God and the Wisdom of God ;' and another says
in the Psalm, `With Thee is the well of life, and in Thy Light shall we see light,' and
`Thou madest all things in Wisdom ;' and the Prophets say, `And the Word of the Lord came
to me ;' and John, `In the beginning was the Word;' and Luke, `As they delivered them unto
us which from the beginning were eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word ;' and as David
again says, `He sent His Word and healed them .' All these passages proscribe in every
light the Arian heresy, and signify the eternity of the Word, and that He is not foreign
but proper to the Father's Essence.

For when saw any one light without radiance? or who dares to say that the expression can
be different from the subsistence? or has not a man himself lost his mind who even
entertains the thought that God was ever without Reason and without Wisdom? For such
illustrations and such images has Scripture proposed, that, considering the inability of
human nature to comprehend God, we might be able to form ideas even from these however
poorly and dimly, and as far as is attainable . And as the creation contains abundant
matter for the knowledge of the being of a God and a Providence (` for by the greatness
and beauty of the creatures proportionably the Maker of them is seen '), and we learn from
them without asking for voices, but hearing the Scriptures we believe, and surveying the
very order and the harmony of all things, we acknowledge that He is Maker and Lord and God
of all, and apprehend His marvellous Providence and governance over all things; so in like
manner about the Son's Godhead, what has been above said is sufficient, and it becomes
superfluous, or rather it is very mad to dispute about it, or to ask in an heretical way,
How can the Son be from eternity? or how can He be from the Father's Essence, yet not a
part? since what is said to be of another, is a part of him; and what is divided, is not
whole.

33. These are the evil sophistries of the heterodox; yet, though we have already shewn
their shallowness, the exact sense of these passages themselves and the force of these
illustrations will serve to shew the baseless nature of their loathsome tenet. For we see
that reason is ever, and is from him and proper to his essence, whose reason it is, and
does not admit a before and an after. So again we see that the radiance from the sun is
proper to it, and the sun's essence is not divided or impaired; but its essence is whole
and its radiance perfect and whole , yet without impairing the essence of light, but as a
true offspring from it. We understand in like manner that the Son is begotten not from
without but from the Father, and while the Father remains whole, the Expression of His
Subsistence is ever, and preserves the Father's likeness and unvarying Image, so that he
who sees Him, sees in Him the Subsistence too, of which He is the Expression. And from the
operation of the Expression we understand the true Godhead of the Subsistence, as the
Saviour Himself teaches when He says, `The Father who dwelleth in Me, He doeth the works '
which I do;

and `I and the Father are one,' and `I in the Father and the Father in Me .' Therefore let
this Christ-opposing heresy attempt first to divide the examples found in things
originate, and say, `Once the sun was without his radiance,' or, `Radiance is not proper
to the essence of light,' or `It is indeed proper, but it is a part of light by division;
and then let it divide Reason, and pronounce that it is foreign to mind, or that once it
was not, or that it was not proper to its essence, or that it is by division a part of
mind.' And so of His Expression and the Light and the Power, let it do violence to these
as in the case of Reason and Radiance; and instead let it imagine what it will . But if
such extravagance be impossible for them, are they not greatly beside themselves,
presumptuously intruding into what is higher than things originate and their own nature,
and essaying impossibilities ?

34. For if in the case of these originate and irrational things offsprings are found which
are not parts of the essences from which they are, nor subsist with passion, nor impair
the essences of their originals, are they not mad again in seeking and conjecturing parts
and passions in the instance of the immaterial and true God, and ascribing divisions to
Him who is beyond passion and change, thereby toperplex the ears of the simple and to
pervert them from the Truth? for who hears of a son but conceives of that which is proper
to the father's essence? who heard, in his first catechising , that God has a Son and has
made all things by His proper Word, but understood it in that sense in which we now mean
it? who on the rise of this odious heresy of the Arians, was not at once startled at what
he heard, as strange , and a second sowing, besides that Word which had been sown from the
beginning? For what is sown in every soul from the beginning is that God has a Son, the
Word, the Wisdom, the Power, that is, His Image and Radiance; from which it at once
follows that He is always; that He is from the Father; that He is like; that He is the
eternal offspring of His essence; and there is no idea involved in these of creature or
work.

But when the man who is an enemy, while men slept, made a second sowing , of `He is a
creature,' and `There was once when He was not,' and `How can it be?' thenceforth the
wicked heresy of Christ's enemies rose as tares, and forthwith, as bereft of every right
thought, they meddle like robbers, and venture to say, `How can the Son always exist with
the Father?' for men come of men and are sons, after a time; and the father is thirty
years old, when the son begins to be, being begotten; and in short of every son of man, it
is true that he was not before his generation. And again they whisper, `How can the Son be
Word, or the Word be God's Image? for the word of men is composed of syllables , and only
signifies the speaker's will, and then is over and is lost.'

35. They then afresh, as if forgetting the proofs which have been already urged against
them, `pierce themselves through ' with these bonds of irreligion, and thus argue. But the
word of truth confutes them as follows:-if they were disputing concerning any man, then
let them exercise reason in this human way, both concerning His Word and His Son; but if
of God who created man, no longer let them entertain human thoughts, but others which are
above human nature. For such as he that besets, such of necessity is the offspring; and
such as is the Word's Father, such must be also His Word. Now man, begotten in time, in
time also himself besets the child; and whereas from nothing he came to be, therefore his
word also is over and continues not. But God is not as man, as Scripture has said; but is
existing and is ever; therefore also His Word is existings and is everlastingly with the
Father, as radiance of light. And man's word is composed of syllables, and neither lives
nor operates anything, but is only significant of the speaker's intention, and does but go
forth and go by, no more to appear, since it was not at all before it was spoken;
wherefore the word of man neither lives nor operates anything, nor in short is man. And
this happens to it, as I said before, because man who besets it, has his nature out of
nothing.

But God's Word is not merely pronounced, as one may say, nor a sound of accents, nor by
His Son is meant His command ; but as radiance of light, so is He perfect offspring from
perfect . Hence He is God also, as being God's Image; for `the Word was God ' says
Scripture. And man's words avail not for operation; hence man works not by means of words
but of hands, for they have being, and man's word subsists not. But the `Word of God,' as
the Apostle says, `is living and powerful and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing
even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a
discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is
not manifest in His sight; but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of Him with
whom we have to do ' He is then Framer of all, `and without Him was made not one thing
,'nor can anything be made without Him.

36. Nor must we ask why the Word of God is not such as our word, considering God is not
such as we, as has been before said; nor again is it right to seek how the word is from
God, or how He is God's radiance, or how God besets, and what is the manner of His
besetting . For a man must be beside himself to venture on such points; since a thing
ineffable and proper to God's nature, and known to Him alone and to the Son, this he
demands to be explained in words. It is all one as if they sought where God is, and how
God is, and of what nature the Father is. But as to ask such questions is irreligious, and
argues an ignorance of God, so it is not holy to venture such questions concerning the
generation of the Son of God, nor to measure God and His Wisdom by our own nature and
infirmity. Nor is a person at liberty on that account to swerve in his thoughts from the
truth, nor, if any one is perplexed in such inquiries, ought he to disbelieve what is
written. For it is better in perplexity to be silent and believe, than to disbelieve on
account of the perplexity: for he who is perplexed may in some way obtain mercy , because,
though he has questioned, he has yet kept quiet;

but when a man is led by his perplexity into forming for himself doctrines which beseem
not, and utters what is unworthy of God, such daring recurs a sentence without mercy. For
in such perplexities divine Scripture is able to afford him some relief, so as to take
rightly what is written, and to dwell upon our word as an illustration; that as it is
proper to us and is from us, and not a work external to us, so also God's Word is proper
to Him and from Him, and is not a work; and yet is not like the word of man, or else we
must suppose God to be man. For observe, many and various are men's words which pass away
day by day; because those that come before others continue not, but vanish. Now this
happens because their authors are men, and have seasons which pass away, and ideas which
are successive; and what strikes them first and second, that they utter; so that they have
many words, and yet after them all nothing at all remaining; for the speaker ceases, and
his word forthwith is spent. But God's Word is one and the same, and, as it is written,
`The Word of God endureth for ever ,' not changed, not before or after other, but existing
the same always. For it was fitting, whereas God is One, that His Image should be One
also, and His Word One and One His Wisdom .

37. Wherefore I am in wonder how, whereas God is One, these men introduce, after their
private notions, many images and wisdoms and words , and say that the Father's proper and
natural Word is other than the Son, by whom He even made the Son and that He who is really
Son is but notionally called Word, as vine, and way, and door, and tree of life; and that
He is called Wisdom also in name, the proper and true Wisdom of the Father, which coexist
ingenerately with Him, being other than the Son, by which He even made the Son, and named
Him Wisdom as partaking of it. This they have not confined to words, but Arius composed in
his Thalia, and the Sophist Asterius wrote, what we have stated above, as follows:
`Blessed Paul said not that he preached Christ, the Power of God or the Wisdom of God,'
but without the addition of the article, `God's power' and `God's wisdom ,' thus preaching
that the proper Power of God Himself which is natural to Him, and co-existent in Him
ingenerately, is something besides, generative indeed of Christ, and 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 that are made, even His eternal Power and Godhead .' For as no one would say that
the Godhead there mentioned was Christ, but the Father Himself, so, as I think, `His
eternal Power and Godhead also is not the Only Begotten Son, but the Father who begat Him
.' And he teaches that there is another power and wisdom of God, manifested through
Christ. And shortly after the same Asterius says, `However His eternal power and wisdom,
which truth argues to be without beginning and ingenerate, the same must surely be one.
For there are many wisdoms which are one by one created by Him, of whom Christ is the
first-born and only-begotten; all however equally depend on their Possessor.

And all the powers are rightly called His who created and uses them:-as the Prophet says
that the locust, which came to be a divine punishment of human sins, was called by God
Himself not only a power, but a great power; and blessed David in most of the Psalms
invites, not the Angels alone, but the Powers to praise God.' 38. Now are they not worthy
of all hatred for merely uttering this? for if, as they hold, He is Son, not because He is
begotten of the Father and proper to His Essence, but that He is called Word only because
of things rational , and Wisdom because of things gifted with wisdom, and Power because of
things gifted with power, surely He must be named a Son because of those who are made
sons: and perhaps because there are things existing, He has even His existence , in our
notions only . And then after all what is He? for He is none of these Himself, if they are
but His names : and He has but a semblance of being, and is decorated with these names
from us. Rather this is some recklessness of the devil, or worse, if they are not
unwilling that they should truly subsist themselves, but think that God's Word is but in
name. Is not this portentous, to say that Wisdom coexists with the Father, yet not to say
that this. is the Christ, but that there are many created powers and wisdoms, of which one
is the Lord whom they go on to compare to the caterpillar and locust?

and are they not profligate, who, when they hear us say that the Word coexists with the
Father, forthwith murmur out, `Are you not speaking of two Unoriginates?' yet in speaking
themselves of `His Unoriginate Wisdom,' do not see that they have already incurred
themselves the charge which they so rashly urge against us ? Moreover, what folly is there
in that thought of theirs, that the Unoriginate Wisdom coexisting with God is God Himself!
for what coexists does not coexist with itself, but with some one else, as the Evangelists
say of the Lord, that He was together with His disciples; for He was not together with
Himself, but with His disciples;-unless indeed they would say that God is of a compound
nature, having wisdom a constituent or complement of His Essence, unoriginate as well as
Himself , which moreover they pretend to be the framer of the world, that so they may
deprive the Son of the framing of it. For there is nothing they would not maintain, sooner
than hold the truth concerning the Lord.

39. For where at all have they found in divine Scripture, or from whom have they heard,
that there is another Word and another Wisdom besides this Son, that they should frame to
themselves such a doctrine? True, indeed, it is written, `Are not My words like fire, and
like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces ?' and in the Proverbs, `I will make known
My words unto you ;' but these are precepts and commands, which God has spoken to the
saints through His proper and only true Word, concerning which the Psalmist said, `I have
refrained my feet from every evil way, that I may keep Thy words .' Such words accordingly
the Saviour signifies to be distinct from Himself, when He says in His own person, `The
words which I have spoken unto you .' For certainly such words are not offsprings or sons,
nor are there so many words that frame the world, nor so many images of the One God, nor
so many who have become men for us, nor as if from many such there were one who has become
flesh, as John says;

but as being the only Word of God was He preached by John, `The Word was made flesh,' and
`all things were made by Him .' Wherefore of Him alone, our Lord Jesus Christ, and of His
oneness with the Father, are written and set forth the testimonies, both of the Father
signifying that the Son is One, and of the saints, aware of this and saying that the Word
is One, and that He is Only-Begotten. And His works also are set forth; for all things,
visible and invisible, have been brought to be through Him, and `without Him was made not
one thing .' But concerning another or any one else they have not a thought, nor frame to
themselves words or wisdoms, of which neither name nor deed are signified by Scripture,
but are named by these only. For it is their invention and Christ-opposing surmise, and
they make the most of the name of the Word and the Wisdom; and framing to themselves
others, they deny the true Word of God, and the real and only Wisdom of the Father, and
thereby, miserable men, rival the Manichees. For they too, when they behold the works of
God, deny Him the only and true God, and frame to themselves another, whom they can shew
neither by work, nor in any testimony drawn from the divine oracles.

40. Therefore, if neither in the divine oracles is found another wisdom besides this Son,
nor from the fathers have we heard of any such, yet they have confessed and written of the
Wisdom coexisting with the Father unoriginately, proper to Him, and the Framer of the
world, this must be the Son who even according to them is eternally coexistent with the
Father. For He is Framer of all, as it is written, `In Wisdom hast Thou made them ally .'
Nay, Asterius himself, as if forgetting what he wrote before, afterwards, in Caiaphas's
fashion, involuntarily, when urging the Greeks, instead of naming many wisdoms, or the
caterpillar, confesses but one, in these words;-`God the Word is one, but many are the
things rational; and one is the essence and nature of Wisdom, but many are the things wise
and beautiful.' And soon afterwards he says again:-`Who are they whom they honour with the
title of God's children? for they will not say that they too are words, nor maintain that
there are many wisdoms. For it is not possible, whereas the Word is one, and Wisdom has
been set forth as one, to dispense to the multitude of children the Essence of the Word,
and to bestow on them the appellation of Wisdom.' It is not then at all wonderful, that
the Arians should battle with the truth, when they have collisions with their own
principles and conflict with each other, at one time saying that there are many wisdoms,
at another maintaining one;

at one time classing wisdom with the caterpillar, at another saying that it coexists with
the Father and is proper to Him; now that the Father alone is unoriginate, and then again
that His Wisdom and His Power are unoriginate also. And they battle with us for saying
that the Word of God is ever, yet forget their own doctrines, and say themselves that
Wisdom coexists with God unoriginately . So dizzied are they in all these matters, denying
the true Wisdom, and inventing one which is not, as the Manichees who make to themselves
another God, after denying Him that is. 41. But let the other heresies and the Manichees
also know that the Father of the Christ is One, and is Lord and Maker of the creation
through His proper Word. And let the Ariomaniacs know in particular, that the Word of God
is One, being the only Son proper and genuine from His Essence, and having with His Father
the oneness of Godhead indivisible, as we said many times, being taught it by the Saviour
Himself. Since, were it not so, wherefore through Him does the Father create, and in Him
reveal Himself to whom He will, and illuminate them? or why too in the baptismal
consecration is the Son named together with the Father? For if they say that the Father is
not all-sufficient, then their answer is irreligious , but if He be, for this it is right
to say, what is the need of the Son for framing the worlds, or for the holy laver? For
what fellowship is there between creature and Creator? or why is a thing made classed with
the Maker in the consecration of all of us? or why, as you hold, is faith in one Creator
and in one creature delivered to us? for if it was that we might be joined to the Godhead,
what need of the creature? but if that we might be united to the Son a creature,
superfluous, according to you, is this naming of the Son in Baptism, for God who made Him
a Son is able to make us sons also.

Besides, if the Son be a creature, the nature of rational creatures being one, no help
will come to creatures from a creature , since all need grace from God. We said a few
words just now on the fitness that all things should be made by Him; but since the course
of the discussion has led us also to mention holy Baptism, it is necessary to state, as I
think and believe, that the Son is named with the Father, not as if the Father were not
all-sufficient, not without meaning, and by accident; but, since He is God's Word and own
Wisdom, and being His Radiance, is ever with the Father, therefore it is impossible, if
the Father bestows grace, that He should not give it in the Son, for the Son is in the
Father as the radiance in the light. For, not as if in need, but as a Father in His own
Wisdom hath God rounded the earth, and made all things in the Word which is from Him, and
in the Son confirms the Holy Laver. For where the Father is, there is the Son, and where
the light, there the radiance; and as what the Father worketh, He worketh through the Son
, and the Lord Himself says, `What I see the Father do, that do I also;' so also when
baptism is given, whom the Father baptizes, him the Son baptizes; and whom the Son
baptizes, he is consecrated in the Holy Ghost .

And again as when the sun shines, one might say that the radiance illuminates, for the
light is one and indivisible, nor can be detached, so where the Father is or is named,
there plainly is the Son also; and is the Father named in Baptism? then must the Son be
named with Him . 42. Therefore, when He made His promise to the saints, He thus spoke; `I
and the Father will come, and make Our abode in him;' and again, `that, as I and Thou are
One, so they may be one in Us.' And the grace given is one, given from the Father in the
Son, as Paul writes in every Epistle, `Grace unto you, and peace from God our Father and
the Lord Jesus Christ .' For the light must be with the ray, and the radiance must be
contemplated together with its own light. Whence the Jews, as denying the Son as well as
they, have not the Father either; for, as having left the `Fountain of Wisdom ,' as Baruch
reproaches them, they put from them the Wisdom springing from it, our Lord Jesus Christ
(for `Christ,' says the Apostle, is `God's power and God's wisdom ),' when they said, `We
have no king but Caesar .' The Jews then have the penal award of their denial; for their
city as well as their reasoning came to nought. And these too hazard the fulness of the
mystery, I mean Baptism;

for if the consecration is given to us into the Name of Father and Son, and they do not
confess a true Father, because they deny what is from Him and like His Essence, and deny
also the true Son, and name another of their own framing as created out of nothing, is not
the rite administered by them altogether empty and unprofitable, making a show, but in
reality being no help towards religion? For the Arians do not baptize into Father and Son,
but into Creator and creature, and into Maker and work . And as a creature is other than
the Son, so the Baptism, which is supposed to be given by them, is other than the truth,
though they pretend to name the Name of the Father and the Son, because of the words of
Scripture, For not he who simply says, `O Lord,' gives Baptism; but he who with the Name
has also the right faith . On this account therefore our Saviour also did not simply
command to baptize, but first says, `Teach;' then thus: `Baptize into the Name of Father,
and Son, and Holy Ghost;' that the right faith might follow upon learning, and together
with faith might come the consecration of Baptism.

43. There are many other heresies too, which use the words only, but not in a right sense,
as I have said, nor with sound faith , and in consequence the water which they administer
is unprofitable, as deficient in piety, so that he who is sprinkled by them is rather
polluted by irreligion than redeemed. So Gentiles also, though the name of God is on their
lips, incur the charge of Atheism , because they know not the real and very God, the
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. So Manichees and Phrygians , and the disciples of the
Samosatene, though using the Names, nevertheless are heretics, and the Arians follow in
the same course, though they read the words of Scripture, and use the Names, yet they too
mock those who receive the rite from them, being more irreligious than the other heresies,
and advancing beyond them, and making them seem innocent by their own recklessness of
speech. For these other heresies lie against the truth in some certain respect, either
erring concerning the Lord's Body, as if He did not take flesh of Mary, or as if He has
not died at all, nor become man, but only appeared, and was not truly, and seemed to have
a body when He had not, and seemed to have the shape of man, as visions in a dream; but
the Arians are without disguise irreligious against the Father Himself.

For hearing from the Scriptures that His Godhead is represented in the Son as in an image,
they blaspheme, saying, that it is a creature, and everywhere concerning that Image, they
carry about with them the phrase, `He was not,' as mud in a wallet , and spit it forth as
serpents their venom. Then, whereas their doctrine is nauseous to all men, forthwith, as a
support against its fall, they prop up the heresy with human patronage, that the simple,
at the sight or even by the fear may overlook the mischief of their perversity. Right
indeed is it to pity their dupes; well is it to weep over them, for that they sacrifice
their own interest for that immediate phantasy which pleasures furnish, and forfeit their
future hope. In thinking to be baptized into the name of one who exists not, they will
receive nothing; and ranking themselves with a creature, from the creation they will have
no help, and believing in one unlike and foreign to the Father in essence, to the Father
they will not be joined, not having His own Son by nature, who is from Him, who is in the
Father, and in whom the Father is, as He Himself has said; but being led astray by them,
the wretched men henceforth remain destitute and stripped of the Godhead. For this
phantasy of earthly goods will not follow them upon their death;

nor when they see the Lord whom they have denied, sitting on His Father's throne, and
judging quick and dead, will they be able to call to their help any one of those who have
now deceived them; for they shall see them also at the judgment-seat, repenting for their
deeds of sin and irreligion.

CHAPTER XIX. TEXTS EXPLAINED; SIXTHLY, PROVERBS VIII. 22.

Proverbs are of a figurative nature, and must be interpreted as such. We must interpret
them, and in particular this passage, by the Regula Fidei. `He created me' not equivalent
to `I am a creature.' Wisdom a creature so far forth as Its human body. Again, if He is a
creature, it is as `a beginning of ways,' an office which, though not an attribute, is a
consequence, of a higher and divine nature. And it is `for the works,' which implied the
works existed, and therefore much more He, before He was created. Also `the Lord' not the
Father `created' Him, which implies the creation was that of a servant. 44. We have gone
through thus much before the passage in the Proverbs, resisting the insensate fables which
their hearts have invented, that they may know that the Son of God ought not to be called
a creature, and may learn lightly to read what admits in truth of a right explanation. For
it is written, `The Lord created me a beginning of His ways, for His works ;' since,
however, these are proverbs, and it is expressed in the way of proverbs, we must not
expound them nakedly in their first sense, but we must inquire into the person, and thus
religiously put the sense on it. For what is said in proverbs, is not said plainly, but is
put forth latently , as the Lord Himself has taught us in the Gospel according to John,
saying, `These things have I spoken unto you in proverbs, but the time cometh when I shall
no more speak unto you in proverbs, but openly .' Therefore it is necessary to unfold the
sense of what is said, and to seek it as something hidden, and not nakedly to expound as
if the meaning were spoken `plainly,' lest by a false interpretation we wander from the
truth.

If then what is written be about Angel, or any other of things originate, as concerning
one of us who are works, let it be said, `created me;' but if it be the Wisdom of God, in
whom all things originate have been framed, that speaks concerning Itself, what ought we
to understand but that `He created' means nothing contrary to `He begat?' Nor, as
forgetting that It is Creator and Framer, or ignorant of the difference between the
Creator and the creatures, does It number Itself among the creatures; but It signifies a
certain sense, as in proverbs, not `plainly,' but latent; which It inspired the saints to
use in prophecy, while soon after It doth Itself give the meaning of `He created' in other
but parallel expressions, saying, `Wisdom made herself a house .' Now it is plain that our
body is Wisdom's house , which It took on Itself to become man; hence consistently does
John say, `The Word was made flesh ;' and by Solomon Wisdom says of Itself with cautious
exactness , not `I am a creature,' but only `The Lord created me a beginning of His ways
for His works ,' yet not `created me that I might have being,' nor `because I have a
creature's beginning and origin.'

45. For in this passage, not as signifying the Essence of His Godhead, nor His own
everlasting and genuine generation from the Father, has the Word spoken by Solomon, but on
the other hand His manhood and Economy towards us. And, as I said before, He has not said
`I am a creature,' or `I became a creature,' but only `He created .' For the creatures,
having a created essence, are originate, and are said to be created, and of course the
creature is created: but this mere term `He created' does not necessarily signify the
essence or the generation, but indicates something else as coming to pass in Him of whom
it speaks, and not simply that He who is said to be created, is at once in His Nature and
Essence a creature . And this difference divine Scripture recognises, saying concerning
the creatures, `The earth is full of Thy creation,' and `the creation itself groaneth
together and travaileth together ;' and in the Apocalypse it says, `And the third part of
the creatures in the sea died which had life;' as also Paul says, `Every creature of God
is good, and nothing is to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving ;' and in the
book of Wisdom it is written, `Having ordained man through Thy wisdom, that he should have
dominion over the creatures which Thou hast made .' And these, being creatures, are also
said to be created, as we may further hear from the Lord, who says, `He who created them,
made them male and female ;' and from Moses in the Song, who writes, `Ask now of the days
that are past, which were before thee since the day that God created man upon the earth,
and from the one side of heaven unto the other .' And Paul in Colossians, `Who is the
Image of the Invisible God, the Firstborn of every creature, for in Him were all things
created that are in heaven, and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether they be
thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created through Him,
and for Him, and He is before all .'

46. That to be called creatures, then, and to be created belongs to things which have by
nature a created essence, these passages are sufficient to remind us, though Scripture is
full of the like; on the other hand that the single word `He created' does not simply
denote the essence and mode of generation, David shews in the Psalm, `This shall be
written for another generation, and the people that is created shall praise the Lord ;'
and again, `Create in me a clean heart, O God ;' and Paul in Ephesians says, `Having
abolished the law of commandments contained in ordinances, for to create in Himself of two
one new man ;' and again, `Put ye on the new man, which after God is created in
righteousness and true holiness .' For neither David spoke of any people created in
essence, nor prayed to have another heart than that he had, but meant renovation according
to God and renewal; nor did Paul signify two persons created in essence in the Lord, nor
again did he counsel us to put on any other man; but he called the life according to
virtue the `man after God,' and by the `created' in Christ he meant the two people who are
renewed in Him.

Such too is the language of the book of Jeremiah; `The Lord created a new salvation for a
planting, in which salvation men shall walk to and fro ;' and in thus speaking, he does
not mean any essence of a creature, but prophesies of the renewal of salvation among men,
which has taken place in Christ for us. Such then being the difference between `the
creatures' and the single word `He created,' if you find anywhere in divine Scripture the
Lord called `creature,' produce it and fight; but if it is nowhere written that He is a
creature, only He Himself says about Himself in the Proverbs, `The Lord created me,' shame
upon you, both on the ground of the distinction aforesaid and for that the diction is like
that of proverbs; and accordingly let `He created' be understood, not of His being a
creature, but of that human nature which became His, for to this belongs creation. Indeed
is it not evidently unfair in you, when David and Paul say `He created,' then indeed not
to understand it of the essence and the generation, but the renewal; yet, when the Lord
says `He created' to number His essence with the creatures? and again when Scripture says,
`Wisdom built her an house, she set it upon seven pillars ,' to understand `house'
allegorically, but to take `He created' as it stands, and to fasten on it the idea of
creature?

and neither His being Framer of all has had any weight with you, nor have you feared His
being the sole and proper Offspring of the Father, but recklessly, as if you had enlisted
against Him, do ye fight, and think less of Him than of men. 47. For the very passage
proves that it is only an invention of your own to call the Lord creature For the Lord,
knowing His own Essence to be the Only-begotten Wisdom and Offspring of the Father, and
other than things originate and natural creatures, says in love to man, `The Lord created
me a beginning of His ways,' as if to say, `My Father hath prepared for Me a body, and has
created Me for men in behalf of their salvation.' For, as when John says, `The Word was
made flesh ,' we do not conceive the whole Word Himself to be flesh , but to have put on
flesh and become man, and on hearing, `Christ hath become a curse for us,' and `He hath
made Him sin for us who knew no sin ,' we do not simply conceive this, that whole Christ
has become curse and sin, but that He has taken on Him the curse which lay against us (as
the Apostle has said, `Has redeemed us from the curse,' and `has carried,' as Isaiah has
said, `our sins,' and as Peter has written, `has borne them in the body on the wood ');

so, if it is said in the Proverbs `He created,' we must not conceive that the whole Word
is in nature a creature, but that He put on the created body and that God created Him for
our sakes, preparing for Him the created body, as it is written, for us, that in Him we
might be capable of being renewed and deified. What then deceived you, O senseless, to
call the Creator a creature? or whence did you purchase for you this new thought, to
parade it ? For the Proverbs say `He created,' but they call not the Son creature, but
Offspring; and, according to the distinction in Scripture aforesaid of `He created' and
`creature,' they acknowledge, what is by nature proper to the Son, that He is the Only-
begotten Wisdom and Framer of the creatures, and when they say `He created,' they say it
not in respect of His Essence, but signify that He was becoming a beginning of many ways;
so that `He created' is in contrast to `Offspring,' and His being called the `Beginning of
ways ' to His being the Only-begotten Word.

48. For if He is Offspring, how call ye Him creature? for no one says that He begets what
He creates, nor calls His proper offspring creatures; and again, if He is Only-begotten,
how becomes He `beginning of the ways?' for of necessity, if He was created a beginning of
all things, He is no longer alone, as having those who came into being after Him. For
Reuben, when he became a beginning of the children , was not only-begotten, but in time
indeed first, but in nature and relationship one among those who came after him. Therefore
if the Word also is `a beginning of the ways,' He must be such as the ways are, and the
ways must be such as the Word, though in point of time He be created first of them. For
the beginning or initiative of a city is such as the other parts of the city are, and the
members too being joined to it, make the city whole and one, as the many members of one
body; nor does one part of it make, and another come to be, and is subject to the former,
but all the city equally has its government and constitution from its maker.

If then the Lord is in such sense created as a `beginning' of all things, it would follow
that He and all other things together make up the unity of the creation, and He neither
differs from all others, though He become the `beginning' of all, nor is He Lord of them,
though older in point of time; but He has the same manner of framing and the same Lord as
the rest. Nay, if He be a creature, as you hold, how can He be created sole and first at
all, so as to be beginning of all? when it is plain from what has been said, that among
the creatures not any is of a constant nature and of prior formation, but each has its
origination with all the rest, however it may excel others in glory. For as to the
separate stars or the great lights, not this appeared first, and that second, but in one
day and by the same command, they were all called into being. And such was the original
formation of the quadrupeds, and of birds, and fishes, and cattle, and plants; thus too
has the race made after God's Image come to be, namely men; for though Adam only was
formed out of earth, yet in him was involved the succession of the whole race.

49. And from the visible creation, we clearly discern that His invisible things also,
`being perceived by the things that are made ,' are not independent of each other; for it
was not first one and then another, but all at once were constituted after their kind. For
the Apostle did not number individually, so as to say `whether Angel, or Throne, or
Dominion, or Authority,' but he mentions together all according to their kind, `whether
Angels, or Archangels, or Principalities :' for in this way is the origination of the
creatures. If then, as I have said, the Word were creature He must have been brought into
being, not first of them, but with all the other Powers, though in glory He excel the rest
ever so much. For so we find it to be in their case, that at once they came to be, with
neither first nor second, and they differ from each other in glory, some on the right of
the throne, some all around, and some on the left, but one and all praising and standing
in service before the Lord . Therefore if the Word be creature He would not be first or
beginning of the rest yet if He be before all, as indeed He is, and is Himself alone First
and Son, it does not follow that He is beginning of all things as to His Essence , for
what is the beginning of all is in the number of all.

And if He is not such a beginning, then neither is He a creature, but it is very plain
that He differs in essence and nature from the creatures, and is other than they, and is
Likeness and Image of the sole and true God, being Himself sole also. Hence He is not
classed with creatures in Scripture, but David rebukes those who dare even to think of Him
as such, saying, `Who among the gods is like unto the Lord ?' and `Who is like unto the
Lord among the sons of God?' and Baruch, `This is our God, and another shall not be
reckoned wills Him .' For the One creates, and the rest are created; and the One is the
own Word and Wisdom of the Father's Essence, and through this Word things which came to
be, which before existed not, were made. 50. Your famous assertion then, that the Son is a
creature, is not true, but is your fantasy only; nay Solomon convicts you of having many
times slandered him. For he has not called Him creature, but God's Offspring and Wisdom,
saying, `God in Wisdom established the earth,' and `Wisdom built her an house .' And the
very passage in question proves your irreligious spirit; for it is written, `The Lord
created me a beginning of His ways for His works.' Therefore if He is before all things,
yet says `He created me' (not `that I might make the works,' but) `for the works,' unless
`He created' relates to something later than Himself, He will seem later than the works,
finding them on His creation already in existence before Him, for the sake of which He is
also brought into being. And if so, how is He before all things notwithstanding? and how
were all things made through Him and consist in Him? for behold, you say that the works
consisted before Him, for which He is created and sent. But it is not so; perish the
thought! false is the supposition of the heretics. For the Word of God is not creature but
Creator; and says in the manner of proverbs, `He created me' when He put on created flesh.
And something besides may be understood from the passage itself; for, being Son and having
God for His Father, for He is His proper Offspring, yet here He names the Father Lord;

not that He was servant, but because He took the servant's form. For it became Him, on the
one hand being the Word from the Father, to call God Father: for this is proper to son
towards father; on the other, having come to finish the work, and taken a servant's form,
to name the Father Lord. And this difference He Himself has taught by an apt distinction,
saying in the Gospels, `I thank Thee, O Father,' and then, `Lord of heaven and earth .'
For He calls God His Father, but of the creatures He names Him Lord; as shewing clearly
from these words, that, when He put on the creature , then it was He called the Father
Lord. For in the prayer of David the Holy. Spirit marks the same distinction, saying in
the Psalms, `Give Thy strength unto Thy Child, and help the Son of Thine handmaid .' For
the natural and true child of God is one, and the sons of the handmaid, that is, of the
nature of things originate, are other. Wherefore the One, as Son, has the Father's might;
but the rest are in need of salvation.51. (But if, because He was called child, they idly
talk, let them know that both Isaac was named Abraham's child, and the son of the
Shunamite was called young child. Reasonably then, we being servants, when He became as
we, He too calls the Father Lord, as we do;

and this He has so done from love to man, that we too, being servants by nature, and
receiving the Spirit of the Son, might have confidence to call Him by grace Father, who is
by nature our Lord. But as we, in calling the Lord Father, do not deny our servitude by
nature (for we are His works, and it is `He that hath made us, and not we ourselves '), so
when the Son, on taking the servant's form, says, `The Lord created me a beginning of His
ways,' let them not deny the eternity of His Godhead, and that `in the beginning was the
Word,' and `all things were made by Him,' and `in Him all things were created .'

CHAPTER XX. TEXTS EXPLAINED; SIXTHLY, PROVERBS VIII. 22 CONTINUED.

Our Lord is said to be created `for the works,' i.e. with a particular purpose, which no
mere creatures are ever said to be. Parallel of Isai. xlix. 5, &c. When His manhood is
spoken of, a reason for it is added; not so when His Divine Nature; Texts in proof. 51
(continued). For the passage in the Proverbs, as I have said before, signifies, not the
Essence, but the manhood of the Word; for if He says that He was created `for the works,'
He shews His intention of signifying, not His Essence, but the Economy which took place
`for His works,' which comes second to being. For things which are in formation and
creation are made specially that they may be and exist , and next they have to do whatever
the Word bids them, as may be seen in the case of all things. For Adam was created, not
that He might work, but that first he might be man; for it was after this that he received
the command to work. And Noah was created, not because of the ark, but that first he might
exist and be a man; for after this he received commandment to prepare the ark. And the
like will be found in every case on inquiring into it;-thus the great Moses first was made
a man, and next was entrusted with the government of the people. Therefore here too we
must suppose the like; for thou seest, that the Word is not created into existence, but,
`In the beginning was the Word,' and He is afterwards sent `for the works' and the Economy
towards them. For before the works were made, the Son was ever, nor was there yet need
that He should be created;

but when the works were created and need arose afterwards of the Economy for their
restoration, then it was that the Word took upon Himself this condescension and
assimilation to the works; which He has shewn us by the word `He created.' And through the
Prophet Isaiah willing to signify the like, He says again: `And now thus saith the Lord,
who formed me from the womb to be His servant, to gather together Jacob unto Him and
Israel, I shall be brought together and be glorified before the Lord .' 52. See here too,
He is formed, not into existence, but in order to gather together the tribes, which were
in existence before He was formed. For as in the former passage stands `He created,' so in
this `He formed;' and as there `for the works,' so here `to gather together;' so that in
every point of view it appears that `He created' and `He formed' are said after `the Word
was.' For as before His forming the tribes existed, for whose sake He was formed, so does
it appear that the works exist, for which He was created. And when `in the beginning was
the Word,' not yet were the works, as I have said before; but when the works were made and
the need required, then `He created' was said; and as if some son, when the servants were
lost, and in the hands of the enemy by their own carelessness, and need was urgent, were
sent by his father to succour and recover them, and on setting out were to put over him
the like dress with them, and should fashion himself as they, test the capturers,
recognising him as the master, should take to flight and prevent his descending to those
who were hidden under the earth by them;

and then were any one to inquire of him, why he did so, were to make answer, `My Father
thus formed and prepared me for his works,' while in thus speaking, he neither implies
that he is a servant nor one of the works, nor speaks of the beginning of His origination,
but of the subsequent charge given him over the works,-in the same way the Lord also,
having put over Him our flesh, and `being found in fashion as a man,' if He were
questioned by those who saw Him thus and marvelled, would say, `The Lord created Me the
beginning of His ways for His works,' and `He formed Me to gather together Israel.' This
again the Spirit foretells in the Psalms, saying, `Thou didst set Him over the works of
Thine hands ;' which elsewhere the Lord signified of Himself, `I am set as King by Him
upon His holy hill of Sion .' And as, when He shone in the body upon Sion, He had not His
beginning of existence or of reign, but being God's Word and everlasting King, He
vouchsafed that His kingdom should shine in a human way in Sion, that redeeming them and
us from the sin which reigned in them, He might bring them under His Father's Kingdom, so,
on being set `for the works,' He is not set for things which did not yet exist, but for
such as already were and needed restoration.

53. `He created' then and `He formed' and `He set,' having the same meaning, do not denote
the beginning of His being, or of His essence as created, but His beneficent renovation
which came to pass for us. Accordingly, though He thus speaks, yet He taught also that He
Himself existed before this, when He said, `Before Abraham came to be, I am ;' and `when
He prepared the heavens, I was present with Him;' and `I was with Him disposing things .'
And as He Himself was before Abraham came to be, and Israel had come into being after
Abraham, and plainly He exists first and is formed afterwards, and His forming signifies
not His beginning of being but His taking manhood, wherein also He collects together the
tribes of Israel; so, as `being always with the Father,' He Himself is Framer of the
creation, and His works are evidently later than Himself, and `He created' signifies, not
His beginning of being, but the Economy which took place for the works, which He effected
in the flesh. For it became Him, being other than the works, nay rather their Framer, to
take upon Himself their renovation , that, whereas He is created for us, all things may be
now created in Him. For when He said `He created,' He forthwith added the reason, naming
`the works,' that His creation for the works might signify His becoming man for their
renovation. And this is usual with divine Scripture ;

for when it signifies the fleshly origination of the Son, it adds also the cause for which
He became man; but when he speaks or His servants declare anything of His Godhead, all is
said in simple diction, and with an absolute sense, and without reason being added. For He
is the Father's Radiance; and as the Father is, but not for any reason, neither must we
seek the reason of that Radiance. Thus it is written, `In the beginning was the Word, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was God ;' and the wherefore it assigns not ; but when
`the Word was made flesh ,' then it adds the reason why, saying, `And dwelt among us.' And
again the Apostle saying, `Who being in the form of God,' has not introduced the reason,
till `He took on Him the form of a servant;' for then he continues, `He humbled Himself
unto death, even the death of the cross ;' for it was for this that He both became flesh
and took the form of a servant.

54. And the Lord Himself has spoken many things in proverbs; but when giving us notices
about Himself, He has spoken absolutely ; `I 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, and I am the
Light of the world,' and, `I am the Truth ;' not setting down in every case the reason,
nor the wherefore, lest He should seem second to those things for which He was made. For
that reason would needs take precedence of Him, without which not even He Himself had come
into being. Paul, for instance, `separated an Apostle for the Gospel, which the Lord had
promised afore by the Prophets ,' was thereby made subordinate to the Gospel, of which he
was made minister, and John, being chosen to prepare the Lord's way, was made subordinate
to the Lord; but the Lord, not being made subordinate to any reason why He should be Word,
save only that He is the Father's Offspring and Only-begotten Wisdom, when He becomes man,
then assigns the reason why He is about to take flesh. For the need of man preceded His
becoming man, apart from which He had not put on flesh . And what the need was for which
He became man, He Himself thus signifies, `I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own
will, but the will of Him that sent Me.

And this is the will of Him which hath sent Me, that of all which He hath given Me, I
should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of
My Father, that every one which seeth the Son and believeth on Him may have everlasting
life, and I will raise him up at the last day .' And again; `I am come a light into the
world, that whosoever believeth on Me, should not abide in darkness .' And again he says;
`To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear
witness unto the truth .' And John has written: `For this was manifested the Son of God,
that He might destroy the works of the devil .' 55. To give a witness then, and for our
sakes to undergo death, to raise man up and destroy the works of the devil , the Saviour
came, and this is the reason of His incarnate presence. For otherwise a resurrection had
not been, unless there had been death; and how had death been, unless He had had a mortal
body? This the Apostle, learning from Him, thus sets forth, `Forasmuch then as the
children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise took part of the same;
that through death He might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the
devil, and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to
bondage .' And, `Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead .'
And again, `For 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;

that the ordinance of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh but
after the Spirit .' And John says, `For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the
world, but that the world through Him might be saved .' And again, the Saviour has spoken
in His own person, `For judgment am I come into this world, that they who see not might
see, and that they which see might become blind .' Not for Himself then, but for our
salvation, and to abolish death, and to condemn sin, and to give sight to the blind, and
to raise up all from the dead, has He come; but if not for Himself, but for us, by
consequence not for Himself but for us is He created. But if not for Himself is He
created, but for us, then He is not Himself a creature, but, as having put on our flesh,
He uses such language. And that this is the sense of the Scriptures, we may learn from the
Apostle, who says in Ephesians, `Having broken down the middle wall of partition between
us, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in
ordinances, to create in Himself of twain one new man, so making peace .' But if in Him
the twain are created, and these are in His body, reasonably then, bearing the twain in
Himself, He is as if Himself created;

for those who were created in Himself He made one, and He was in them, as they. And thus,
the two being created in Him, He may say suitably, `The Lord created me.' For as by
receiving our infirmities, He is said to be infirm Himself, though not Himself infirm, for
He is the Power of God, and He became sin for us and a curse, though not having sinned
Himself, but because He Himself bare our sins and our curse, so , by creating us in Him,
let Him say, `He created me for the works,' though not Himself a creature. 56. For if, as
they hold, the Essence of the Word being of created nature, therefore He says, `The Lord
created me,' being a creature, He was not created for us; but if He was not created for
us, we are not created in Him; and, if not created in Him, we have Him not in ourselves
but externally; as, for instance, as receiving instruction from Him as from a teacher .
And it being so with us, sin has not lost its reign over the flesh, being inherent and not
cast out of it. But the Apostle opposes such a doctrine a little before, when he says,
`For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus ;' and if in Christ we are created,
then it is not He who is created, but we in Him; and thus the words `He created' are for
our sake. For because of our need, the Word, though being Creator, endured words which are
used of creatures; which are not proper to Him, as being the Word, but are ours who are
created in Him.

And as, since the Father is always, so is His Word, and always being, always says `I was
daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him ,' and `I am in the Father and the Father
in Me ;' so, when for our need He became man, consistently does He use language, as
ourselves, `The Lord hath created Me,' that, by His dwelling in the flesh, sin might
perfectly be expelled from the flesh, and we might have a free mind . For what ought He,
when made man, to say? `In the beginning I was man?' this were neither suitable to Him nor
true; and as it beseemed not to say this, so it is natural and proper in the case of man
to say, `He created' and `He made' Him. On this account then the reason of `He created' is
added, namely, the need of the works; and where the reason is added, surely the reason
rightly explains the lection.

Thus here, when He says `He created,' He sets down the cause, `the works;' on the other
hand, when He signifies absolutely the generation from the Father, straightway He adds,
`Before all the hills He begets me ;' but He does not add the `wherefore,' as in the case
of `He created,' saying, `for the works,' but absolutely, `He begets me,' as in the text,
`In the beginning was the Word .' For, though no works had been created, still `the Word'
of God `was,' and `the Word was God.' And His becoming man would not have taken place, had
not the need of men become a cause. The Son then is not a creature.


FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS
==================================

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

CHAPTER XXI. TEXTS EXPLAINED; SIXTHLY, PROVERBS VIII. 22, CONTINUED.

Our Lord not said in Scripture to be `created,' or the works to be `begotten.' `In the
beginning' means in the case of the works `from the beginning.' Scripture passages
explained. We are made by God first, begotten next; creatures by nature, sons by grace.
Christ begotten first, made or created afterwards. Sense of `First-born of the dead;' of
`First-born among many brethren;' of `First-born of all creation,' contrasted with `Only-
begotten.' Further interpretation of `beginning of ways,' and `for the works.' Why a
creature could not redeem; why redemption was necessary at all. Texts which contrast the
Word and the works. 57. For had He been a creature, He had not said, `He begets me,' for
the creatures are from without, and are works of the Maker; but the Offspring is not from
without nor a work, but from the Father, and proper to His Essence. Wherefore they are
creatures; this God's Word and Only-begotten Son. For instance, Moses did not say of the
creation, `In the beginning He begat,' nor `In the beginning was,' but `In the beginning
God created the heaven and the earth .' Nor did David say in the Psalm, `Thy hands have
"begotten me,"' but `made me and fashioned me ,' everywhere applying the word `made' to
the creatures. But to the Son contrariwise; for he has not said `I made,' but `I begat ,'
and `He begets me,' and `My heart uttered a good Word .' And in the instance of the
creation, `In the beginning He made;' but in the instance of the Son, `In the beginning
was the Word .' And there is this difference, that the creatures are made upon the
beginning, and have a beginning of existence connected with an interval;

wherefore also what is said of them, `In the beginning He made,' is as much as saying of
them, `From the beginning He made:'-as the Lord, knowing that which He had made, taught,
when He silenced the Pharisees, with the words, `He which made them from the beginning,
made them male and female ;' for from some beginning, when they were not yet, were
originate things brought into being and created. This too the Holy Spirit has signified in
the Psalms, saying, `Thou, Lord, at the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth ;'
and again, `O think upon Thy congregation which Thou hast purchased from the beginning ;'
now it is plain that what takes place at the beginning, has a beginning of creation, and
that from some beginning God purchased His congregation. And that `In the beginning He
made,' from his saying `made,' means `began to make,' Moses himself shews by saying, after
the completion of all things, `And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because
that in it He had rested from all His work which God began to make .' Therefore the
creatures began to be made; but the Word of God, not having beginning of being, certainly
did not begin to be, nor begin to come to be, but was ever. And the works have their
beginning in their making, and their beginning precedes their coming to be; but the Word,
not being of things which come to be, rather comes to be Himself the Framer of those which
have a beginning.

And the being of things originate is measured by their becoming , and from some beginning
does God begin to make them through the Word, that it may be known that they were not
before their origination; but the Word has His being, in no other beginning than the
Father, whom they allow to be without beginning, so that He too exists without beginning?
the Father, being His Offspring, not His creature. 58. Thus does divine Scripture
recognise the difference between the Offspring and things made, and shew that the
Offspring is a Son, not begun from any beginning, but eternal; but that the thing made, as
an external work of the Maker, began to come into being. John therefore delivering divine
doctrine about the Son, and knowing the difference of the phrases, said not, `In the
beginning has become' or `been made,' but `In the beginning was the Word;' that we might
understand `Offspring' by `was,' and not account of Him by intervals, but believe the Son
always and eternally to exist. And with these proofs, how, O Arians, misunderstanding the
passage in Deuteronomy, did you venture a fresh act of irreligion against the Lord, saying
that `He is a work,' or `creature,' or indeed `offspring?' for offspring and work you take
to mean the same thing; but here too you shall be shewn to be as unlearned as you are
irreligious. Your first passage is this, `Is not He thy Father that bought thee? did He
not make thee and create thee ?' And shortly after in the same Song he says, `God that
begat thee thou didst desert, and forgattest God that nourished thee .' Now the meaning
conveyed in these passages is very remarkable;

for he says not first `He begat,' lest that term should be taken as indiscriminate with
`He made,' and these men should have a pretence for saying, `Moses tells us indeed that
God said from the beginning, "Let Us make man ,"' but he soon after says himself, `God
that begat thee thou didst desert,' as if the terms were indifferent; for offspring and
work are the same. But after the words `bought' and `made,' he has added last of all
`begat,' that the sentence might carry its own interpretation; for in the word `made' he
accurately denotes what belongs to men by nature, to be works and things made; but in the
word `begat' he shews God's lovingkindness exercised towards men after He had created
them. And since they have proved ungrateful upon this, thereupon Moses reproaches them,
saying first, `Do ye thus requite the Lord?' and then adds, `Is not He thy Father that
bought thee? Did He not make thee and create thee ?' And next he says, `They sacrificed
unto devils, not to God, to gods whom they knew not. New gods and strange came up, whom
your fathers knew not; the God that begat thee thou didst desert .'

59. For God not only created them to be men, but called them to be sons, as having
begotten them. For the term `begat' is here as elsewhere expressive of a Son, as He says
by the Prophet, `I begat sons and exalted them;' and generally, when Scripture wishes to
signify a son, it does so, not by the term `created,' but undoubtedly by that of `begat.'
And this John seems to say, `He gave to them power to become children of God, even to them
that believe on His Name; which were begotten not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh,
nor of the will of man, but of God .' And here too the cautious distinction is well kept
up, for first he says `become,' because they are not called sons by nature but by
adoption; then he says `were begotten,' because they too had received at any rate the name
of son. But the People, as says the Prophet, `despised' their Benefactor. But this is
God's kindness to man, that of whom He is Maker, of them according to grace He afterwards
becomes Father also; becomes, that is, when men, His creatures, receive into their hearts,
as the Apostle says, `the Spirit of His Son, crying, Abba, Father .' And these are they
who, having received the Word, gained power from Him to become sons of God; for they could
not become sons, being by nature creatures, otherwise than by receiving the Spirit of the
natural and true Son.

Wherefore, that this might be, `The Word became flesh,' that He might make man capable of
Godhead. This same meaning may be gained also from the Prophet Malachi, who says, `Hath
not One God created us? Have we not all one Father ?' for first he puts `created,' next
`Father,' to shew, as the other writers, that from the beginning we were creatures by
nature, and God is our Creator through the Word; but afterwards we were made sons, and
thenceforward God the Creator becomes our Father also. Therefore `Father' is proper to the
Son; and not `creature,' but `Son' is proper to the Father. Accordingly this passage also
proves, that we are not sons by nature, but the Son who is in us ; and again, that God is
not our Father by nature, but of that Word in us, in whom and because of whom we `cry,
Abba, Father .' And so in like manner, the Father calls them sons in whomsoever He sees
His own Son, and says, `I begat;' since begetting is significant of a Son, and making is
indicative of the works. And thus it is that we are not begotten first, but made; for it
is written, `Let Us make man ;' but afterwards, on receiving the grace of the Spirit, we
are said thenceforth to be begotten also; just as the great Moses in his Song with an
apposite meaning says first `He bought,' and afterwards `He begat;' lest, hearing `He
begat,' they might forget their own original nature;

but that they might know that from the beginning they are creatures, but when according to
grace they are said to be begotten, as sons, still no less than before are men works
according to nature. 60. And that creature and offspring are not the same, but differ from
each other in nature and the signification of the words, the Lord Himself shews even in
the Proverbs. For having said, `The Lord treated me a beginning of His ways;' He has
added, `But before all the hills He begat me.' If then the Word were by nature and in His
Essence a creature, and there were no difference between offspring and creature, He would
not have added, `He begat me,' but had been satisfied with `He created,' as if that term
implied `He begat;' but, as it is, after saying, `He created me a beginning of His ways
for His works,' He has added, not simply `begat me,' but with the connection of the
conjunction `But,' as guarding thereby the term `created,' when he says, `But before all
the hills He begat me.' For `begat me' succeeding in such close connection to `created
me,' makes the meaning one, and shews that `created' is said with an object , but that
`begat me' is prior to `created me.' For as, if He had said the reverse, `The Lord begat
me,' and went on, `But before the hills He created me,' `created' would certainly precede
`begat,' so having said first `created,' and then added `But before all the hills He begat
me,' He necessarily shews that `begat' preceded `created.' For in saying, `Before all lie
begat me,' He intimates that He is other than all things;

it having been shewn to be true in an earlier part of this book, that no one creature was
made before another, but all things originate subsisted at once together upon one and the
same command . Therefore neither do the words which follow `created,' also follow `begat
me;' but in the case of `created' is added `beginning of ways,' but of `begat me,' He says
not, `He begat me as a beginning,' but `before all He begat me.' But He who is before all
is not a beginning of all, but is other than all ; but if other than all (in which `all'
the beginning of all is included), it follows that He is other than the creatures; and it
becomes a clear point, that the Word, being other than all things and before all,
afterwards is created `a beginning of the ways for works,' because He became man, that, as
the Apostle has said, He who is the `Beginning' and `First-born from the dead, in all
things might have the preeminence .'

61. Such then being the difference between `created' and `begat me,' and between
`beginning of ways' and `before all,' God, being first Creator, next, as has been said,
becomes Father of men, because of His Word dwelling in them. But in the case of the Word
the reverse; for God, being His Father by nature, becomes afterwards both His Creator and
Maker, when the Word puts on that flesh which was created and made, and becomes man. For,
as men, receiving the Spirit of the Son, become children through Him, so the Word of God,
when He Himself puts on the flesh of man, then is said both to be created and to have been
made. If then we are by nature sons, then is He by nature creature and work; but if we
become sons by adoption and grace, then has the Word also, when in grace towards us He
became man, said, `The Lord created me.' And in the next place, when He put on a created
nature and became like us in body, reasonably was He therefore called both our Brother and
`First-born .' For though it was after us that He was made man for us, and our brother by
similitude of body, still He is therefore called and is the `First-born' of us, because,
all men being lost, according to the transgression of Adam, His flesh before all others
was saved and liberated, as being the Word's body ; and henceforth we, becoming
incorporate with It, are saved after Its pattern.

For in It the Lord becomes our guide to the Kingdom of Heaven and to His own Father,
saying, `I am the way' and `the door ,' and `through Me all must enter.' Whence also is He
said to be `First-born from the dead ,' not that He died before us, for we had died first;
but because having undergone death for us and abolished it, He was the first to rise, as
man, for our sakes raising His own Body. Henceforth He having risen, we too from Him and
because of Him rise in due course from the dead. 62. But if He is also called `First-born
of the creation ,' still this is not as if He were levelled to the creatures, and only
first of them in point of time (for how should that be, since He is `Only-begotten?'), but
it is because of the Word's condescension to the creatures, according to which He has
become the `Brother' of `many.' For the term `Only-begotten' is used where there are no
brethren, but `First-born ' because of brethren. Accordingly it is nowhere written in the
Scriptures, `the first-born of God,' nor `the creature of God;' but `Only-begotten' and
`Son' and `Word' and `Wisdom,' refer to Him as proper to the Father . Thus, `We have seen
His glory, the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father ;' and `God sent His Only-
begotten Son ;' and `O Lord, Thy Word endureth for ever ;' and `In the beginning was the
Word, and the Word was with God;' and `Christ the Power of God and the Wisdom of God ;'
and `This is My beloved Son;' and `Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God .' But
`first-born' implied the descent to the creation ; for of it has He been called first-
born; and `He created' implies His grace towards the works, for for them is He created. If
then He is Only-begotten, as indeed He is, `First-born' needs some explanation; but if He
be really First-born, then He is not Only-begotten .

For the same cannot be both Only-begotten and First-born, except in different
relations;-that is, Only-begotten, because of His generation from the Father, as has been
said; and First-born, because of His condescension to the creation and His making the many
His brethren. Certainly, those two terms being inconsistent with each other, one should
say that the attribute of being Only-begotten has justly the preference in the instance of
the Word, in that there is no other Word, or other Wisdom, but He alone is very Son of the
Father. Moreover , as was before said, not in connection with any reason, but absolutely
it is said of Him, `The Only-begotten Son which is in the bosom of the Father ;' but the
word `First-born' has again the creation as a reason in connection with it, which Paul
proceeds to say, `for in Him all things were created .' But if all the creatures were
created in Him, He is other than the creatures, and is not a creature, but the Creator of
the creatures.

63. Not then because He was from the Father was He called `First-born,' but because in Him
the creation came to be; and as before the creation He was the Son, through whom was the
creation, so also before He was called the First-born of the whole creation, not the less
was the Word Himself with God and the Word was God. But this also not understanding, these
irreligious men go about saying, `If He is First-born of all creation, it is plain that He
too is one of the creation.' Senseless men! if He is simply `First-born of the whole
creation,' then He is other than the whole creation; for he says not, `He is First-born
above the rest of the creatures,' lest He be reckoned to be as one of the creatures, but
it is written, `of the whole creation,' that He may appear other than the creation .
Reuben, for instance, is not said to be first-born of all the children of Jacob , but of
Jacob himself and his brethren; lest he should be thought to be some other beside the
children of Jacob. Nay, even concerning the Lord Himself the Apostle says not, `that He
may become First-born of all,' lest He be thought to bear a body other than ours, but
`among many brethren ,' because of the likeness of the flesh. If then the Word also were
one of the creatures, Scripture would have said of Him also that He was First-born of
other creatures;

but in fact, the saints saying that He is `First-born of the whole creation ,' the Son of
God is plainly shewn to be other than the whole creation and not a creature. For if He is
a creature, He will be First-born of Himself. How then is it possible, O Arians, for Him
to be before and after Himself? next, if He is a creature, and the whole creation through
Him came to be, and in Him consists, how can He both create the creation and be one of the
things which consist in Him? Since then such a notion is in itself unseemly, it is proved
against them by the truth, that He is called `First-born among many brethren' because of
the relationship of the flesh, and `First-born from the dead,' because the resurrection of
the dead is from Him and after Him; and `First-born of the whole creation,' because of the
Father's love to man, which brought it to pass that in His Word not, only `all things
consist ,' but the creation itself, of which the Apostle speaks, `waiting for the
manifestation of the sons of God, shall be delivered' one time `from the bondage of
corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God .' Of this creation thus
delivered, the Lord will be First-born, both of it and of all those who are made children,
that by His being called first, those that come after Him may abide , as depending on the
Word as a beginning .

64. And I think that the irreligious men themselves will be shamed from such a thought;
for if the case stands not as we have said, but they will rule it that He is `First-born
of the whole creation' as in essence-a creature among creatures, let them reflect that
they will be conceiving Him as brother and fellow of the things without reason and life.
For of the whole creation these also are parts; and the `First-born' must be first indeed
in point of time but only thus, and in kind and similitude must be the same with all. How
then can they say this without exceeding all measures of irreligion? or who will endure
them, if this is their language? or who can but hate them even imagining such things? For
it is evident to all, that neither for Himself, as being a creature, nor as having any
connection according to essence with the whole creation, has He been called `First-born'
of it: but because the Word, when at the beginning He framed the creatures, condescended
to things originate, that it might be possible for them to come to be. For they could not
have endured His nature, which was untempered splendour, even that of the Father, unless
condescending by the Father's love for man He had supported them and taken hold of them
and brought them into existence ;

and next, because, by this condescension of the Word, the creation too is made a son
through Him, that He might be in all respects `First-born' of it, as has been said, both
in creating, and also in being brought for the sake of all into this very world. For so it
is written, `When He bringeth the First-born into the world, He saith, Let all the Angels
of God worship Him .' Let Christ's enemies hear and tear themselves to pieces, because His
coming into the world is what makes Him called `First-born' of all; and thus the Son is
the Father's `Only-begotten,' because He alone is from Him, and He is the `First-born of
creations,' because of this adoption of all as sons . And as He is First-born among
brethren and rose from the dead `the first fruits of them that slept ;' so, since it
became Him `in all things to have the preeminence ,' therefore He is created `a beginning
of ways,' that we, walking along it and entering through Him who says, `I am the Way' and
`the Door,' and partaking of the knowledge of the Father, may also hear the words,
`Blessed are the undefiled in the Way,' and `Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall
see God .'

65. And thus since the truth declares that the Word is not by nature a creature, it is
fitting now to say, in what sense He is `beginning of ways.' For when the first way, which
was through Adam, was lost, and in place of paradise we deviated unto death, and heard the
words, `Dust thou art, and unto dust shall thou return,' therefore the Word of God, who
loves man, puts on Him created flesh at the Father's will , that whereas the first man had
made it dead through the transgression, He Himself might quicken it in the blood of His
own body , and might open `for us a way new and living,' as the Apostle says, `through the
veil, that is to say, His flesh ;' which he signifies elsewhere thus, `Wherefore, if any
man be in Christ, he is a new creation; old things are passed away, behold all things are
become new .' But if a new creation has come to pass, some one must be first of this
creation; now a man, made of earth only, such as we are become from the transgression, he
could not be. For in the first creation, men had become unfaithful, and through them that
first creation had been lost; and there was need of some one else to renew the first
creation, and preserve the new which had come to be.

Therefore from love to man none other than the Lord, the `beginning' of the new creation,
is created as `the Way,' and consistently says, `The Lord created me a beginning of ways
for His works;' that man might walk no longer according to that first creation, but there
being as it were a beginning of a new creation, and with the Christ `a beginning of its
ways,' we might follow Him henceforth, who says to us, `I am the Way:'-as the blessed
Apostle teaches in Colossians, saying, `He is the Head of the body, the Church, who is the
Beginning, the First-born from the dead, that in all things He might have the
preeminence.' 66. For if, as has been said, because of the resurrection from the dead He
is called a beginning, and then a resurrection took place when He, bearing our flesh, had
given Himself to death for us, it is evident that His words, `He created me a beginning of
ways,' is indicative not of His essence , but of His bodily presence. For to the body
death was proper ; and in like manner to the bodily presence are the words proper, `The
Lord created me a beginning of His ways.' For since the Saviour was thus created according
to the flesh, and had become a beginning of things new created, and had our first fruits,
viz.

that human flesh which He took to Himself, therefore after Him, as is fit, is created also
the people to come, David saying, `Let this be written for another generation, and the
people that shall be created shall praise the Lord .' And again in the twenty-first Psalm,
`The generation to come shall declare unto the Lord, and they shall declare His
righteousness, unto a people that shall be born whom the Lord made .' For we shall no more
hear, `In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die ,' but `Where I am,
there ye' shall `be also;' so that we may say, `We are His workmanship, created unto good
works .' And again, since God's work, that is, man, though created perfect, has become
wanting through the transgression, and dead by sin, and it was unbecoming that the work of
God should remain imperfect (wherefore all the saints were praying concerning this, for
instance in the hundred and thirty-seventh Psalm, saying, `Lord, Thou shall requite for
me; despise not then the works of Thine hands '); therefore the perfect Word of God puts
around Him an imperfect body, and is said to be created `for the works;' that, paying the
debt in our stead, He might, by Himself, perfect what was wanting to man. Now immortality
was wanting to him, and the way to paradise.

This then is what the Saviour says, `I glorified Thee on the earth, I perfected the work
which Thou hast given Me to do ;' and again, `The works which the Father hath given Me to
perfect, the same works that I do, bear witness of Me;' but `the works ' He here says that
the Father had given Him to perfect, are those for which He is created, saying in the
Proverbs, `The Lord created me a beginning of His ways, for His works;' for it is all one
to say, `The Father hath given me the works,' and `The Lord created me for the works.' 67.
When then received He the works to perfect, O God's enemies? for from this also `He
created' will be understood. If ye say, `At the beginning when He brought them into being
out of what was not,' it is an untruth; for they were not yet made; whereas He appears to
speak as taking what was already in being. Nor is it pious to refer to the time which
preceded the Word's becoming flesh, lest His coming should thereupon seem superfluous,
since for the sake of these works that coming took place. Therefore it remains for us to
say that when He has become man, then He took the works. For then He perfected them, by
healing our wounds and vouchsafing to us the resurrection from the dead. But if, when the
Word became flesh, then were given to Him the works, plainly when He became man, then also
is He created for the works. Not of His essence then is `He created' indicative, as has
many times been said, but of His bodily generation. For then, because the works were
become imperfect and mutilated from the transgression, He is said in respect to the body
to be created; that by perfecting them and making them whole, He might present the Church
unto the Father, as the Apostle says, `not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but
holy and without blemish .' Mankind then is perfected in Him and restored, as it was made
at the beginning, nay, with greater grace.

For, on rising from the dead, we shall no longer fear death, but shall ever reign in
Christ in the heavens. And this has been done, since the own Word of God Himself, who is
from the Father, has put on the flesh, and become man. For if, being a creature, He had
become man, man had remained just what he was, not joined to God; for how had a work been
joined to the Creator by a work ? or what succour had come from like to like, when one as
well as other needed it ? And how, were the Word a creature, had He power to undo God's
sentence, and to remit sin, whereas it is written in the Prophets, that this is God's
doing? For `who is a God like unto Thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by
transgression ?' For whereas God has said, `Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return
,' men have become mortal; how then could things originate undo sin? but the Lord is He
who has undone it, as He says Himself, `Unless the Son shall make you free ;' and the Son,
who made free, has shewn in truth that He is no creature, nor one of things originate, but
the proper Word and Image of the Father's Essence, who at the beginning sentenced, and
alone remitteth sins.

For since it is said in the Word, `Dust thou art, and unto dust thou shalt return,'
suitably through the Word Himself and in Him the freedom and the undoing of the
condemnation has come to pass. 68. `Yet,' they say, `though the Saviour were a creature,
God was able to speak the word only and undo the curse.' And so another will tell them in
like manner, `Without His coming among us at all, God was able just to speak and undo the
curse;' but we must consider what was expedient for mankind, and not what simply is
possible with God . He could have destroyed, before the ark of Noah, the then
transgressors; but He did it after the ark. He could too, without Moses, have spoken the
word only and have brought the people out of Egypt; but it profited to do it through
Moses. And God was able without the judges to save His people; but it was profitable for
the people that for a season judges should be raised up to them. The Saviour too might
have come among us from the beginning, or on His coming might not have been delivered to
Pilate; but He came `at the fulness of the ages ,' and when sought for said, `I am He .'
For what He does, that is profitable for men, and was not fitting in any other way; and
what is profitable and fitting, for that He provides . Accordingly He came, not `that He
might be ministered unto, but that He might minister ,' and might work our salvation.
Certainly He was able to speak the Law from heaven, but He saw that it was expedient to
men for Him to speak from Sinai;

and that He has done, that it might be possible for Moses to go up, and for them hearing
the word near them the rather to believe. Moreover, the good reason of what He did may be
seen thus; if God had but spoken, because it was in His power, and so the curse had been
undone, the power had been shewn of Him who gave the word, but man had become such as Adam
was before the transgression, having received grace from without , and not having it
united to the body; (for he was such when he was placed in Paradise) nay, perhaps had
become worse, because he had learned to transgress. Such then being his condition, had he
been seduced by the serpent, there had been fresh need for God to give command and undo
the curse; and thus the need had become interminable , and men had remained under guilt
not less than before, as being enslaved to sin; and, ever sinning, would have ever needed
one to pardon them, and had never become free, being in themselves flesh, and ever worsted
by the Law because of the infirmity of the flesh.

69. Again, if the Son were a creature, man had remained mortal as before, not being joined
to God; for a creature had not joined creatures to God, as seeking itself one to join it ;
nor would a portion of the creation have been the creation's salvation, as needing
salvation itself. To provide against this also, He sends His own Son, and He becomes Son
of Man, by taking created flesh; that, since all were under sentence of death, He, being
other than them all, might Himself for all offer to death His own body; and that
henceforth, as if all land died through Him, the word of that sentence might be
accomplished (for `all died ' in Christ), and all through Him might thereupon become free
from sin and from the curse which came upon it, and might truly abide for ever, risen from
the dead and clothed in immortality and incorruption. For the Word being clothed in the
flesh, as has many times been explained, every bite of the serpent began to be utterly
staunched from out it;

and whatever evil sprung from the motions of the flesh, to be cut away, and with these
death also was abolished, the companion of sin, as the Lord Himself says , `The prince of
this world cometh, and findeth nothing in Me;' and `For this end was He manifested,' as
John has written, `that He might destroy the works of the devil .' And these being
destroyed from the flesh, we all were thus liberated by the kinship of the flesh, and for
the future were joined, even we, to the Word. And being joined to God, no longer do we
abide upon earth; but, as He Himself has said, where He is, there shall we be also; and
henceforward we shall fear no longer the serpent, for he was brought to nought when he was
assailed by the Saviour in the flesh, and heard Him say, `Get thee behind Me, Satan ,' and
thus he is cast out of paradise into the eternal fire. Nor shall we have to watch against
woman beguiling us, for `in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage,
but are as the Angels ;' and in Christ Jesus it shall be `a new creation,' and `neither
male nor female, but all and in all Christ ;' and where Christ is, what fear, what danger
can still happen?

70. But this would not have come to pass, had the Word been a creature; for with a
creature, the devil, himself a creature, would have ever continued the battle, and man,
being between the two, had been ever in peril of death, having none in whom and through
whom he might be joined to God and delivered from all fear. Whence the truth shews us that
the Word is not of things originate, but rather Himself their Framer. For therefore did He
assume the body originate and human, that having renewed it as its Framer, He might deify
it in Himself, and thus might introduce us all into the kingdom of heaven after His
likeness. For man had not been deified if joined to a creature, or unless the Son were
very God; nor had man been brought into the Father's presence, unless He had been His
natural and true Word who had put on the body. And as we had not been delivered from sin
and the curse, unless it had been by nature human flesh, which the Word put on (for we
should have had nothing common with what was foreign), so also the man had not been
deified, unless the Word who became flesh had been by nature from the Father and true and
proper to Him. For therefore the union was of this kind, that He might unite what is man
by nature to Him who is in the nature of the Godhead, and his salvation and deification
might be sure.

Therefore let those who deny that the Son is from the Father by nature and proper to His
Essence, deny also that He took true human flesh of Mary Ever-Virgin ; for in neither case
had it been of profit to us men, whether the Word were not true and naturally Son of God,
or the flesh not true which He assumed. But surely He took true flesh, though Valentinus
rave; yea the Word was by nature Very God, though Ariomaniacs rave ; and in that flesh has
come to pass the beginning of our new creation, He being created man for our sake, and
having made for us that new way, as has been said. 71. The Word then is neither creature
nor work; for creature, thing made, work, are all one; and were He creature and thing
made, He would also be work. Accordingly He has not said, `He created Me a work,' nor `He
made Me with the works,' lest He should appear to be in nature and essence a creature;
nor, `He created Me to make works,' lest, on the other hand, according to the perverseness
of the irreligious, He should seem as an instrument made for our sake. Nor again has He
declared, `He created Me before the works,' lest, as He really is before all, as an
Offspring, so, if created also before the works, He should give `Offspring' and `He
created' the same meaning. But He has said with exact discrimination , `for the works;' as
much as to say, `The Father has made Me, into flesh, that I might be man,' which again
shews that He is not a work but an offspring. For as he who comes into a house, is not
part of the house, but is other than the house, so He who is created for the works, must
be by nature other than the works. But if otherwise, as you hold, O Arians, the Word of
God be a work, by what Hand and Wisdom did He Himself come into being?

for all things that came to be, came by the Hand and Wisdom of God, who Himself says, `My
hand hath made all these things ;' and David says in the Psalm, `And Thou, Lord, in the
beginning hast laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Thy
hands ;' and again, in the hundred and forty-second Psalm, `I do remember the time past, I
muse upon all Thy works, yea I exercise myself in the works of Thy hands .' Therefore if
by the Hand of God the works are wrought, and it is written that `all things were made
through the Word,' and `without Him was not made one thing ,' and again, `One Lord Jesus,
through whom are all things ,' and `in Him all things consist ,' it is very plain that the
Son cannot be a work, but He is the Hand of God and the Wisdom. This knowing, the martyrs
in Babylon, Ananias, Azarias, and Misael, arraign the Arian irreligion. For when they say,
`O all ye works of the Lord, bless ye the Lord,' they recount things in heaven, things on
earth, and the whole creation, as works; but the Son they name not. For they say not,
`Bless, O Word, and praise, O Wisdom;' to shew that all other things are both praising and
are works;

but the Word is not a work nor of those that praise, but is praised with the Father and
worshipped and confessed as God , being His Word and Wisdom, and of the works the Framer.
This too the Spirit has declared in the Psalms with a most apposite distinction, `the Word
of the Lord is true, and all His works are faithful ;' as in another Psalm too He says, `O
Lord, how manifold are Thy works! in Wisdom hast Thou made them all .' 72. But if the Word
were a work, then certainly He as others had been made in Wisdom; nor would Scripture
distinguish Him from the works, nor while it named them works, preach Him as Word and own
Wisdom of God. But, as it is, distinguishing Him from the works, He shews that Wisdom is
Framer of the works, and not a work. This distinction Paul also observes, writing to the
Hebrews, `The Word of God is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword,
reaching even to the dividing of soul and spirit, joints and marrow, and a discerner of
the thoughts and intents of the heart, neither is there any creature hidden before Him,
but all things are naked and open unto the eyes of Him with whom is our account .' For
behold he calls things originate `creature;' but the Son he recognises as the Word of God,
as if He were other than the creatures. And again saying, `All things are naked and open
to the eyes of Him with whom is our account,' he signifies that He is other than all of
them. For hence it is that He judges, but each of all things originate is bound to give
account to Him. And so also, when the whole creation is groaning together with us in order
to be set free from the bondage of corruption, the Son is thereby shewn to be other than
the creatures.

For if He were creature, He too would be one of those who groan, and would need one who
should bring adoption and deliverance to Himself as well as others. But if the whole
creation groans together, for the sake of freedom from the bondage of corruption, whereas
the Son is not of those that groan nor of those who need freedom, but He it is who gives
sonship and freedom to all, saying to the Jews of His time , `The servant remains not in
the house for ever, but the Son remaineth for ever; if then the Son shall make you free,
ye shall be free indeed ;' it is clearer than the light from these considerations also,
that the Word of God is not a creature but true Son, and by nature genuine, of the Father.
Concerning then `The Lord hath created me a beginning of the ways,' this is sufficient, as
I think, though in few words, to afford matter to the learned to frame more ample
refutations of the Arian heresy.

CHAPTER XXII. TEXTS EXPLAINED; SIXTHLY, THE CONTEXT OF PROVERBS VIII. 22 VZ. 22-30.

It is right to interpret this passage by the Regula Fidei. `Founded' is used in contrast
to superstructure; and it implies, as in the case of stones in building, previous
existence. `Before the world' signifies the divine intention and purpose. Recurrence to
Prov. viii. 22, and application of it to created Wisdom as seen in the works. The Son
reveals the Father, first by the works, then by the Incarnation. But since the heretics,
reading the next verse, take a perverse view of that also, because it is written, `He
founded me before the world ,' namely, that this is said of the Godhead of the Word and
not of His incarnate Presence , it is necessary, explaining this verse also, to shew their
error. 73. It is written, `The Lord in Wisdom rounded the earth ;' if then by Wisdom the
earth is founded, how can He who founds be founded? nay, this too is said after the manner
of proverbs , and we must in like manner investigate its sense; that we may know that,
while by Wisdom the Father frames and founds the earth to be firm and steadfast , Wisdom
Itself is founded for us, that It may become beginning and foundation of our new creation
and renewal. Accordingly here as before, He says not, `Before the world He hath made me
Word or Son,' lest there should be as it were a beginning of His making. For this we must
seek before all things, whether He is Son , `and on this point specially search the
Scriptures ;' for this it was, when the Apostles were questioned, that Peter answered,
saying, `Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God .' This also the father of the
Arian heresy asked as one of his first questions; `If Thou be the Son of God ;' for he
knew that this is the truth and the sovereign principle of our faith; and that, if He were
Himself the Son, the tyranny of the devil would have its end; but if He were a creature,
He too was one of those descended from that Adam whom he deceived, and he had no cause for
anxiety.

For the same reason the Jews of the day were angered, because the Lord said that He was
Son of God, and that God was His proper Father. For had He called Himself one of the
creatures, or said, `I am a work,' they had not been startled at the intelligence, nor
thought such words blasphemy, knowing, as they did, that even Angels had come among their
fathers; but since He called Himself Son, they perceived that such was not the note of a
creature, but of Godhead and of the Father's nature . The Arians then ought, even in
imitation of their own father the devil, to take some special pains on this point; and if
He has said, `He founded me to be Word or Son,' then to think as they do; but if He has
not so spoken, not to invent for themselves what is not. 74. For He says not, `Before the
world He founded me as Word or Son,' but simply, `He founded me,' to shew again, as I have
said, that not for His own sake but for those who are built upon Him does He here also
speak, after the way of proverbs. For this knowing, the Apostle also writes, `Other
foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ; but let every man take
heed how he buildeth thereupon .' And it must be that the foundation should be such as the
things built on it, that they may admit of being well compacted together. Being then the
Word, He has not, as Word , any such as Himself, who may be compacted with Him; for He is
Only-begotten; but having become man, He has the like of Him, those namely the likeness of
whose flesh He has put on. Therefore according to His manhood He is rounded, that we, as
precious stones, may admit of building upon Him, and may become a temple of the Holy Ghost
who dwelleth in us. And as He is a foundation, and we stones built upon Him, so again He
is a Vine and we knit to Him as branches,-not according to the Essence of the Godhead; for
this surely is impossible; but according to His manhood, for the branches must be like the
vine, since we are like Him according to the flesh.

Moreover, since the heretics have such human notions, we may suitably confute them with
human resemblances contained in the very matter they urge. Thus He saith not, `He made me
a foundation,' lest He might seem to be made and to have a beginning of being, and they
might thence find a shameless occasion of irreligion; but, `He founded me.' Now what is
founded is founded for the sake of the stones which are raised upon it; it is not a random
process, but a stone is first transported from the mountain and set down in the depth of
the earth. And while a stone is in the mountain, it is not yet founded; but when need
demands, and it is transported, and laid in the depth of the earth, then forthwith if the
stone could speak, it would say, `He now founded me, who brought me hither from the
mountain.' Therefore the Lord also did not when rounded take a beginning of existence; for
He was the Word before that; but when He put on our body, which He severed and took from
Mary, then He says `He hath founded me;' as much as to say, `Me, being the Word, He hath
enveloped in a body of earth.' For so He is founded for our sakes, taking on Him what is
ours , that we, as incorporated and compacted and bound together in Him through the
likeness of the flesh, may attain unto a perfect man, and abide immortal and
incorruptible.

75. Nor let the words `before the world' and `before He made the earth' and `before the
mountains were settled' disturb any one; for they very well accord with `founded' and
`created;' for here again allusion is made to the Economy according to the flesh. For
though the grace which came to us from the Saviour appeared, as the Apostle says, just
now, and has come when He sojourned among us; yet this grace had been prepared even before
we came into being, nay, before the foundation of the world, and the reason why is kindly
and wonderful. It beseemed not that God should counsel concerning us afterwards, lest He
should appear ignorant of our fate. The God of all then,-creating us by His own Word, and
knowing our destinies better than we, and foreseeing that, being made `good ,' we should
in the event be transgressors of the commandment, and be thrust out of paradise for
disobedience,-being loving and kind, prepared beforehand in His own Word, by whom also. He
created us , the Economy of our salvation;

that though by the serpent's deceit we fell from Him, we might not remain quite dead, but
having in the Word the redemption and salvation which was afore prepared for us, we might
rise again and abide immortal, what time He should have been created for us `a beginning
of the ways,' and He who was the `First-born of creation' should become `first-born' of
the `brethren,' and again should rise `first-fruits of the dead.' This Paul the blessed
Apostle teaches in his writings; for, as interpreting the words of the Proverbs `before
the world' and `before the earth was,' he thus speaks to Timothy ; `Be partaker of the
afflictions of the Gospel according to the power of God, who hath saved us and called us
with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and
grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, but is now made manifest
by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and brought to
light life .' And to the Ephesians; `Blessed be God even the Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessing in heavenly places in Christ
Jesus, according as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we
should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestinated us to the
adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself .'

76. How then has He chosen us, before we came into existence, but that, as he says
himself, in Him we were represented beforehand? and how at all, before men were created,
did He predestinate us unto adoption, but that the Son Himself was `founded before the
world,' taking on Him that economy which was for our sake? or how, as the Apostle goes on
to say, have we `an inheritance being predestinated,' but that the Lord Himself was
founded `before the world,' inasmuch as He had a purpose, for our sakes, to take on Him
through the flesh all that inheritance of judgment which lay against us, and we henceforth
were made sons in Him? and how did we receive it `before the world was,' when we were not
yet in being, but afterwards in time, but that in Christ was stored the grace which has
reached us? Wherefore also in the Judgment, when every one shall receive according to his
conduct, He says, `Come, ye blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you
from the foundation of the world .' How then, or in whom, was it prepared before we came
to be, save in the Lord who `before the world' was founded for this purpose; that we, as
built upon Him, might partake, as well-compacted stones, the life and grace which is from
Him?

And this took place, as naturally suggests itself to the religious mind, that, as I said,
we, rising after our brief death, may be capable of an eternal life, of which we had not
been capable , men as we are, formed of earth, but that `before the world' there had been
prepared for us in Christ the hope of life and salvation. Therefore reason is there that
the Word, on coming into our flesh, and being created in it as `a beginning of ways for
His works,' is laid as a foundation according as the Father's will was in Him before the
world, as has been said, and before land was, and before the mountains were settled, and
before the fountains burst forth; that, though the earth and the mountains and the shapes
of visible nature pass away in the fulness of the present age, we on the contrary may not
grow old after their pattern, but may be able to live after them, having the spiritual
life and blessing which before these things have been prepared for us in the Word Himself
according to election. For thus we shall be capable of a life not temporary, but ever
afterwards abide and live in Christ; since even before this our life had been founded and
prepared in Christ Jesus.

77. Nor in any other way was it fitting that our life should be founded, but in the Lord
who is before the ages, and through whom the ages were brought to be; that, since it was
in Him, we too might be able to inherit that everlasting life. For God is good; and being
good always, He willed this, as knowing that our weak nature needed the succour and
salvation which is from Him. And as a wise architect, proposing to build a house, consults
also about repairing it, should it at any time become dilapidated after building, and, as
counselling about this, makes preparation and gives to the workmen materials for a repair;
and thus the means of the repair are provided before the house; in the same way prior to
us is the repair of our salvation founded in Christ, that in Him we might even be new-
created. And the will and the purpose were made ready `before the world,' but have taken
effect when the need required, and the Saviour came among us. For the Lord Himself will
stand us in place of all things in the heavens, when He receives us into everlasting life.
This then suffices to prove that the Word of God is not a creature, but that the sense of
the passage is right . But since that passage, when scrutinized, has a right sense in
every point of view, it may be well to state what it is; perhaps many words may bring
these senseless men to shame.

Now here I must recur to what has been said before, for what I have to say relates to the
same proverb and the same Wisdom. The Word has not called Himself a creature by nature,
but has said in proverbs, `The Lord created me;' and He plainly indicates a sense not
spoken `plainly' but latent , such as we shall be able to find by taking away the veil
from the proverb. For who, on hearing from the Framing Wisdom, `The Lord created me a
beginning of His ways,' does not at once question the meaning, reflecting how that
creative Wisdom can be created? who on hearing the Only-begotten Son of God say, that He
was created `a beginning of ways,' does not investigate the sense, wondering how the Only-
begotten Son can become a Beginning of many others? for it is a dark saying ; but `a man
of understanding,' says he, `shall understand a proverb and the interpretation, the words
of the wise and their dark sayings .'

78. Now the Only-begotten and very Wisdom of God is Creator and Framer of all things; for
`in Wisdom hast Thou made them all ,' he says, and `the earth is full of Thy creation.'
But that what came into being might not only be, but be good , it pleased God that His own
Wisdom should condescend to the creatures, so as to introduce an impress and semblance of
Its Image on all in common and on each, that what was made might be manifestly wise works
and worthy of God . For as of the Son of God, considered as the Word, our word is an
image, so of the same Son considered as Wisdom is the wisdom which is implanted in us an
image; in which wisdom we, having the power of knowledge and thought, become recipients of
the All-framing Wisdom; and through It we are able to know Its Father. `For he who hath
the Son,' saith He, `hath the Father also;' and `he that receiveth Me, receiveth Him that
sent Me .' Such an impress then of Wisdom being created in us, and being in all the works,
with reason does the true and framing Wisdom take to Itself what belongs to its own
impress, and say, `The Lord created me for His works;' for what the wisdom in us says,
that the Lord Himself speaks as if it were His own;

and, whereas He is not Himself created, being Creator, yet because of the image of Him
created in the works , He says this as if of Himself. And as the Lord Himself has said,
`He that receiveth you, receiveth Me ,'because His impress is in us, so, though He be not
among the creatures, yet because His image and impress is created in the works, He says,
as if in His own person, `The Lord created me a beginning of His ways for His works.' And
therefore has this impress of Wisdom in the works been brought into being, that, as I said
before, the world might recognise in it its own Creator the Word, and through Him the
Father. And this is what Paul said, `Because that which may be known of God is manifest in
them, for God has shewed it unto them: for the invisible things of Him from the creation
of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made .' But if so,
the Word is not a creature in essence ; but the wisdom which is in us and so called, is
spoken of in this passage in the Proverbs.

79. But if this too fails to persuade them, let them tell us themselves, whether there is
any wisdom in the creatures or not ? If not how is it that the Apostle complains, `For
after that in the Wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God ?' or how is it if there
is no wisdom, that a `multitude of wise men ' are found in Scripture? for `a wise man
feareth and departeth from evil ;' and `through wisdom is a house builded ;' and the
Preacher says, `A man's wisdom maketh his face to shine;' and he blames those who are
headstrong thus, `Say not thou, what is the cause that the former days were better than
these? for thou dost not inquire in wisdom concerning this .' But if, as the Son of Sirach
says, `He poured her out upon all His works; she is with all flesh according to His gift,
and He hath given her to them that love Him ,' and this outpouring is a note, not of the
Essence of the Very Wisdom and Only-begotten, but of that wisdom which is imaged in the
world, how is it incredible that the All-framing and true Wisdom Itself, whose impress is
the wisdom and knowledge poured out in the world, should say, as I have already explained,
as if of Itself, `The Lord created me for His works?' For the wisdom in the world is not
creative, but is that which is created in the works, according to which `the heavens
declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth His handywork .' This if men have
within them , they will acknowledge the true Wisdom of God; and will know that they are
made really after God's Image.

And, as some son of a king, when the father wished to build a city , might cause his own
name to be printed upon each of the works that were rising, both to give security to them
of the works remaining, by reason of the show of his name on everything, and also to make
them remember him and his father from the name, and having finished the city might be
asked concerning it, how it was made, and then would answer, `It is made securely, for
according to the will of my father, I am imaged in each work, for my name was made in the
works;' but saying this, he does not signify that his own essence is created, but the
impress of himself by means of his name; in the same manner, to apply the illustration, to
those who admire the wisdom in the creatures, the true Wisdom makes answer, `The Lord
created me for the works,' for my impress is in them; and I have thus condescended for the
framing of all things.

80. Moreover, that the Son should be speaking of the impress that is within us as if it
were Himself, should not startle any one, considering (for we must not shrink from
repetition ) that, when Saul was persecuting the Church, in which was His impress and
image, He said, as if He were Himself under persecution, `Saul, why persecutest thou Me ?'
Therefore (as has been said), as, supposing the impress itself of Wisdom which is in the
works had said, `The Lord created me for the works,' no one would have been startled, so,
if He, the True and Framing Wisdom, the Only-begotten Word of God, should use what belongs
to His image as about Himself, namely, `The Lord created me for the works,' let no one,
overlooking the wisdom created in the world and in the works, think that `He created' is
said of the Substance of the Very Wisdom, lest, diluting the wine with water , he be
judged a defrauder of the truth. For It is Creative and Framer; but Its impress is created
in the works, as the copy of the image. And He says, `Beginning of ways,' since such
wisdom becomes a sort of beginning. and, as it were, rudiments of the knowledge of God;

for a man entering, as it were, upon this way first, and keeping it in the fear of God (as
Solomon says , `The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom'), then advancing upwards
in his thoughts and perceiving the Framing Wisdom which is in the creation, will perceive
in It also Its Father , as the Lord Himself has said, `He that hath seen Me, hath seen the
Father,' and as John writes, `He who acknowledgeth the Son, hath the Father also .' And He
says, `Before the world He founded me ,' since in Its impress the works remain settled and
eternal. Then, lest any, hearing concerning the wisdom thus created in the works, should
think the true Wisdom, God's Son, to be by nature a creature, He has found it necessary to
add, `Before the mountains, and before the earth, and before the waters, and before all
hills He begets me,' that in saying, `before every creature' (for He includes all the
creation under these heads), He may shew that He is not created together with the works
according to Essence. For if He was created `for the works,' yet is before them, it
follows that He is in being before He was created. He is not then a creature by nature and
essence, but as He Himself has added, an Offspring. But in what differs a creature from an
offspring, and how it is distinct by nature, has been shewn in what has gone before.

81. But since He proceeds to say, `When He prepared the heaven, I was present with Him ,'
we ought to know that He says not this as if without Wisdom the Father prepared the heaven
or the clouds above (for there is no room to doubt that all things are created in Wisdom,
and without It was made not even one thing); but this is what He says, `All things took
place in Me and through Me, and when there was need that Wisdom should be,created in the
works, in My Essence indeed I was with the Father, but by a condescension to things
originate, I was disposing over the works My own impress, so that the whole world as being
in one body, might not be at variance but in concord with itself.' All those then who with
an upright understanding, according to the wisdom given unto them, come to contemplate the
creatures, are able to say for themselves, `By Thy appointment all things continue ;' but
they who make light of this must be told, `Professing themselves to be wise, they became
fools;' for `that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God has revealed it
unto them; for the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly
seen, being perceived by the things that are made, even His eternal Power and Godhead, so
that they are without excuse.

Because that when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God, but served the creature
more than the Creator of all, who is blessed for ever. Amen .' And they will surely be
shamed at hearing, `For, after that in the wisdom of God (in the mode we have explained
above), the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of the
preaching to save them that believe .' For no longer, as in the former times, God has
willed to be known by an image and shadow of wisdom, that namely which is in the
creatures, but He has made the true Wisdom Itself to take flesh, and to become man, and to
undergo the death of the cross; that by the faith in Him, henceforth all that believe may
obtain salvation. However, it is the same Wisdom of God, which through Its own Image in
the creatures (whence also It is said to be created), first manifested Itself, and through
Itself Its own Father; and afterwards, being Itself the Word, has `become flesh ,' as John
says, and after abolishing death and saving our race, still more revealed Himself and
through Him His own Father, saying, `Grant unto them that they may know Thee the only true
God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent .'

82. Hence the whole earth is filled with the knowledge of Him; for the knowledge of Father
through Son and of Son from Father is one and the same, and the Father delights in Him,
and in the same joy the Son rejoices in the Father, saying, `I was by Him, daily His
delight, rejoicing always before Him .' And this again proves that the Son is not foreign,
but proper to the Father's Essence. For behold, not because of us has He come to be, as
the irreligious men say, nor is He out of nothing (for not from without did God procure
for Himself a cause of rejoicing), but the words denote what is His own and like. When
then was it, when the Father rejoiced not? but if He ever rejoiced, He was ever, in whom
He rejoiced. And in whom does the Father rejoice, except as seeing Himself in His own
Image, which is His Word? And though in sons of men also He had delight, on finishing the
world, as it is written in these same Proverbs , yet this too has a consistent sense. For
even thus He had delight, not because joy was added to Him, but again on seeing the works
made after His own Image; so that even this rejoicing of God is on account of His Image.
And how too has the Son delight, except as seeing Himself in the Father?

for this is the same as saying, `He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father,' and `I am in
the Father and the Father in Me .' Vain then is your vaunt as is on all sides shewn, O
Christ's enemies, and vainly did ye parade and circulate everywhere your text, `The Lord
created me a beginning of His ways,' perverting its sense, and publishing, not Solomon's
meaning, but your own comment . For behold your sense is proved to be but a fantasy; but
the passage in the Proverbs, as well as all that is above said, proves that the Son is not
a creature in nature and essence, but the proper Offspring of the Father, true Wisdom and
Word, by whom `all things were made,' and `without Him was made not one thing '

CHAPTER XXIII. TEXTS EXPLAINED; SEVENTHLY, JOHN XIV. 10.

Introduction. The doctrine of the coinherence. The Father and the Son Each whole and
perfect God. They are in Each Other, because their Essence is One and the Same. They are
Each Perfect and have One Essence, because the Second Person is the Son of the First.
Asterius's evasive explanation of the text under review; refuted. Since the Son has all
that the Father has, He is His Image; and the Father is the One God, because the Son is in
the Father. 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 ;' for refutation
does not stop them, nor perplexity abash them; but, as having `a whore's forehead,' they
`refuse to be ashamed ' before all men in their irreligion.

For whereas the passages which they alleged, `The Lord created me ,' and `Made better than
the Angels ,' and `First-born ,' and `Faithful to Him that made Him ' have a right sense ,
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 ;' 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 ?' 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 , 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 . 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
of the Father is the Life, in which all things are both quickened and consist; for the
Life does not live in life , 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 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 , is the writer, what a serious condemnation
does he deserve! And does he not shew himself a stranger to the Apostle , 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 ? 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 man, that the Power of the Father receives power, that from this his
irreligion it may follow to say that in a son 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 ,' and again
Solomon , `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 ,' 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 , 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 , 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 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 .

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, ' by way of shewing the identity of Godhead
and the unity of Essence. For they are one, not 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 ; but the nature is one; (for the offspring is not unlike its parent, for it is his
image), and all that is the Father's, is the Son's . 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 ; 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 , 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 :-for
instance , that He is God, `And the Word was God ;' Almighty, `Thus saith He which was and
is and is to come, the Almighty ;' Lord, `One Lord Jesus Christ ;' that He is Light, `I am
the Light ;' that He wipes out sins, `that ye may know,' He says, `that the Son of man
hath power upon earth to forgive sins ;' and so with other attributes. For `all things,'
says the Son Himself, `whatsoever the Father hath, are Mine ;' 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 .' Moreover, He has added this again, `He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father ;'
and there is one and the same sense in these three 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 ; 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 . 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 .' 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 ,' and `the Father in Me.' Nor
is this Form 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 , this is what He says, `I in the Father.' Thus
`God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself ;' 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 .' 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 . 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 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 ,
and `I am,' and `beside Me there is no God,' and `I the first and I the last ,' this has a
fit meaning. For God is One and Only and First; but this is not said to the denial of the
Son , 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 . This then is not
said on His account, but to deny that there is other such as the Father and His Word.


FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS
==================================

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

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 ;"' 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 . 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 , 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 ;' and to one who asked, what was the great
commandment in the Law, answering, `Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is One Lords ;' and
saying to the multitudes, `I came down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of
Him that sent Me ;' and teaching the disciples, `My Father is greater than I,' and `He
that honoureth Me, honoureth Him that sent Me ;' if the Son is such towards His own
Father, what is the difficulty , 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 clay, 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 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 .

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 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 ,
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
, 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 ,' 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 .' 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 , 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 .' And when the Prophet says concerning the
creation, `That stretcheth forth the heavens alone ,' 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 ;
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 lie
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 through the Son. For as the Father is First, so also is He both First , 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.

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 . 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 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 . 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 that the Angels 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 ?' 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 ,' and observing the exhortation, `Be ye therefore followers of God as
dear children, and walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us ;' many too have become
followers of Paul as he also of Christ . 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 ;' 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 ?' 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 , 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 , 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 .' 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 , and the
Son coming to the Saints, the Father is He who cometh in the Son , as He promised when He
said, `I and My Father will come, and will make Our abode with hire ;' 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 ,' 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 , 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
,' 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 ,' 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 ' (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. There- fore 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 goest;' and it was no other than God whom lie 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 ;' 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, 0 Lord, from lying lips and from a deceitful tongue .' 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 .'
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 .' 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 .' 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 a.' 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 yon in Christ Jesus .' 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 lie 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 , 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 ,' 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 . 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 ,' 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
. 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 . For, as the illustration shows, we do not introduce
three Origins or three Fathers, as the followers of Marcion and Manichaeus; 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 , 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 , 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 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 . 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 , 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 , 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 . And with such sentiments, they
will certainly be going on to more gods, for this will be the essay 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 , 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 ,'
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 differ- ence 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 with the Gentiles, hateful 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 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 .' 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 .' 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 ;' 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 ;' 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 .'
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 .' Then, as having found an evasion, these men of craft 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 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 , 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 . And
now again bearing from the Saviour, `that they may be one as We are ,' 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 ,'
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 . 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 though it be to refine upon
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 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 .' 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 .' And the Saviour to expose
Herod said, `Tell that fox ;' 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 .' 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 ;' and, `Be ye perfect, as your
heavenly Father is perfect .' 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 , 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 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 ') 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 '), 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 '); but we by
imitation become virtuous 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 , 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 ;
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 , 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 ,' 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 .' 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 ; 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 ;' and `In Thee will we
tread down our enemies .' 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' , 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 , 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 .'
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 `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 , but in nature only all things are far from Him. And, as I said
before, whose uses the particle `as' implies, not identity, nor equality, but a pattern of
the matter in question, viewed in a certain respect . 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 .' 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 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 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 . 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 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 , 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 , have in each other, by looking at Me, the bond of
charity .'

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 bow 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 .' John then thus writes; `Hereby know we that we dwell in Him and He in
us, because He hath given us of His Spirit .' Therefore because of the grace of the Spirit
which has been given to us, in Him we come to be, and He in us ; 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 , 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 Gods .' 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 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 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 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 .
For what the Word has by nature , 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 .' It is the Spirit then which is in God, and not we viewed in our own selves;

and as we are sons and gods because of the Word in us , 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 ; 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 . 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' ) nor endure religious words, but find them heavy even to hear.

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. I. 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 , they have utterly forgotten, like the
Samosatene, the Son's paternal Godhead , 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
.' 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 .' 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 .'" 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 ?' In like manner, when He had come into the parts of Caesarea 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 ? 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 .'" Upon this again say the
miserable men, "If the Son were, according to your interpretation , 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 ' for this and the like the
Jews then muttered when they saw, and now the Ariomaniacs 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 madeHimself 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 ?' the Arians on the other hand make response 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 , 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 stumbleat such lowly sayings as He may speak for our sakes as man. If then you
would become Christians , put off Arius's madness, and cleanse 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
, but ye will yourselves acknowledge that the Lord is God's true Son by nature, and not as
merely eternal , 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
;' 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 lie 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 , we may
easily see, if we now consider the scope 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 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 Fie was ever God, and is the Son, being the
Father's Word and Radiance and Wisdom ; and that afterwards for us He took flesh of a
Virgin, Mary Bearer of God , 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 .' 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 ;' 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 Fathers ;' 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 .' Any one, beginning with these passages and going through the whole of the
Scripture upon the interpretation 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 ;' 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 .'

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 .' 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 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 . 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 ;' for `the Word,' as John says, `became flesh' (it being the custom 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 ;' 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 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 ,' 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 , afterwards for our sakes He became
man, and `bodily ,' 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 , 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 . 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 . And well has the Prophet said `carried ;' 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 Himself by `bearing our sins in His body on the tree,' as Peter speaks, we men
were redeemed from our own affections , and were filled with the righteousness 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 , `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 He 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 . These things were so done, were so manifested, because He had a body, not in
appearance, but in truth ; 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 theWord'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 ,
but to the Lord; that the grace also may be from Him , and that we may become, not
worshippers of any other, but truly devout towards God, because we invoke no originate
thing, no ordinary 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 ; 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 dean
from all sin; nay, Jeremiah was hallowed even from the womb, and John, while yet in the
womb, leapt for joy at the voice of Mary Bearer of God ; nevertheless `death reigned from
Adam to Moses, even over those that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's
transgression ;' 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 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 by Him, and henceforth men no
longerremain sinners and dead according to their proper affections, but having risen
according to the Word's power, they abide ever immortal and incorruptible.

Whence also, whereas the flesh is born of Mary Bearer of God , 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 carded 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 , 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 , 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 .'
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 , 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 ," 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 by these affections, but rather obliterating and destroying them, men, their
passions as if changed and abolished in the Impassible, henceforth become themselves also
impassible and free 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 .' 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 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 , we are fight 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 , 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 the origination of His body, and henceforth to rank themselves with
Manichees . But for them, learn they, however tardily, that `the Word became flesh;' and
let us, retaining the general scope of the faith, acknowledge that what they interpret
ill, has a right interpretation .

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 ;' 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 ,' 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 ,' 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 the
Godhead of the Son, but rather shew Him to be truly 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 ,' 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 .' 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 themwhen
the Son says that, `as' the Father has, `so' also the Son has, to say that He has not `so
,' 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 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 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 , or when He asks on
coming into the parts of Caesarea, `Whom do men say that I am?' or, `How many loaves have
ye?' and, `What will ye that I shall do unto you ?' we may know, from what has been
already said, the right 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 .' 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 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 ,' 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. ' 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 ; 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 ), but that the
grace may be irrevocable, and may be kept sure by men, therefore He Himself appropriates
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
beignorant, wherefore do we consider the Giveras 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 andbeen 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 , 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 , than the body
promoted because of Him. But this notion is Judaic.

But if that He might redeem mankind , 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 .' 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 .' 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 ;' for He had that glory which He asked when He
said, `the glory which I had with Thee before the world was .'

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 ;' and to the disciples He gave the power against him, when on their
return He said, `I beheld Satan, as lightning, fall from heaven .' 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 un-binding 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 ;' 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 .' 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 ; 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 surely for us. For what is said
by Peter, `receiving from God honour and glory, Angels being made subject unto Him ,' 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 , and degrade not the Word; nor detract from His Godhead,
which is the Father's , 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 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.


FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS
==================================

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

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 ;' for being in great ignorance as
regards these words, and being stupefied 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 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 where He has been silent; for `Who hath known the mind of the
Lord, or who hath been His counsellor ?' 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 , but of that human nature whose property it is to be ignorant. And this again
will be weIl 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 ,' nor before He became man did He say it, but
when `the Word became flesh .' 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 ,' 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 , 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 , to say `I know not,' that He may shew that knowing as God, He is but ignorant
according to the flesh . And therefore He said not, `no, not the Son of God knows,' test
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 ; 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 `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 .' 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 , 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 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 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 Ariomaniacs, 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 ; 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 , in that to be ignorant is proper to man, and that He had put on flesh that was
ignorant , 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 .' 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 .' 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 .' 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 .' 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 . 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 .' 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 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 Caesarea, 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 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 .' 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 .' 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 of the Phrygians , 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 , knew? as we may by searching conjecture, for our
profit , 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 , 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 .' 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 .' 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 . 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 . 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 .' 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
waft 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 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 ' and He inquires
of Cain also, `Where is Abel thy brother ?' 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 the question then put to Adam and all that you may give full play
to your perverseness. For being exposed on all sides, you still make a whispering 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 meaning may be shewn.

51. Now Luke says, `And Jesus advanced in wisdom and stature, and in grace with God and
man .' 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 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 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 reachng forward and
advancing in virtue . Enoch, for instance, was thus translated, and Moses increased and
was perfected; and Isaac `by advancing became great ;' and the Apostle said that he
`reached forth ' 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 . 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 , who needs nothing, nay brings forward others to an
advance; but humanly is He here also said to advance, since advance belongs to man . Hence
the Evangelist, speaking with cautious exactness , 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
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 in it, He is
confessed henceforth by Peter first, then also by all, `Truly this is the Son of God ;'
however wilfully the Jews, both the ancient and these modern , 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 , 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 the Father's
Light , which is the Son, but that it still shews that the Word has become man, and bore
true flesh. And as we said 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 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 . 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 of Wisdom
for the operation and the shining forth 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.

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 . For they, going up and down , 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
. 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 ), If the speaker is mere man, let him weep
and fear death, as being man; but if He is the Word in flesh (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 ,' 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 ,'
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
'), 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 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 .'

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
vouch-safed sight to the man born blind, and said, `I and My Father are one .' 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 from heaven, wherefore not from His
divine works recognise the Word who is in the Father, and henceforward renounce their
self-willed 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 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 " `And Christ's
enemies seem to me to shew plain shamelessness and blasphemy;' for, when they hear `I and
the Father are one ,' 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 ; 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 impossible),
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 these very
sufferings of the flesh, and free it from them .

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 and set open hell, and the graves
did gape, and many bodies of the saints arose and appeared to their own people . 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 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 .'

57. And as to His saying, `If it be possible, let the cup pass,' observe how, though He
thus spake, He rebuked Peter, saying, `Thou savourest not the things that be of God, but
those that be of men.' For He willed 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 , that destroying
this affection He might in turn make man undaunted in face of death. hold then a thing
strange indeed! He to whom Christ's enemies impute words of terror, He by that so-called
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 .' 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 .' For to be troubled was proper to the flesh, and to have power to lay down His
life 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 .' 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 , 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 incorruptible, as a temple
of the Word . 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 .

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 , as it seems, a heretic is a wicked thing in truth, and in every
respect his heart is depraved 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
and hateful God , as hydras , 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
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 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 were to say this in simplicity, there would be no
cause to be suspicious of the expression, the right intention prevailing over that
somewhat simple use of words . But since the phrase is from the heretics and the words of
heretics are suspicious, and, as it is written, `The wicked are deceitful,' and `The words
of the wicked are deceit ,' even though they but make signs , 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 , and to keep in mind their
peculiar heresy. For whence 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 .'

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 '
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 , 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 , 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 .' 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 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 , 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 ;' 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 .' 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 , 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 .' 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 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 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 . 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 .

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 !)-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 , 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 of will as
before Himself, since He is Himself the Father's Living Counsel , 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 .' 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 ), 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 Counsel of the Father; as we have learned from
the Prophet also, that He becomes `the Angel of great Counsel ,' and was called the good
pleasure of the Father; for thus we must refute them, using human illustrations 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 shall guide me with Thy Counsel .' 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 . 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 ; 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 heresy of the
Atheists is discovered to issue in polytheism 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 inglory, 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 ? 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 .' 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 , as if a habit , coming and going , 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 ;' 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 .'
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 ; 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 , but of
His Essence Itself, saying, `Who being the Radiance of His glory and the Expression of His
Subsistence .' 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 .' 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 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 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 .' 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
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 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 ?' 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 ?' that, even from fathers they may learn
shame, from whom they assumed this proposition 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 , 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 ,
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 , 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 ."' But the Lord according to His wont is loving to man, and
would fain `help them that are fallen,' as the praise of David 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.


FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS
==================================

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

DISCOURSE 4

§§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
,' and again, `Of whom are the Fathers, and of whom Christ, who is God over all, blessed
for ever. Amen .' 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 ,' 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 , 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 .
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 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 thought; for it will issue in this, that God is compounded of essence and
quality . 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 .
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 and verbally . 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 ;' 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 .'

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 ? 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 .' And Christ will be found
to speak untruly, `I in the Father,' there being another in the Father. And `the Word
became flesh ' 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
, the absurdities will follow already mentioned. For He will be compound , and will prove
His own Son and Father . 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 ,' 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 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 .

And the same concerning the word `Son;' if God be without Son , then is He without Work;
for the Son is His Offspring through whom He works ; 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 .' 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 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 ?' and elsewhere, `I a God drawing nigh ;' 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 ;' but what is applied, is applied from without.

§§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 ,' 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 , interceding for us, that
in Him they may be annulled . 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 , nor has come into being ; 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 . For of such gifts
mere man had not become worthy; and again the mere Word had not needed them ;

the Word then was united to us, and then imparted to us power, and highly exalted us . 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 ,' 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 ; 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 , 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 .' 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 ,' 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 .'

§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 . 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.

§§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 .' 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 . 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 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.

§§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 , 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 ?' 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 , and a Son who is His Word, not in name
alone a Word, nor the Word in notion only a Son, but existing coessential 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 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 . §§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
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 , 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 some- thing 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 ;' 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 ;' and Noah says, `May God dilate for Japheth
,' 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 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
, 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.

§§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 ; and others both
that the man and the Word then became Son, when they were united . And others say that the
Word Himself then became Son when He became man ; for from being Word, they say, He has
become Son, not being Son before, but only Word. Now both are Stoic 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 . 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
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 . 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 ,' 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 ,' 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 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 .' 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 ,' 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 ,' is shewn to
be no other than the Only-begotten Son of God, by the same John's saying before , `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 .' 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 ,' 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
.' 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 .'

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 .' 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 ,' 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 ;' 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 .' 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
.' And is it not absurd to say, as they do, that one who came of the seed of Abraham after
two and forty generations , 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 .' 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 ? 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 ?' 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 , He may be called our
Father also; for `He sent forth,' says Scripture, `the Spirit of His Son into our hearts,
crying, Abba, Father .' 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 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 ?'
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 Son; for before His appearing He was
not Son but Word only; and as the `Word be came 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 Fathers ,' and afterwards He and the Father have become One; and afterwards
is, `He that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father .' 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 ?' 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 . 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 ,' 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 ;' and in the ninth the
title , 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 ;' 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 ,' 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 ;' 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 ,' 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 .' 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 ;' 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. §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 , in subsistence One, in name Two; and
he 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 , 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 .

Nay, what will follow but the annihilation of the creation? for if the Word came forth
that we might be created , 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. §§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 .' 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 .' 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 ,' 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 .' 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 ,' shews that the Son was ever. For whom John calls Son, Him David mentions in
the Psalm as God's Hand , saying, `Why stretchest Thou not forth Thy Right Hand out of Thy
bosom ?' 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 ;'
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 ;' 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 ;' 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 , 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 .' 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 , 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 .' 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 .' 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 . 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 .' 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 ,' 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 .' 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:'er
the wide earth, dear youth, why seek to run,An only child, a well-beloved son?He whom you
mourn, divine Ulysses, fellFar 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 . It is this: `The Word He sent to
the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ; this is Lord of all .' 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 .' 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 .' 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 , still it is without any division of the Word, as
when the inspired John says, `And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us .' What then
is said well and rightly 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 .' 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 ,' nay, of Him who is Very Life (as the Lord said to Martha, `I
am the Life '), 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 .' 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 .'

33. And this is usual with Scriptures , 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 , 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 iswith reason called Christ and Son of God, the prophet
having long since loudly and clearlyascribed the Father's subsistence to Him, and said,
`And I will send My Son Christ ,' 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 ;' which the Apostle interprets when he says, `Which house are we ,' and elsewhere
calls us a temple, as far as it is fitting to God to inbabit 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 ,'
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 . 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 .'
Theirs it was to say, `Why dost Thou, being a man, make Thyself God ?' 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 .' 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 ,' 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 ' (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 , 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 main, ways, `I and the Father are one,' and `He
that hath seen Me, hath seen the Father ?)' In which Man, after the resurrection also,
when the doors were shut, we know of His coming to the whole band 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 .' 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 ,' 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 ;' so says God the Word,
speaking of His own 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 , 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 with Me, and Me with Him.' For I the Word am the chrism, and
that which has the chrism from Me is the Man ; 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 .' For he has given the name of mission 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 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 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.


COUNCILS OF ARIMINUM AND SELEUCIA
=================================

COUNCILS OF ARIMINUM AND SELEUCIA Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

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 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 Nicaea
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 from Pannonia; and from Syria, Acacius, Eudoxius, and
Patrophilus 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 of their heresy, influenced
some who seemed to be somewhat, and the Emperor Constantius among them, being a heretic ,
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 , 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' (Is. lii.
5; Rom. ii. 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 , 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 ; thereby
to shew all sensible men, that their faith dates, not from of old, but now, from the reign
of Constantius ; 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 ; 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 ' (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 , 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 ? 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 ; 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 , and drew up a suitable formula
against it. And yet in this, many as they are, they ventured on nothing like the
proceedings of these three or four men . 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

6. But the Councils which they are now setting in motion, what colourable pretext have
they ? 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 , what need is there of Councils, when the Nicest
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 , 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 .

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 ; 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 Nicaea, 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
Nicaea; 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 Gains . And, while the whole assembly was discussing the
matter from the Divine Scriptures, these men produced 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 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 .

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. xiv. 16, 17, 26; xvi. 14). But whereas the term `essence,' has been adopted 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 .

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 Nicaea, 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 Nicaea having anticipated them once for all, and done all that was
needful for the Catholic Church .' 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 . 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 Nicaea 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 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 , 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 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 . 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 , and Gaius, the
stirrersup 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 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 . We pray also that you would give orders that so many Bishops who are detained
abroad, among whom are numbers who arebroken with age and poverty, may be enabled to
returnto 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 . 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 Nicaea, 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 . 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 Gorpiaeus, and the day of
the month according to the Egyptians the 16th , 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 , and Theodotus , and Evagrius, and Theodulus, and George who has
been driven from the whole world , 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 . And they made a pretence 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 obscureand 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 ,
and deposed Acacius, Patrophilus, Uranius, Eudoxius, and George the contractor , and
others from Asia, Leontius, and Theodosius, Evagrius and Theodulus, and excommunicated
Asterius, Eusebius, Augarus, Basilicus, Phoebus, 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 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 . 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 Ariomaniacs ? 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
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 , 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 ? But if their sentiments were wrong and their writings sedated
duced the world, then let their memory perish altogether; when, however, you east out
their books, go and east 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. xxx. 11; Ex. xxi. 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 Nicaea, they have held many Councils themselves, and have published a faith
in each of them, and have stood to none , 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.

PART II. HISTORY OF ARIAN OPINIONS.

1 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 , he writes at
great length, for instance as follows:-

2 Blasphemies of Arius. 3 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 he. 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 with Him. Wise is God, for He is the teacher of Wisdom .
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 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 not, the Father was God.

4 Hence the Son, not being (for He existed at the will of the Father), is God Only-
begotten , and He is alien from either. Wisdom existed as Wisdom by the will of the Wise
God. Hence He is conceived in numberless conceptions : 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
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.

5 16. And what they wrote by letter to the blessed Alexander, the Bishop, runs as
follows:- To Our Blessed Pope and Bishop, Alexander, the Presbyters and Deacons send
health in the Lord. 6 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 ; nor as Manichaeus taught that the offspring was a portion of the Father,
one in essence ; or as Sabellius, dividing the Monad, speaks of a Son-and-Father ; nor as
Hieracas, of one torch from another, or as a lamp divided into two ; nor that He who was
before, was afterwards generated or new-created into a Son , 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.

7 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 , 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 ' (Rom.
xi. 36; Ps. cx. 3;

8 John xvi. 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. 9 This is a part of what Arius and his fellows vomited from their
heretical hearts. 10 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 . 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 Caesarea in Palestine, in a letter to
Euphration the Bishop , did not scruple to say plainly that Christ was not true God . 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;

11 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.

12 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 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 , 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:-

13 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.

14 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.

15 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 pro-existing knowledge how to generate; since
a physician too, before he cured, had the science of curing .' 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.

16 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 . But here too they seem ignorant, or to pretend
ignorance, that even before Nicea that heresy was held in detestation, when Artemas 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).

17 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 hail ordained on purpose for this very object.
Accordingly, they assemble at Jerusalem, and there they write thus:- The Holy Council
assembled in Jerusalem by the grace of God, &c... their orthodox teaching in writing ,
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 anti lathers; 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.

18 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 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:-

19 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 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.

20 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 , 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 , perfect
from perfect, King from King, Lord from Lord, Living Word, Living Wisdom, true Light, Way,
Truth, Resurrection, Shepherd, Door, both unalterable and unchangeable; exact Image 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. I); 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 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.

21 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 .
Holding then this faith, and holding it in the presence of God and Christ, from beginning
to end, we anathematize every heretical heterodoxy . And if any teaches, beside the sound
and right faith of the Scriptures, that time, or season, or age , 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 .

22 24. And one Theophronius , 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 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 , 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:

23 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 , or Sabellius, or Paul of Samosata, be he anathemas 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 , 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 . And
they, as being sent from the Council, deliver the following document to Constans Augustus
of blessed memory, and to all who were there:

24 We believe 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 ; for He shall be seated on the right
hand of the Father, not only in this age but in that which is to come.

25 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 . 26. As if
dissatisfied with this, they hold their meeting again after three years, and dispatch
Eudoxius, Martyrius, and Macedonius of Cilicia , 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 in one God the Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of
all things, from whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named.

26 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.

27 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.

28 (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
. (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 . But we
acknowledge 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.)

29 (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 , 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 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 , and
not first man and then God, but first God and then becoming man for us, and never having
been deprived of being.

30 (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 ,-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 . Such are the disciples of Marcellus and Scotinus 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 , 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 ' (Gen. i. 26), who also was seen in His
own Person 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 .

31 (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 . 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. 32 (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 bare 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 handi-works 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 . Yet , 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 , and that they
exist inseparable;

33 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 . 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 un-sparingly 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. 34 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 they met together
against Photinus 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 in One God, the
Father Almighty, the Creator and Maker of all things, `from whom all fatherhood in heaven
and earth is named '

35 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 fight hand of the Father, not only in this age, but also in that which is to come.

36 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 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 . (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 . (4.) Whosoever presumes to say that the Ingenerate, or a part of Him, was
born of Mary, be he anathema.

37 (5.) Whosoever says that according to foreknowledge 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 , 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 , 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
, 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.

38 (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 . (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 . (15.) Whosoever shall say that Abraham saw, not the Son, but the Ingenerate God
or part of Him, be he anathema . (16.) Whosoever shall say that with Jacob, not the Son as
man, but the Ingenerate God or part of Him, has wrestled, be anathema . (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.

39 (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 fight hand,
but He hears the Father saying, `Sit Thou on My right hand' (Ps. cx. I).(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 . (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.

40 (22.) Whosoever shall say that the Holy Ghost is part of the Father or of the Son 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 , 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.

41 (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 . Whereas 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.

42 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. iii. 29, 30); and
every thing else agrees, and has no ambiguity. 43 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 x. 29, Ib. xiv.
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;

44 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 , 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 .

45 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 . 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 not to bring forward the authentic
faith published at the Dedication at Antioch ; 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).

46 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.

47 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 , 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 in One God, Father
Almighty, from whom are all things; 48 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 , 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.

49 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 .

50 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 , 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 . Because then of the
extreme shamelessness of their blasphemy they were called by all Anomoeans, having also
the name of Exucontian , 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 ; not however by religious men, but by Euzoius , 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.

51 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 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?

52 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.


COUNCILS OF ARIMINUM AND SELEUCIA
=================================

COUNCILS OF ARIMINUM AND SELEUCIA continued

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 ? `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 ;

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 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
(1 Cor. i. 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 , 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 ; 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 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' (Ex. iii. 14; Gen. i.
1; Deut. vi. 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 ); 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 ; and spontaneously from elements of
similar structure , 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 , 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 , `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 , 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. i. 7; Prov. vii. 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 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 ,' 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 . 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 .

How then read you, `In Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily?' and, `from His
fulness all we received' (Coloss. ii. 9; John i. 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 ; 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 . 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' (Tit. i. 12; Acts xvii. 28;
1 Cor. xv. 33; 1 Tim. ii. 7;1 Cor. ii. 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 gain 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 fight 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 theme ,'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 Nicaeaea, 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 ,
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 . 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.

But since they say that He is `of the essence' and `Like-in-essence,' what do they signify
by these but `Coessential ?' 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 essences' 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 , 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 xiv. 6; Prov. viii. 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 .

For not even man's word is part of him, nor proceeds from him according to passion ; 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 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 is not foreign nor far
from the `Coessential.' But since, as they allege (for I have not the Epistle in
question), the Bishops who condemned the Samosatene 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 disputations, 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 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 Nicaea, 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 Dionysu 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. vii. 14, 12); and soon after, `What the Law could not do, in that it was weak' (ib.
viii. 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 . 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 thatthe word `Coessential' has not this meaning when used of things immaterial
, 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 ,`I and the Father are one' and
`he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father' (John x. 30, ib. xiv. 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. ii. 7;
Joh. i. 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 of likeness 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 ;

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 Nicaea, 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 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 . Some, for instance, call what is, but is neither generated,
nor has any personal cause at all, un-originate; 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 ,' 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 .' 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 coessentials ;' 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 Nicaea 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 . 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 ,
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 x. 30; xiv. 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 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 , 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 , and what
is said of the Father, is said in Scripture of the Son also, all but His being called
Father . 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 , 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 i. 1; Apoc. i. 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 i. 3; v. 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. i. 20; John i. 1; ib. 9; Gen
xix. 24; Isa. xlv. 5; Am. v. 16; 1 Cor. viii. 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. i. 6;
Matt. iv. 11; xxiv. 31; John v. 23; Phil. ii 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. vi. 4; Ps. 1. I;
cxviii. 27; lxxxiv. 7, LXX.; Mic. vii. 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. ix. 5; Mark ii. 11; 1 Tim. i. 17; Ps. xxiv. 7; Dan. iv. 3; vii. 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 , 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. xlii. 8; John x. 33; Luke xi. 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 , 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
, 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 ' As to
all this, though it be a Greek interpretation, and what comes from them does not bind us ,
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 . 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
, so again they work upon an existing subject matter, and otherwise cannot make. But if we
do not understand creation in a human way , 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 to the Father , 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 , 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 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 be holding 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 , 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 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 . 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 ; 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 , 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 , I had information that
the most irreligious 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 . 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 Excursusto
the de Synodisis 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 dmoonsion (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.]


CIRCULAR LETTER
===============

CIRCULAR LETTER Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

CIRCULAR LETTER

1 To his fellow-ministers in every place, beloved lords, Athanasius sends health in the
Lord.

§1. The Whole Church Affected by What Has Occurred.

2 Our sufferings have been dreadful beyond endurance, and it is impossible to describe
them in suitable terms; but in order that the dreadful nature of the events which have
taken place may be more readily apprehended, I have thought it good to remind you of a
history out of the Scriptures. It happened that a certain Levite was injured in the person
of his wife; and, when he considered the exceeding greatness of the pollution (for the
woman was a Hebrew, and of the tribe of Judah), being astounded at the outrage which had
been committed against him, he divided his wife's body, as the Holy Scripture relates in
the Book of Judges, and sent a part of it to every tribe in Israel, in order that it might
be understood that an injury like this pertained not to himself only, but extended to all
alike; and that, if the people sympathised with him in his sufferings, they might avenge
him; or if they neglected to do so, might bear the disgrace of being considered
thenceforth as themselves guilty of the wrong. The messengers whom he sent related what
had happened; and they that heard and saw it, declared that such things had never been
done from the day that the children of Israel came up out of Egypt. So every tribe of
Israel was moved, and all came together against the offenders, as though they had
themselves been the sufferers;

3 and at last the perpetrators of this iniquity were destroyed in war, and became a curse
in the mouths of all: for the assembled people considered not their kindred blood, but
regarded only the crime they had committed. You know the history, brethren, and the
particular account of the circumstances given in Scripture. I will not therefore describe
them more in detail, since I write to persons acquainted with them, and as I am anxious to
represent to your piety our present circumstances, which are even worse than those to
which I have referred. For my object in reminding you of this history is this, that you
may compare those ancient transactions with what has happened to us now, and perceiving
how much these last exceed the other in cruelty, may be filled with greater indignation on
account of them, than were the people of old against those offenders. For the treatment we
have undergone surpasses the bitterness of any persecution; and the calamity of the Levite
was but small, when compared with the enormities which have now been committed against the
Church; or rather such deeds as these were never before heard of in the whole world, or
the like experienced by any one. For in that case it was but a single woman that was
injured, and one Levite who suffered wrong; Now the whole Church is injured, the
priesthood insulted, and worst of all, piety is persecuted by impiety.

4 On that occasion the tribes were astounded, each at the sight of part of the body of one
woman; but now the members of the whole Church are seen divided from one another, and are
sent abroad some to you, and some to others, bringing word of the insults and injustice
which they have suffered. Be ye therefore also moved, I beseech you, considering that
these wrongs are done unto you no less than unto us; and let every one lend his aid, as
feeling that he is himself a sufferer, lest shortly ecclesiastical Canons, and the faith
of the Church be corrupted. For both are in danger, unless God shall speedily by your
hands amend what has been done amiss, and the Church be avenged on her enemies. For our
Canons and our forms were not given to the Churches at the present day, but were wisely
and safely transmitted to us from our forefathers. Neither had our faith its beginning at
this time, but it came down to us from the Lord through His disciples . That therefore the
ordinances which have been preserved in the Churches from old time until now, may not be
lost in our days, and the trust which has been committed to us required at our hands;
rouse yourselves, brethren, as being stewards of the mysteries of God , and seeing them
now seized upon by others. Further particulars of our condition you will learn from the
bearers of our letters;

5 but I was anxious myself to write you a brief account thereof, that you may know for
certain, that such things have never before been committed against the Church, from the
day that our Saviour when He was taken up, gave command to His disciples, saying, `Go ye
and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost .'

§2. Violent and Uncanonical Intrusion of Gregory.

6 Now the outrages which have been committed against us and against the Church are these.
While we were holding our assemblies in peace, as usual, and while the people were
rejoicing in them, and advancing in godly conversation, and while our fellow-ministers in
Egypt, and the Thebais, and Libya, were in love and peace both with one another and with
us; on a sudden the Prefect of Egypt puts forth a public letter, bearing the form of an
edict, and declaring that one Gregory from Cappadocia was coming to be my successor from
the court. This announcement confounded every one, for such a proceeding was entirely
novel, and now heard of for the first time. The people however assembled still more
constantly in the churches , for they very well knew that neither they themselves, nor any
Bishop or Presbyter, nor in short any one had ever complained against me; and they saw
that Arians only were on his side, and were aware also that he was himself an Arian, and
was sent by Eusebius and his fellows to the Arian party. For you know, brethren, that
Eusebius and his fellows have always been the supporters and associates of the impious
heresy of the Arian madmen , by whose means they have ever carded on their designs against
me, and were the authors of my banishment into Gaul.

7 The people, therefore, were justly indignant and exclaimed against the proceeding,
calling the rest of the magistrates and the whole city to witness, that this novel and
iniquitous attempt was now made against the Church, not on the ground of any charge
brought against me by ecclesiastical persons, but through the wanton assault of the Arian
heretics. For even if there had been any complaint generally prevailing against me, it was
not an Arian, or one professing Arian doctrines, that ought to have been chosen to
supersede me; but according to the ecclesiastical Canons, and the direction of Paul, when
the people were `gathered together, and the spirit' of them that ordain, `with the power
of our Lord Jesus Christ ' all things ought to have been enquired into and transacted
canonically, in the presence of those among the laity and clergy who demanded the change;
and not that a person brought from a distance by Arians, as if making a traffic of the
title of Bishop, should with the patronage and strong arm of heathen magistrates, thrust
himself upon those who neither asked for nor desired his presence, nor indeed knew
anything of what had been done. Such proceedings tend to the dissolution of all the
ecclesiastical Canons, and compel the heathen to blaspheme, and to suspect that our
appointments are not made according to a divine rule, but as a result of traffic and
patronage .

§3. Outrages Which Took Place at the Time of Gregory's Arrival.

8 Thus was this notable appointment of Gregory brought about by the Arians, and such was
the beginning of it. And what outrages he committed on his entry into Alexandria, and of
what great evils that event has been the cause, you may learn both from our letters, and
by enquiry of those who are sojourning among you. While the people were offended at such
an unusual proceeding, and in consequence assembled in the churches, in order to prevent
the impiety of the Arians from mingling itself with the faith of the Church, Philagrius,
who has long been a persecutor of the Church and her virgins, and is now Prefect of Egypt,
an apostate already, and a fellow-countryman of Gregory, a man too of no respectable
character, and moreover supported by Eusebius and his fellows, and therefore full of zeal
against the Church; this person, by means of promises which he afterwards fulfilled,
succeeded in gaining over the heathen multitude, with the Jews and disorderly persons, and
having excited their passions, sent them in a body with swords and clubs into the churches
to attack the people.

9 What followed upon this it is by no means easy to describe: indeed it is not possible to
set before you a just representation of the circumstances, nor even could one recount a
small part of them without tears and lamentations. Have such deeds as these ever been made
the subjects of tragedy among the ancients? or has the like ever happened before in time
of persecution or of war? The church and the holy Baptistery were set on fire, and
straightway groans, shrieks, and lamentations, were heard through the city; while the
citizens in their indignation at these enormities, cried shame upon the governor, and
protested against the violence used to them. For holy and undefiled virgins were being
stripped naked, and suffering treatment which is not to be named and if they resisted,
they were in danger of their lives. Monks were being trampled under foot and perishing;
some were being hurled headlong; others were being destroyed with swords and clubs; others
were being wounded and beaten. And oh! what deeds of impiety and iniquity have been
committed upon the Holy Table! They were offering birds and pine cones in sacrifice,
singing the praises of their idols, and blaspheming even in the very churches our Lord and
Saviour Jesus-Christ, the Son of the living God. They were burning the books of Holy
Scripture which they found in the church; and the Jews, the murderers of our Lord, and the
godless heathen entering irreverently (O strange boldness!

10 the holy Baptistery, were stripping themselves naked, and acting such a disgraceful
part, both by word and deed, as one is ashamed even to relate. Certain impious men also,
following the examples set them in the bitterest persecutions, were seizing upon the
virgins and ascetics by the hands and dragging them along, and as they were haling them,
endeavoured to make them blaspheme and deny the Lord; and when they refused to do so, were
beating them violently and trampling them under foot.

§4. Outrages on Good Friday and Easter Day, 339.

11 In addition to all this, after such a notable and illustrious entry into the city, the
Arian Gregory, taking pleasure in these calamities, and as if desirous to secure to the
heathens and Jews, and those who had wrought these evils upon us, a prize and price of
their iniquitous success, gave up the church to be plundered by them. Upon this license of
iniquity and disorder, their deeds were worse than in time of war, and more cruel than
those of robbers. Some of them were plundering whatever fell in their way; others dividing
among themselves the sums which some had laid up there ; the wine, of which there was a
large quantity, they either drank or emptied out or carried away; they plundered the store
of oil, and every one took as his spoil the doors and chancel rails; the candlesticks they
forthwith laid aside in the wall , and lighted the candies of the Church before their
idols: in a word, rapine and death pervaded the Church. And the impious Arians, so far
from feeling shame that such things should be done, added yet further outrages and
cruelty. Presbyters and laymen had their flesh torn, virgins were stript of their veils ,
and led away to the tribunal of the governor, and then cast into prison; others had their
goods confiscated, and were scourged; the bread of the ministers and virgins was
intercepted. And these things were done even during the holy season of Lent , about the
time of Easter;

12 a time when the brethren were keeping fast, while this notable Gregory exhibited the
disposition of a Caiaphas, and, together with Pilate the Governor, furiously raged against
the pious worshippers of Christ. Going into one of the churches on the Preparation , in
company with the Governor and the heathen multitude, when he saw that the people regarded
with abhorrence his forcible entry among them, he caused that most cruel person, the
Governor, publicly to scourge in one hour, four and thirty virgins and married women, and
men of rank, and to cast them into prison. Among them there was one virgin, who, being
fond of study, had the Psalter in her hands, at the time when be caused her to be publicly
scourged: the book was torn in pieces by the officers, and the virgin herself shut up in
prison.

§5. Retirement of Athanasius, and Tyranny of Gregory and Philagrius.

13 When all this was done, they did not stop even here; but consulted how they might act
the same part in the other church , where I was mostly living during those clays; and they
were eager to extend their fury to this church also, in order that they might hunt out and
dispatch me. And this would have been my fate, had not the grace of Christ assisted me, if
it were only that I might escape to relate these few particulars concerning their conduct.
For seeing that they were exceedingly mad against me, and being anxious that the church
should not be injured, nor the virgins that were in it suffer, nor additional murders be
committed, nor the people again outraged, I withdrew myself from among them, remembering
the words of our Saviour, `If they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another .' For
I knew, from the evil they had done against the first-named church, that they would for-
hear no outrage against the other also. And there in fact they reverenced not even the
Lord's day of the holy Feast, but in that church also they imprisoned the persons who
belonged to it, at a time when the Lord delivered all from the bonds of death, whereas
Gregory and his associates, as if fighting against our Saviour, and depending upon the
patronage of the Governor, have turned into mourning this day of liberty to the servants
of Christ. The heathens were rejoicing to do this, for they abhor that day; and Gregory
perhaps did but fulfil the commands of Eusebius and his fellows in forcing the Christians
to mourn under the infliction of bonds.

14 With these acts of violence has the Governor seized upon the churches, and has given
them up to Gregory and the Arian madmen. Thus, those persons who were excommunicated by us
for their impiety, now glory in the plunder of our churches; while the people of God, and
the Clergy of the Catholic Church are compelled either to have communion with the impiety
of the Arian heretics, or else to forbear entering into them. Moreover, by means of the
Governor, Gregory has exercised no small violence towards the captains of ships and others
who pass over sea, torturing and scourging some, putting others in bonds, and casting them
into prison, in order to oblige them not to resist his iniquities, and to take letters
from him. And not satisfied with all this, that he may glut himself with our blood, he has
caused his savage associate, the Governor, to prefer an indictment against me, as in the
name of the people, before the most religious Emperor Constantius, which contains odious
charges, from which one may expect not only to be banished, but even ten thousand deaths.
The person who drew it up is an apostate from Christianity, and a shameless worshipper of
idols, and they who subscribed it are heathens, and keepers of idol temples, and others of
them Arians. In short, not to make my letter tedious to you, a persecution rages here, and
such a persecution as was never before raised against the Church.

15 For in former instances a man at least might pray while he fled from his persecutors,
and be baptized while he lay in concealment. But now their extreme cruelty has imitated
the godless conduct of the Babylonians. For as they falsely accused Daniel , so does the
notable Gregory now accuse before the Governor those who pray in their houses, and watches
every opportunity to insult their ministers, so that through his violent conduct, many are
endangered from missing baptism, and many who are in sickness and sorrow have no one to
visit them, a calamity which they bitterly lament, accounting it worse than their
sickness. For while the ministers of the Church are under persecution, the people who
condemn the impiety of the Arian heretics choose rather thus to be sick and to run the
risk, than that a hand of the Arians should come upon their heads.

§6. All the Above Illegalities Were Carried or in the Interest of Arianism.

16 Gregory then is an Arian, and has been sent to the Arian party; for none demanded him,
but they only; and accordingly as a hireling and a stranger, he makes use of the Governor
to inflict these dreadful and cruel deeds upon the people of the Catholic Churches, as not
being his own. For since Pistus, whom Eusebius and his fellows formerly appointed over the
Arians, was justly anathematized and excommunicated for his impiety by you the Bishops of
the Catholic Church, as you all know, on our writing to you concerning him, they have now,
therefore, in like manner sent this Gregory to them; and lest they should a second time be
put to shame, by our again writing against them, they have employed extraneous force
against me, in order that, having obtained possession of the Churches, they may seem to
have escaped all suspicion of being Arians. But in this too they have been mistaken, for
none of the people of the Church are with them, except the heretics only, and those who
have been excommunicated on divers charges, and such as have been compelled by the
Governor to dissemble. This then is the drama of Eusebius and his fellows, which they have
long been rehearsing and composing; and now have succeeded in performing through the false
charges which they have made against me before the Emperor . Notwithstanding, they are not
yet content to be quiet, but even now seek to kill me;

17 and they make themselves so formidable to our friends, that they are all driven into
banishment, and expect death at their hands. But you must not for this stand in awe of
their iniquity, but on the contrary avenge: and shew your indignation at this their
unprecedented conduct against us. For if when one member suffers all the members suffer
with it, and, according to the blessed Apostle, we ought to weep with them that weep , let
every one, now that so great a Church as this is suffering, avenge its wrongs, as though
he were himself a sufferer. For we have a common Saviour, who is blasphemed by them, and
Canons belonging to us all, which they are transgressing. If while any of you bad been
sitting in your Church, and while the people were assembled with you, without any blame,
some one had suddenly come under plea of an edict as successor of one of you, and had
acted the same part towards you, would you not have been indignant? would I you not have
demanded to be righted? If so,then it is right that you should be indignant now, lest if
these things be passed over unnoticed, the same mischief shall by degrees extend itself to
every Church, and so our schools of religion be turned into a market-house and an
exchange.

§7. Appeal to the Bishops of the Whole Church to Unite Against Gregory.

18 You are acquainted with the history of the Arian madmen, beloved, for you have often,
both individually and in a body, condemned their impiety; and you know also that Eusebius
and his fellows, as I said before, are engaged in the same heresy; for the sake of which
they have long been carrying on a conspiracy against me. And I have represented to you,
what has now been done, both for them and by them, with greater cruelty than is usual even
in time of war, in order that after the example set before you in the history which I
related at the beginning, you may entertain a zealous hatred of their wickedness, and
reject those who have committed such enormities against the Church. If the brethren at
Rome [last year], before these things had happened, and on account of their former
misdeeds, wrote letters to call a Council, that these evils might be set right (fearing
which, Eusebius and his fellows took care previously to throw the Church into confusion,
and desired to destroy me, in order that they might thenceforth be able to act as they
pleased without fear, and might have no one to call them to account), how much more ought
you now to be indignant at these outrages, and to condemn them, seeing they have added
this to their former misconduct.

19 I beseech you, overlook not such proceedings, nor suffer the famous Church of the
Alexandrians to be trodden down by heretics. In consequence of these things the people and
their ministers are separated from one another, as one might expect, silenced by the
violence of the Prefect, yet abhorring the impiety of the Arian madmen. If therefore
Gregory shall write unto you, or any other in his behalf, receive not his letters,
brethren, but tear them in pieces and put the bearers of them to shame, as the ministers
of impiety and wickedness. And even if he presume to write to you after a friendly
fashion, nevertheless receive them not. Those who bring his letters convey them only from
fear of the Governor, and on account of his frequent acts of violence. And since it is
probable that Eusebius and his fellows will write to you concerning him, I was anxious to
admonish you beforehand, so that you may herein imitate God, Who is no respecter of
persons, and may drive out from before you those that come from them; because for the sake
of the Arian madmen they caused persecutions, rape of virgins, murders, plunder of the
Church's property, burnings, and blasphemies in the Churches, to be committed by the
heathens and Jews at such a season. The impious and mad Gregory cannot deny that he is an
Arian, being proved to be so by the person who writes his letters. This is his secretary
Ammon, who was cast out of the Church long ago by my predecessor the blessed Alexander for
many misdeeds and for impiety.

20 For all these reasons, therefore, vouchsafe to send me a reply, and condemn these
impious men; so that even now the ministers and people of this place, seeing your
orthodoxy and hatred of wickedness, may rejoice in your concord in the Christian faith,
and that those who have been guilty of these lawless deeds against the Church may be
reformed by your letters, and brought at last, though late, to repentance. Salute the
brotherhood that is among you. All the brethren that are with me salute you. Fare ye well,
and remember me, and the Lord preserve you continually, most truly beloved lords.


DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS
==========================

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

INTRODUCTION

1. I supposed that, after so many proofs of my innocence had been given, my enemies would
have shrunk from further enquiry, and would now have condemned themselves for their false
accusations of others. But as they are not yet abashed, though they have been so clearly
convicted, but, as insensible to shame, persist in their slanderous reports against me,
professing to think that the whole matter ought to be tried over again (not that they may
have judgment passed on them, for that they avoid, but in order to harass me, and to
disturb the minds of the simple); I therefore thought it necessary to make my defence unto
you, that you may listen to their murmurings no longer, but may denounce their wickedness
and base calumnies. And it is only to you, who are men of sincere minds, that I offer a
defence: as for the contentious, I appeal confidently to the decisive proofs Which I have
against them. For my cause needs no further judgment; for judgment has already been given,
and not once or twice only, but many times. First of all, it was tried in my own country
in an assembly of nearly one hundred of its Bishops ; a second time at Rome, when, in
consequence of letters from Eusebius, both they and we were summoned, and more than fifty
Bishops met ; and a third time in the great Council assembled at Sardica by order of the
most religious Emperors Constantius and Constans, when my enemies were degraded as false
accusers, and the sentence that was passed in my favour received the suffrages of more
than three hundred Bishops, out of the provinces of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis,
Palestine, Arabia, Isauria, Cyprus, Pamphylia, Lycia, Galatia, Dacia, Moesia, Thrace,
Dardania, Macedonia, Epirus, Thessaly, Achaia, Crete, Dalmatia, Siscia, Pannonia, Noricum,
Italy, Picenum, Tuscany, Campania, Calabria, Apulia, Bruttia, Sicily, the whole of Africa,
Sardinia, Spain, Gaul, and Britain.

Added to these was the testimony of Ursacius and Valens, who had formerly calumniated me,
but afterwards changed their minds, and not only gave their assent to the sentence that
was passed in my favour, but also confessed that they themselves and the rest of my
enemies were false accusers; for men who make such a change and such a recantation of
course reflect upon Eusebius and his fellows, for with them they had contrived the plot
against me. Now after a matter has been examined and decided on such clear evidence by so
many eminent Bishops, every one will confess that further discussion is unnecessary; else,
if an investigation be instituted at this time, it may be again discussed and again
investigated, and there will be no end to such trifling. 2. Now the decision of so many
Bishops was sufficient to confound those who would still fain pretend some charge against
me. But when my enemies also bear testimony in my favour and against themselves, declaring
that the proceedings against me were a conspiracy, who is there that would not be ashamed
to doubt any longer? The law requires that in the mouth of two or three witnesses
judgments shall be settled, and we have here this great multitude of witnesses in my
favour, with the addition of the proofs afforded by my enemies; so much so that those who
still continue opposed to me no longer attach any importance to their own arbitrary
judgment, but now have recourse to violence, and in the place of fair reasoning seek to
injure those by whom they were exposed. For this is the chief cause of vexation to them,
that the measures they carried on in secret, contrived by themselves in a corner, have
been brought to light and disclosed by Valens and Ursacius; for they are well aware that
their recantation while it clears those whom they have injured, condemns themselves.

Indeed this led to their degradation in the Council of Sardica, as mentioned before; and
with good reason; for, as the Pharisees of old, when they undertook the defence of Paul ,
fully exposed the conspiracy which they and the Jews bad formed against him; and as the
blessed David was proved to be persecuted unjustly when the persecutor confessed, `I have
sinned, my son David ;' so it was with these men; being overcome by the truth they made a
request, and delivered it in writing to Julius, Bishop of Rome. They wrote also to me
requesting to be on terms of peace with me, though they have spread such reports
concerning me; and probably even now they are covered with shame, on seeing that those
whom they sought to destroy by the grace of the Lord are still alive. Consistently also
with this conduct they anathematized Arius and his heresy; for knowing that Eusebius and
his fellows had conspired against me in behalf of their own misbelief, and of nothing
else, as soon as they had determined to confess their calumnies against me, they
immediately renounced also that antichristian heresy for the sake of which they had
falsely asserted them.

The following are the letters written in my favour by the Bishops in the several Councils
and first the letter of the Egyptian Bishops. Encyclical Letter of the Council of Egypt.
The holy Council assembled at Alexandria out of Egypt, the Thebais, Libya, and Pentapolis,
to the Bishops of the Catholic Church everywhere, brethren beloved and greatly longed for
in the Lord, greeting. 3. Dearly beloved brethren, we might have put forth a defence of
our brother Athanasius as respects the conspiracy of Eusebius and his fellows against him,
and complained of his sufferings at their hands, and have exposed all their false charges,
either at the beginning of their conspiracy or upon his arrival at Alexandria. But
circumstances did not permit it then, as you also know; and lately, after the return of
the Bishop Athanasius, we thought that they would be confounded and covered with shame at
their manifest injustice: in consequence we prevailed with ourselves to remain silent.
Since, however, after all his severe sufferings, after his retirement into Gaul, after his
sojourn in a foreign and far distant country in the place of his own, after his narrow
escape from death through their calumnies, but thanks to the clemency of the
Emperor,-distress which would have satisfied even the most cruel enemy,-they are still
insensible to shame, are again acting insolently against the Church and Athanasius; and
from indignation at his deliverance venture on still more atrocious schemes against him,
and are ready with an accusation, fearless of the words in holy Scripture , `A false
witness shall not be unpunished;' and, `The mouth that belieth slayeth the soul;' we
therefore are unable longer to hold our peace, being amazed at their wickedness and at the
insatiable love of contention displayed in their intrigues.

For see, they cease not to disturb the ear of royalty with fresh reports against us; they
cease not to write letters of deadly import, for the destruction of the Bishop who is the
enemy of their impiety. For again have they written to the Emperors against him; again
they wish to conspire against him, charging him with a butchery which has never taken
place; again they wish to shed his blood, accusing him of a murder that never was
committed (for at that former time would they have murdered him by their calumnies, had we
not had a kind Emperor); again they are urgent, to say the least, that he should be sent
into banishment, while they pretend to lament the miseries of those alleged to have been
exiled by him. They lament before us things that have never been done, and, not satisfied
with what has been done to him, desire to add thereto other and more cruel treatment. So
mild are they and merciful, and of so just a disposition; or rather (for the truth shall
be spoken) so wicked are they and malicious; obtaining respect through fear and by
threats, rather than by their piety and justice, as becomes Bishops. They have dared in
their letters to the Emperors to pour forth language such as no contentious person would
employ even among those that are without; they have charged him with a number of murders
and butcheries, and that not before a Governor, or any other superior officer, but before
the three Augusti; nor shrink they from any journey however long, provided only all
greater courts may be filled with their accusations. For indeed, dearly beloved, their
business consists in accusations, and that of the most solemn character, forasmuch as the
tribunals to which they make their appeal are the most solemn of any upon earth. And what
other end do they propose by these investigations, except to move the Emperor to capital
punishment?

4. Their own conduct therefore, and not that of Athanasius, is the fittest subject for
lamentation and mourning, and one would more properly lament them, for such actions ought
to be bewailed, since it is written, `Weep ye not for the dead, neither bemoan him: but
weep sore for him that goeth away, for he shall return no more .' For their whole letter
contemplates nothing but death; and their endeavour is to kill, whenever they may be
permitted, or if not, to drive into exile. And this they were permitted to do by the most
religious father of the Emperors, who gratified their fury by the banishment of Athanasius
, instead of his death. Now that this is not the conduct even of ordinary Christians,
scarcely even of heathens, much less of Bishops, who profess to teach others
righteousness, we suppose that your Christian consciences must at once perceive. How can
they forbid others to accuse their brethren, who themselves become their accusers, and
that to the Emperors? How can they teach compassion for the misfortunes of others, who
cannot rest satisfied even with our banishment? For there was confessedly a general
sentence of banishment against us Bishops, and we all looked upon ourselves as banished
men: and now again we consider ourselves as restored with Athanasius to our native places,
and instead of our former lamentations and mourning over him, as having the greatest
encouragement and grace,-which may the Lord continue to us, nor suffer Eusebius and his
fellows to destroy?

Even if their charges against him were true, here is a certain charge against them, that
against the precept of Christianity, and after his banishment and trials, they have
assaulted him again, and accuse him of murder, and butchery, and other crimes, which they
sound in the royal ears against the Bishops. But how manifold is their wickedness, and
what manner of men think you them, when every word they speak is false, every charge they
bring a calumny, and there is no truth whatever either in their mouths or their writings!
Let us then at length enter upon these matters, and meet their last charges. This will
prove, that in their former representations in the Council and at the trial their conduct
was dishonourable, or rather their words untrue, besides exposing them for what they have
now advanced. 5. We are indeed ashamed to make any defence against such charges. But since
our reckless accusers lay hold of any charge, and allege that murders and butchcries were
committed after the return of Athanasius, we beseech you to bear with our answer though it
be somewhat long; for circumstances constrain as. No murder has been committed either by
Athanasius or on his account, since our accusers, as we said before, compel us to enter
upon this humiliating defence. Slaughter and imprisonment are foreign to our Church. No
one did Athanasius commit into the hands of the executioner; and the prison, so far as he
was concerned, was never disturbed. Our sanctuaries are now, as they have always been,
pure, and honoured only with the Blood of Christ and His pious worship. Neither Presbyter
nor Deacon was destroyed by Athanasius; he perpetrated no murder, he caused the banishment
of no one. Would that they had never caused the like to him, nor given him actual
experience of it! No one here has been banished on his account; no one at all except
Athanasius himself, the Bishop of Alexandria, whom they banished, and whom, now that he is
restored, they again seek to entangle in the same or even a more cruel plot than before,
setting their tongues to speak all manner of false and deadly words against him.

For, behold, they now attribute to him the acts of the magistrates; and although they
plainly confess in their letter that the Prefect of Egypt passed sentence upon certain
persons, they now are not ashamed to impute this sentence to Athanasius; and that, though
he had not at the time entered Alexandria, but was yet on his return from his place of
exile. Indeed he was then in Syria; since we must needs adduce in defence his length of
way from home, that a man may not be responsible for the actions of a Governor or Prefect
of Egypt. But supposing Athanasius had been in Alexandria, what were the proceedings of
the Prefect to Athanasius? However, he was not even in the country; and what the Prefect
of Egypt did was not done on ecclesiastical grounds, but for reasons which you will learn
from the records, which, after we understood what they had written, we made diligent
enquiry for, and have transmitted to you. Since then they now raise a cry against certain
things which were never done either by him or for him, as though they had certainly taken
place, and testify against such evils as though they were assured of their existence; let
them inform us from what Council they obtained their knowledge of them, from what proofs,
and from what judicial investigation?

But if they have no such evidence to bring forward, and nothing but their own mere
assertion, we leave it to you to consider as regards their former charges also, how the
things took place, and why they so speak of them. In truth, it is nothing but calumny, and
a plot of our enemies, and a temper of ungovernable mood, and an impiety in behalf of the
Arian madmen which is frantic against true godliness, and desires to root out the
orthodox, so that henceforth the advocates of impiety may preach without fear whatever
doctrines they please. The history of the matter is as follows:- 6. When Arius, from whom
the heresy of the Arian madmen has its name, was cast out of the Church for his impiety by
Bishop Alexander, of blessed memory, Eusebius and his fellows, who are the disciples and
partners of his impiety, considering themselves also to have been ejected, wrote
frequently to Bishop Alexander, beseeching him not to leave the heretic Arius out of the
Church . But when Alexander in his piety towards Christ refused to admit that impious man,
they directed their resentment against Athanasius, who was then a Deacon, because in their
busy enquiries they had heard that he was much in the familiarity of Bishop Alexander, and
much honoured by him. And their hatred of him was greatly increased after they had
experience of his piety towards Christ, in the Council assembled at Nicaea , wherein he
spoke boldly against the impiety of the Arian madmen. But when God raised him to the
Episcopate, their long-cherished malice burst forth into a flame, and fearing his
orthodoxy and resistance of their impiety, they (and especially Eusebius , who was smitten
with a consciousness of his own evil doings), engaged in all manner of treacherous designs
against him. They prejudiced the Emperor against him; they frequently threatened him with
Councils; and at last assembled at Tyre; and to this day they cease not to write against
him, and are so implacable that they even find fault with his appointment to the
Episcopate , taking every means of shewing their enmity and hatred towards him, and
spreading false reports for the sole purpose of thereby vilifying his character.

However, the very misrepresentations which they now are making do but convict their former
statements of being falsehoods, and a mere conspiracy against him. For they say, that
`after the death of Bishop Alexander, a certain few having mentioned the name of
Athanasius, six or seven Bishops elected him clandestinely in a secret place:' and this is
what they wrote to the Emperors, having no scruple about asserting the greatest
falsehoods. Now that the whole multitude and all the people of the Catholic Church
assembled together as with one mind and body, and cried, shouted, that Athanasius should
be Bishop of their Church, made this the subject of their public prayers to Christ, and
conjured us to grant it for many days and nights, neither departing themselves from the
Church, nor suffering us to do so; of all this we are witnesses, and so is the whole city,
and the province too. Not a word did they speak against him, as these persons represented,
but gave him the most excellent titles they could devise, calling him good, pious,
Christian, an ascetic , a genuine Bishop. And that he was elected by a majority of our
body in the sight and with the acclamations of all the people, we who elected him also
testify, who are surely more credible witnesses than those who were not present, and now
spread these false accounts.

But yet Eusebius finds fault with the appointment of Athanasius,-he who perhaps never
received any appointment to his office at all; or if he did, has himself rendered it
invalid . For he had first the See of Berytus, but leaving that he came to Nicomedia. He
left the one contrary to the law, and contrary to the law invaded the other; having
deserted his own without affection, and holding possession of another's without reason; he
lost his love for the first in his lust for another, without even keeping to that which he
obtained at the prompting of his lust. For, behold, withdrawing himself from the second,
again he takes possession of another's , casting an evil eye all around him upon the
cities of other men, and thinking that godliness consists in wealth and in the greatness
of cities, and making light of the heritage of God to which he had been appointed; not
knowing that `where' even `two or three are gathered in the name of the' Lord, `there' is
the Lord `in the midst of them;' not considering the words of the Apostle, `I will not
boast in another man's labours;' not perceiving the charge which he has given, `Art thou
bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed.' For if this expression applies to a wife, how
much more does it apply to a Church, and to the same Episcopate; to which whosoever is
bound ought not to seek another, lest he prove an adulterer according to holy Scripture.

7. But though conscious of these his own misdoings, he has boldly undertaken to arraign
the appointment of Athanasius, to which honourable testimony has been borne by all, and he
ventures to reproach him with his deposition, though he has been deposed himself, and has
a standing proof of his deposition in the appointment of another in his room. How could
either he or Theognius depose another, after they had been deposed themselves, which is
sufficiently proved by the appointment of others in their room? For you know very well
that there were appointed instead of them Amphion to Nicomedia and Chrestus to Nicaea, in
consequence of their own impiety and connection with the Arian madmen, who were rejected
by the Ecumenic Council But while they desire to set aside that true Council, they
endeavour to give that name to their own unlawful combination ; while they are unwilling
that the decrees of the Council should be enforced, they desire to enforce their own
decisions; and they use the name of a Council, while they refuse to submit themselves to
one so great as this. Thus they care not for Councils, but only pretend to do so in order
that they may root out the orthodox, and annul the decrees of the true and great Council
against the Arians, in support of whom, both now and heretofore, they have ventured to
assert these falsehoods against the Bishop Athanasius.

For their former statements resembled those they now falsely make, viz., that disorderly
meetings were held at his entrance , with lamentation and mourning, the people indignantly
refusing to receive him. Now such was not the case, but, quite the contrary, joy and
cheerfulness prevailed, and the people ran together, hastening to obtain the desired sight
of him. The churches were full of rejoicings, and thanksgivings were offered up to the
Lord everywhere; and all the Ministers and Clergy beheld him with such feelings, that
their souls were possessed with delight, and they esteemed that the happiest day of their
lives. Why need we mention the inexpressible joy that prevailed among us Bishops, for we
have already said that we counted ourselves to have been partakers in his sufferings? 8.
Now this being confessedly the truth of the matter, although it is very differently
represented by them, what weight can be attached to that Council or trial of which they
make their boast? Since they presume thus to interfere in a case which they did not
witness, which they have not examined, and for which they did not meet, and to write as
though they were assured of the truth of their statements, how can they claim credit
respecting these matters for the consideration of which they say that they did meet
together? Will it not rather be believed that they have acted both in the one case and in
the other out of enmity to us? For what kind of a Council of Bishops was then held? Was it
an assembly which aimed at the truth? Was not almost every one among them our enemy ? Did
not the attack of Eusebius and his fellows upon us proceed from their zeal for the Arian
madness? Did they not urge on the others of their party? Have we not always written
against them as professing the doctrines of Arius? Was not Eusebius of Caesarea in
Palestine accused by our confessors of sacrificing to idols ? Was not George proved to
have been deposed by the blessed Alexander ? Were not they charged with various offences,
some with this, some with that?

How then could such men entertain the purpose of holding a meeting against us? How can
they have the boldness to call that a Council, at which a Count presided, which an
executioner attended, and where an usher instead of the Deacons of the Church introduced
us into Court; and where the Count only spoke, and all present held their peace, or rather
obeyed his directions ? The removal of those Bishops who seemed to deserve it was
prevented at his desire; and when he gave the order we were dragged about by soldiers;-or
rather Eusebius and his fellows gave the order, and he was subservient to their will. In
short, dearly beloved, what kind of Council was that, the object of which was banishment
and murder at the pleasure of the Emperor? And of what nature were their charges?-for here
is matter of still greater astonishment. There was one Arsenius whom they declared to have
been murdered; and they also complained that a chalice belonging to the sacred mysteries
had been broken.

Now Arsenius is alive, and prays to be admitted to our communion. He waits for no other
testimony to prove that he is still living, but himself confesses it, writing in his own
person to our brother Athanasius, whom they positively asserted to be his murderer. The
impious wretches were not ashamed to accuse him of having murdered a man who was at a
great distance from him, being separated by so great a distance, whether by sea or land,
and whose abode at that time no one knew. Nay, they even had the boldness to remove him
out of sight, and place him in concealment, though he had suffered no injury; and, if it
had been possible, they would have transported him to another world, nay, or have taken
him from life in earnest, so that either by a true or false statement of his murder they
might in good earnest destroy Athanasius. But thanks to divine Providence for this also
which permitted them not to succeed in their injustice, but presented Arsenius alive to
the eyes of all men, who has clearly proved their conspiracy and calumnies. He does not
withdraw from us as murderers, nor hate us as having injured him (for indeed he has
suffered no evil at all); but he desires to hold communion with us; he wishes to be
numbered t among us, and has written to this effect.

9. Nevertheless they laid their plot against Athanasius, accusing him of having murdereda
person who was still alive; and those same men are the authors of his banishment . For it
was not the father of the Emperors, but their calumnies, that sent him into exile.Consider
whether this is not the truth. When nothing was discovered to the prejudice of our fellow-
minister Athanasius, but still the Count threatened him with violence, and was very
zealous against him, the Bishop fled from this violence and went up to the most religious
Emperor, where he protested against the Count and their conspiracy against him, and
requested either that a lawful Council of Bishops might be assembled, or that the Emperor
would himself receive his defence concerning the charges they brought against him. Upon
this the Emperor wrote in anger, summoning them before him, and declaring that he would
hear the cause himself, and for that purpose he also ordered a Council to be held.
Whereupon Eusebius and his fellows went up and falsely charged Athanasius, not with the
same offences which they had published against him at Tyre, but with an intention of
detaining the vessels laden with corn, as though Athanasius had been the man to pretend
that he could stop the exports of corn from Alexandria to Constantinople .

Certain of our friends were present at the palace with Athanasius, and heard the threats
of the Emperor upon receiving this report And when Athanasius cried out upon the calumny,
and positively declared that it was not true, (for how, he argued, should he a poor man,
and in a private station, be able to do such a thing?) Eusebius did not hesitate publicly
to repeat the charge, and swore that Athanasius was a rich man, and powerful, and able to
do anything; in order that it might thence be supposed that he had used this language.
Such was the accusation these venerable Bishops proffered against him. But the grace of
God proved superior to their wickedness, for it moved the pious Emperor to mercy, who
instead of death passed upon him the sentence of banishment. Thus their calumnies, and
nothing else, were the cause of this. For the Emperor, in the letter which he previously
wrote, complained of their conspiracy, censured their machinations, and condemned the
Meletians as unscrupulous and deserving of execration; in short, expressed himself in the
severest terms concerning them. For he was greatly moved when he heard the story of the
dead alive; he was moved at hearing of murder in the case of one alive, and not deprived
of life. We have sent you the letter.

10. But these marvellous men, Eusebius and his fellows, to make a show of refuting the
truth of the case, and the statements contained in this letter, put forward the name of a
Council, and ground its proceedings upon the authority of the Emperor. Hence the
attendance of a Count at their meeting, and the soldiers as guards of the Bishops, and
royal letters compelling the attendance of any persons whom they required. But observe
here the strange character of their machinations, and the inconsistency of their bold
measures, so that by some means or other they may take Athanasius away from us. For if as
Bishops they claimed for themselves alone the judgment of the case, what need was there
for the attendance of a Count and soldiers? or how was it that they assembled under the
sanction of royal letters? Or if they required the Emperor's countenance and wished to
derive their authority from him why were they then annulling his judgment? and when he
declared in the letter which he wrote, that the Meletians were calumniators, unscrupulous,
and that Athanasius was most innocent, and made much stir about the pretended murder of
the living, how was it that they determined that the Meletians had spoken the truth, and
that Athanasius was guilty of the offence; and were not ashamed to make the living dead,
living both after the Emperor's judgment, and at the time when they met together, and who
even until this; day is amongst us? So much concerning the case of Arsenius.

11. And as for the cup belonging to the mysteries, what was it, or where was it broken by
Macarius? for this is the report which they spread up and down. But as for Athanasius,
even his accusers would not have ventured to blame him, had they not been suborned by
them. However, they attribute the origin of the offence to him; although it ought not to
be imputed even to Macarius who is clear of it. And they are not ashamed to parade the
sacred mysteries before Catechumens, and worse than that, even before heathens : whereas,
they ought to attend to what is written, `It is good to keep close the secret of a king ;'
and as the Lord has charged us, `Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast
ye your pearls before swine .' We ought not then to parade the holy mysteries before the
uninitiated, lest the heathen in their ignorance deride them, and the Catechumens being
over-curious be offended. However, what was the cup, and where and before whom was it
broken? It is the Meletians who make the accusation, who are not worthy of the least
credit, for they have been schismatics and enemies of the Church, not of a recent date,
but from the times of the blessed Peter, Bishop and Martyr . They formed a conspiracy
against Peter himself; they calumniated his successor Achillas; they accused Alexander
even before the Emperor;

and being thus well versed in these arts, they have now transferred their enmity to
Athanasius, acting altogether in accordance with their former wickedness. For as they
slandered those that have been before him, so now they have slandered him. But their
calumnies and false accusations have never prevailed against him until now, that they have
got Eusebius and his fellows for their assistants and patrons, on account of the impiety
which these have adopted from the Arian madmen, which has led them to conspire against
many Bishops, and among the rest Athanasius. Now the place where they say the cup was
broken, was not a Church; there was no Presbyter in occupation of the place; and the day
on which they say that Macarius did the deed, was not the Lord's day. Since then there was
no church there; since there was no one to perform the sacred office; and since the day
did not require the use of it ; what was this cup belonging to the mysteries, and when, or
where was it broken? There are many cups, it is plain, both in private houses, and in the
public market; and if a person breaks one of them, he is not guilty of impiety. But the
cup which belongs to the mysteries, and which if it be broken intentionally, makes the
perpetrator of the deed an impious person, is found only among those who lawfully preside.
This is the only description that can be given of this kind of cup; there is none other;
this you legally give to the people to drink; this you have received according to the
canon of the Church ; this belongs only to those who preside over the Catholic Church. for
to you only it appertains to administer the Blood of Christ, and to none besides. But as
he who breaks the cup belonging to the mysteries is an impious person, much more impious
is he who treats the Blood of Christ with contumely: and he does so who `does this '
contrary to the rule of the Church.

(We say this, not as if a cup even of the schismatics was broken by Macarius, for there
was no cup there at all; how should there be? where there was neither Lord's house nor any
the belonging to the Church, nay, it was not the time of the celebration of the
mysteries). Now such a person is the notorious Ischyras, who was never appointed to his
office by the Church, and when Alexander admitted the Presbyters that had been ordained by
Meletius, he was not even numbered amongst them; and therefore did not receive ordination
even from that quarter. 12. By what means then did Ischyras become a Presbyter? who was it
that ordained him? was it Colluthus? for this is the only supposition that remains. But it
is well known and no one has any doubt about the matter that Colluthus died a Presbyter,
and that every ordination of his was invalid, and that all that were ordained by him
during the schism were reduced to the condition of laymen, and in that rank appear in the
congregation. How then can it be believed that a private person, occupying a private house
had in his possession a sacred chalice? But the truth is, they gave the name of Presbyter
at the time to a private person, and gratified him with this title to support him in his
iniquitous conduct towards us; and now as the reward of his accusations they procure for
him the erection of a Church . So that this man had then no Church; but as the reward of
his malice and subserviency to them in accusing us, he receives now what he had not
before; nay, perhaps they have even remunerated his services with the Episcopate, for so
he goes about reporting, and accordingly behaves towards us with great insolence. Thus are
such rewards as these now bestowed by Bishops upon accusers and calumniators though indeed
it is reasonable, in the case of an accomplice, that as they have made him a partner in
their proceedings, so they should also make him their associate in their own Episcopate.
But this is not all; give ear yet further to their proceedings at that time.

13. Being unable to prevail against the truth, though they bad thus set themselves in
array against it, and Ischyras having proved nothing at Tyre, but being shewn to be a
calumniator, and the calumny ruining their plot, they defer proceedings for flesh
evidence, and profess that they are going to send to the Mareotis certain of their party
to enquire diligently into the matter. Accordingly they dispatched secretly, with the
assistance of the civil power, persons to whom we openly objected on many accounts, as
being of the party of Arius, and therefore our enemies; namely, Diognius , Maris,
Theodorus, Macedonius, and two others, young both in years and mind , Ursacius and Valens
from Pannonia; who, after they had undertaken this long journey for the purpose of sitting
in judgment upon their enemy, set out again from Tyre for Alexandria. They did not shrink
from becoming witnesses themselves, although they were the judges, but openly adopted
every means of furthering their design, and undertook any labour or journey whatsoever in
order to bring to a successful issue the conspiracy which was in progress. They left the
Bishop Athanasius detained in a foreign country while they themselves entered their
enemy's city, as if to have their revel both against his Church and against his people.
And what was more outrageous still, they took with them the accuser Ischyras, but would
not permit Macarius, the accused person, to accompany them, but left him in custody at
Tyre. For `Macarius the Presbyter of Alexandria' was made answerable for the charge far
and near.

14. They therefore entered Alexandria alone with the accuser, their partner in lodging,
board, and cup; and taking with them Philagrius the Prefect of Egypt they proceeded to the
Mareotis, and there carried on the so-called investigation by themselves, all their own
way, with the forementioned person. Although the Presbyters frequently begged that they
might be present, they would not permit them. The Presbyters both of the city and of the
whole country desired to attend, that they might detect who and whence the persons were
who were suborned by Ischyras. But they forbade the Ministers to be present, while they
carried on the examination concerning church, cup, table, and the holy things, before the
heathen; nay, worse than that, they summoned heathen witnesses during the enquiry
concerning a cup belonging to the mysteries; and those persons who they affirmed were
taken out of the way by Athanasius by summons of the Receiver-general, and they knew not
where in the world they were, these same individuals they brought forward before
themselves and the Prefect only, and avowedly used their testimony, whom they affirmed
without shame to have been secreted by the Bishop Athanasius.

But here too their only object is to effect his death, and so they again pretend that
persons are dead who are still alive, following the same method they adopted in the case
of Arsenius. For the men are living, and are to be seen in their own country; but to you
who are at a great distance from the spot they make a great stir about the matter as
though they had disappeared, in order that, as the evidence is so far removed from you,
they may falsely accuse our brother-minister, as though he used violence and the civil
power; whereas they themselves have in all respects acted by means of that power and the
countenance of others. For their proceedings in the Mareotis were parallel to those at
Tyre; and as there a Count attended with military assistance, and would permit nothing
either to be said or done contrary to their pleasure, so here also the Prefect of Egypt
was present with a band of men, frightening all the members of the Church, and permitting
no one to give true testimony. And what was the strangest thing of all, the persons who
came, whether as judges or witnesses, or, what was more likely, in order to serve their
own purposes and those of Eusebius, lived in the same place with the accuser, even in his
house, and there seemed to carry on the investigation as they pleased.

15. We suppose you are not ignorant what outrages they committed at Alexandria; for they
are reported everywhere. Naked swords were at work against the holy virgins and brethren
scourges were at work against their persons, esteemed honourable in the sight of God, so
that their feet were lamed by the stripes, whose souls are whole and sound in purity and
all good works . The trades were excited against them; and the heathen multitude was set
to strip them naked, to beat them, wantonly to insult them, and to threaten them with
their altars and sacrifices. And one coarse fellow, as though license had now been given
them by the Prefect in order to gratify the Bishops, took hold of a virgin by the hand,
and dragged her towards an altar that happened to be near, imitating the practice of
compelling to offer sacrifice in time of persecution. When this was done, the virgins took
to flight, and a shout of laughter was raised by the heathen against the Church; the
Bishops being in the place, and occupying the very house where this was going on; and from
which, in order to obtain favour with them, the virgins were assaulted with naked swords,
and were exposed to all kinds of danger, and insult, and wanton violence. And this
treatment they received on a fast-day , and at the hands of persons who themselves were
feasting with the Bishops indoors.

16. Foreseeing these things, and reflecting that the entrance of enemies into a place is
no ordinary calamity, we protested against this commission. And Alexander , Bishop of
Thessalonica, considering the same, wrote to the people residing there, discovering the
conspiracy, and testifying of the plot. They indeed reckon him to be one of themselves,
and account him a partner in their designs; but they only prove thereby the violence they
have exercised towards him. For even the profligate Ischyras himself was only induced by
fear and violence to proceed in the matter, and was obliged by force to undertake the
accusation. As a proof of this, he wrote himself to our brother Athanasius , confessing
that nothing of the kind that was alleged had taken place there, but that he was suborned
to make a false statement. This declaration be made, though he was never admitted by
Athanasius as a Presbyter, nor received such a title of grace from him, nor was entrusted
by way of recompense with the erection of a Church, nor expected the bribe of a Bishopric;
all of which he obtained from them in return for under, taking the accusation. Moreover,
his whole family held communion with us , which they would not have done had they been
injured in the slightest degree.

17. Now to prove that these things are facts and not mere assertions, we have the
testimony of all the Presbyters of the Mareotis , who always accompany the Bishop in his
visitations, and who also wrote at the time against Ischyras. But neither those of them
who came to Tyre were allowed to declare the truth , nor could those who remained in the
Mareotis obtain permission to refute the calumnies of Ischyras . The copies also of the
letters of Alexander, and of the Presbyters, and of Ischyras will prove the same thing. We
have sent also the letter of the father of the Emperors, in which he expresses his
indignation that the murder of Arsenius was charged upon any one while the man was still
alive; as also his astonishment at the variable and inconsistent character of their
accusations with respect to the cup i since at one time they accused the Presbyter
Macarius, at another the Bishop Athanasius, of having broken it with his hands. He
declares also on the one hand that the Meletians are calumniators, and on the other that
Athanasius is perfectly innocent.

And are not the Meletians calumniators, and above all John , who after coming into the
Church, and communicating with us, after condemning himself, and no longer taking any part
in the proceedings respecting the cup, when he saw Eusebius and his fellows zealously
supporting the Arian madmen, though they had not the daring to co-operate with them
openly, but were attempting to employ others as their masks, undertook a character, as an
actor in the heathen theatres ? The subject of the drama was a contest of Arians; the real
design of the piece being their success, but John and his partizans being put on the stage
and playing the parts, in order that under colour of these, the supporters of the Arians
in the garb of judges might drive away the enemies of their impiety, firmly establish
their impious doctrines, and bring the Arians into the Church. And those who wish to drive
out true religion strive all they can to prevail by irreligion; they who have chosen the
part of that impiety which wars against Christ, endeavour to destroy the enemies thereof,
as though they were impious persons; and they impute to us the breaking of the cup, for
the purpose of making it appear that Athanasins, equally with themselves, is guilty of
impiety towards Christ.

For what means this mention of a cup belonging to the mysteries by them? Whence comes this
religious regard for the cup among those who support impiety towards Christ? Whence comes
it that Christ's cup is known to them who know not Christ? How can they who profess to
honour that cup, dishonour the God of the cup? or how can they who lament over the cup,
seek to murder the Bishop who celebrates the mysteries therewith? for they would have
murdered him, had it been in their power. And how can they who lament the loss of the
throne that was Episcopally covered , seek to destroy the Bishop that sat upon it, to the
end that both the throne may be without its Bishop, and that the people may be deprived of
godly doctrine? It was not then the cup, nor the murder, nor any of those portentous deeds
they talk about, that induced them to act thus; but the forementioned heresy of the
Arians, for the sake of which they conspired against Athanasius other Bishops, and still
continue to wage war against the Church.

Who are they that have really been the cause of murders and banishments? Is it not these?
Who are they that, availing themselves of external support, conspire against the Bishops?
Are not Eusebius and his fellows the men, and not Athanasius, as they say in their
letters? Both he and others have suffered at their hands. Even at the time of which we
speak, four Presbyters of Alexandria, though they had not even proceeded to Tyre, were
banished by their means. Who then are they whose conduct calls for tears and lamentations?
Is it not they, who after they have been guilty of one course of persecution, do not
scruple to add to it a second, but have recourse to all manner of falsehood, in order that
they may destroy a Bishop who will not give way to their impious heresy? Hence arises the
enmity of Eusebius and his fellows; hence their proceedings at Tyre; hence their pretended
trials; hence also now the letters which they have written even without any trial,
expressing the utmost confidence in their statements; hence their columnies before the
father of the Emperors, and before the most religious Emperors themselves.

18. For it is necessary that you should know what is now reported to the prejudice of our
fellow-minister Athanasius, in order that you may thereby be led to condemn their
wickedness, and may perceive that they desire nothing else but to murder him. A quantity
of corn was given by the father of the Emperors for the support of certain widows, partly
of Libya, and partly certain out of Egypt. They have all received it up to this time,
Athanasius getting nothing therefrom, but the trouble of assisting them. But now, although
the recipients themselves make no complaint, but acknowledge that they have received it,
Athanasius has been accused of selling all the corn, and appropriating the profits to his
own use: and the Emperor wrote to this effect about it, charging him with the offence in
consequence of the calumnies which had been raised against him. Now who are they which
have raised these calumnies? Is it not those who after they have been guilty of one course
of persecution, scruple not to set on foot another? Who are the authors of those letters
which are said to have come from the Emperor? Are not the Arians, who are so zealous
against Athanasius, and scruple not to speak and write anything against him? No one would
pass over persons who have acted as they have done, in order to entertain suspicion of
others.

Nay, the proof of their calumny appears to be most evident for they are anxious under
cover of it, to take away the corn from the Church, and to give it to the Arians. And this
circumstance more than any other, brings the matter home to the authors of this design and
their principals, who scrupled neither to set on foot a charge of murder against
Athanasius, as a base means of prejudicing the Emperor against him, nor yet to take away
from the Clergy of the Church the subsistence of the poor, in order that in fact they
might make gain for the heretics. 19. We have sent also the testimony of our fellow-
ministers in Libya, Pentapolis, and Egypt, from which likewise you may learn the false
accusations which have been brought against Athanasius. And these things they do, in order
that, the professors of true godliness being henceforth induced by fear to remain quiet,
the heresy of the impious Arians may be brought in in its stead. But thanks be to your
piety, dearly beloved, that you have frequently anathematized the Arians in your letters,
and have never given them admittance into the Church. The exposure of Eusebius and his
fellows is also easy and ready at hand. For behold, after their former letters concerning
the Arians, of which also we have sent you copies, they now openly stir up the Arian
madmen against the Church, though the whole Catholic Church has anathematized them; they
have appointed a Bishop over them; they distract the Churches with threats and alarms,
that they may gain assistants in their impiety in every part. Moreover, they send Deacons
to the Arian madmen, who openly join their assemblies; they write letters to them, and
receive answers from them, thus making schisms in the Church, and holding communion with
them; and they send to every part,commending their heresy, and repudiating the Church, as
you will perceive from the letters they have addressed to the Bishop of Rome and perhaps
to yourselves also. You perceive therefore, dearly beloved, that these things are not
undeserving of vengeance: they are indeed dreadful and alien from the doctrine of Christ.

Wherefore we have assembled together, and have written to you, to request of your
Christian wisdom to receive this our declaration and sympathize with our brother
Athanasius, and to shew your indignation against Eusebius and his fellows who have essayed
such things, in order that such malice and wickedness may no longer prevail against the
Church. We call upon you to be the avengers of such injustice, reminding you of the
injunction of the Apostle, `Put away from among yourselves that wicked person .' Wicked
indeed is their conduct, and unworthy of your communion. Wherefore give no further heed to
them, though they should again write to you against the Bishop Athanasius (for all that
proceeds from them is false); not even though they subscribe their letter with names of
Egyptian Bishops. For it is evident that it will not be we who write, but the Meletians ,
who have ever been schismatics, and who even unto this day make disturbances and raise
factions in the Churches. For they ordain improper persons, and all but heathens; and they
are guilty of such actions as we are ashamed to set down in writing, but which you may
learn from those whom we have sent unto you, who will also deliver to you our letter.

20. Thus wrote the Bishops of Egypt to all Bishops, and to Julius, Bishop of Rome.

CHAPTER II. LETTER OF JULIUS TO THE EUSEBIANS AT ANTIOCH.

Eusebius and his fellows wrote also to Julius, and thinking to frighten me, requested him
to call a council, and to be himself the judge, if he so pleased . When therefore I went
up to Rome, Julius wrote to Eusebius and his fellows as was suitable, and sent moreover
two of his own Presbyters , Elpidius and Philoxenus . But they, when they heard of me,
were thrown into confusion, as not expecting my going up thither; and they declined the
proposed Council, alleging unsatisfactory reasons for so doing, but in truth they were
afraid lest the things should be proved against them which Valens and Ursacius afterwards
confessed . However, more than fifty Bishops assembled, in the place where the Presbyter
Vito held his congregation; and they acknowledged my defence, and gave me the confirmation
both of their communion and their love. On the other hand, they expressed great
indignation against Eusebius and his fellows, and requested that Julius would write to the
following effect to those of their number who had written to him. Which accordingly he
did, and sent it by the hand of Count Gabianus.

The Letter of Julius. Julius to his dearly beloved brethren , Danius, Flacillus,
Narcissus, Eusebius, Maris, Macedonius, Theodorus, and their friends, who have written to
me from Antioch, sends health in the Lord. 21. I have read your letter which was brought
to me by my Presbyters Elpidius and Philoxenus, and I am surprised to find that, whereas I
wrote to you in charity and with conscious sincerity, you have replied to me in an
unbecoming and contentious temper; for the pride and arrogance of the writers is plainly
exhibited in that letter. Yet such feelings are inconsistent with the Christian faith; for
what was written in a charitable spirit ought likewise to be answered in a spirit of
charity and not of contention. And was it not a token of charity to send Presbyters to
sympathize with them that are in suffering, and to desire those who had written to me to
come thither, that the questions at issue might obtain a speedy settlement, and all things
be duly ordered, so that our brethren might no longer be exposed to suffering, and that
you might escape further calumny? But something seems to shew that your temper is such, as
to force us to conclude that even in the terms in which you appeared to pay honour to us,
you have expressed yourselves under the disguise of irony. The Presbyters also whom we
sent to you, and who ought to have returned rejoicing, did on the contrary return
sorrowful on account of the proceedings they had witnessed among you. And I, when I had
read your letter, after much consideration, kept it to myself, thinking that after all
some of you would come, and there would be no need to bring it forward, lest if it should
be openly exhibited, it should grieve many of our brethren here. But when no one arrived,
and it became necessary that the letter should be produced, I declare to you, they were
all astonished, and were hardly able to believe that such a letter had been written by you
at all; for it is expressed in terms of contention rather than of charity.

Now if the author of it wrote with an ambition of exhibiting his power of language, such a
practice surely is more suitable for other subjects: in ecclesiastical matters, it is not
a display of eloquence that is needed, but the observance of Apostolic Canons, and an
earnest care not to offend one of the little ones of the Church. For it were better for a
man, according to the word of the Church, that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and
that he were drowned in the sea, than that he should offend even one of the little ones .
But if such a letter was written, because certain persons have been aggrieved on account
of their meanness of spirit towards one another (for I will not impute it to all); it were
better not to entertain any such feeling of offence at all, at least not to let the sun go
down upon their vexation; and certainly not to give it room to exhibit itself in writing.

22. Yet what has been done that is a just cause of vexation? or in what respect was my
letter to you such? Was it, that I invited you to be present at a council? You ought
rather to have received the proposal with joy. Those who have confidence in their
proceedings, or as they choose to term them, in their decisions, are not wont to be angry,
if such decision is inquired into by others; they rather shew all boldness, seeing that if
they have given a just decision, it can never prove to be the reverse. The Bishops who
assembled in the great Council of Nicaea agreed, not without the will of God, that the
decisions of one council should be examined in another , to the end that the judges,
having before their eyes that other trial which was to follow, might be led to investigate
matters with the utmost caution, and that the parties concerned in their sentence might
have assurance that the judgment they received was just, and not dictated by the enmity of
their former judges. Now if you are unwilling that such a practice should be adopted in
your own case, though it is of ancient standing, and has been noticed and recommended by
the great Council, your refusal is not becoming; for it is unreasonable that a custom
which had once obtained in the Church, and been established by councils, should be set
aside by a few individuals.

For a further reason they cannot justly take offence in this point. When the persons whom
you, Eusebius and his fellows, dispatched with your letters, I mean Macarius the
Presbyter, and Martyrius and Hesychius the Deacons, arrived here, and found that they were
unable to withstand the arguments of the Presbyters who came from Athanasius, but were
confuted and exposed on all sides, they then requested me to call a Council together, and
to write to Alexandria to the Bishop Athanasius, and also to Eusebius and his fellows, in
order that a just judgment might be given in presence of all parties. And they undertook
in that case to prove all the charges which had been brought against Athanasius. For
Martyrius and Hesychius had been publicly refuted by us, and the Presbyters of the Bishop
Athanasius had withstood them with great confidence: indeed, if one must tell the truth,
Martyrius and his fellows had been utterly overthrown; and this it was that led them to
desire that a Council might be held. Now supposing that they had not desired a Council,
but that I had been the person to propose it, in discouragement of those who had written
to me, and for the sake of our brethren who complain that they have suffered injustice;
even in that case the proposal would have been reasonable and just, for it is agreeable to
ecclesiastical practice, and well pleasing to God.

But when those persons, whom you, Eusebius and his fellows, considered to be trustworthy,
when even they wished me to call the brethren together, it was inconsistent in the parties
invited to take offence, when they ought rather to have shewn all readiness to be present.
These considerations shew that the display of anger in the offended persons is petulant,
and the refusal of those who decline to meet the Council is unbecoming, and has a
suspicious appearance. Does any one find fault, if he sees that done by another, which he
would allow if done by himself? If, as you write, each council has an irreversible force,
and he who has given judgment on a matter is dishonoured, if his sentence is examined by
others; consider, dearly beloved, who are they that dishonour councils? who are setting
aside the decisions of former judges? Not to inquire at present into every individual
case, lest I should appear to press too heavily on certain parties, the last instance that
has occurred, and which every one who hears it must shudder at, will be sufficient in
proof of the others which I omit.

23. The Arians who were excommunicated for their impiety by Alexander, the late Bishop of
Alexandria, of blessed memory, were not only proscribed by the brethren in the several
cities, but were also anathematised by the whole body assembled together in the great
Council of Nicaea. For theirs was no ordinary offence, neither had they sinned against
man, but against our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, the Son of the living God. And yet these
persons who were proscribed by the whole world, and branded in every Church, are said now
to have been admitted to communion again; which I think even you ought to hear with
indignation. Who then are the parties who dishonour a council? Are not they who have set
at nought the votes of the Three hundred , and have preferred impiety to godliness? The
heresy of the Arian madmen was condemned and proscribed by the whole body of Bishops
everywhere; but the Bishops Athanasius and Marcellus have many supporters who speak and
write in their behalf. We have received testimony in favour of Marcellus , that he
resisted the advocates of the Arian doctrines in the Council of Nicaea; and in favour of
Athanasius , that at Tyre nothing was brought home to him, and that in the Mareotis, where
the Reports against him are said to have been drawn up, he was not present. Now you know,
dearly beloved, that ex parte proceedings are of no weight, but bear a suspicious
appearance.

Nevertheless, these things being so, we, in order to be accurate, and neither shewing any
prepossession in favour of yourselves, nor of those who wrote in behalf of the other
party, invited those who had written to us to come hither; that, since there were many who
wrote in their behalf, all things might be enquired into in a council, and neither the
guiltless might be condemned, nor the person on his trial be accounted innocent. We then
are not the parties who dishonour a council, but they who at once and recklessly have
received the Arians whom all had condemned, and contrary to the decision of the judges.
The greater part of those judges have now departed, and are with Christ; but some of them
are still in this life of trial, and are indignant at learning that certain persons have
set aside their judgment. 24. We have also been informed of the following circumstance by
those who were at Alexandria. A certain Carpones, who had been excommunicated by Alexander
for Arianism, was sent hither by one Gregory with certain others, also excommunicated for
the same heresy. However, I had learnt the matter also from the Presbyter Macarius, and
the Deacons Martyrius and Hesychius. For before the Presbyters of Athanasius arrived they
urged me to send letters to one Pistus at Alexandria, though at the same time the Bishop
Athanasius was there. And when the Presbyters of the Bishop Athanasius came, they informed
me that this Pistus was an Arian, and that he had been excommunicated by the Bishop
Alexander and the Council of Nicaea, and then ordained by one Secundus, whom also the
great Council excommunicated as an Arian. This statement Martyrius and his fellows did not
gainsay, nor did they deny that Pistus had received his ordination from Secundus. Now
consider, after this who are most justly liable to blame? I, who could not be prevailed
upon to write to the Arian Pistus; or those, who advised me to do dishonour to the great
Council, and to address the irreligious as if they were religious persons? Moreover, when
the Presbyter Macarius, who had been sent hither by Eusebius with Martyrius and the rest,
heard of the opposition which had been made by the Presbyters of Athanasius, while we were
expecting his appearance with Martyrius and Hesychius, he departed in the night, in spite
of a bodily ailment;

which leads us to conjecture that his departure arose from shame on account of the
exposure which had been made concerning Pistus. For it is impossible that the ordination
of the Arian Secundus should be considered valid in the Catholic Church. This would indeed
be dishonour to the Council, and to the Bishops who composed it, if the decrees they
framed, as in the presence of God, with such extreme earnestness and care, should be set
aside as worthless. 25. If, as you write , the decrees of all Councils ought to be of
force, according to the precedent in the case of Novatus and Paul of Samosata, all the
more ought not the sentence of the Three hundred to be reversed, certainly a general
Council ought not to be set at nought by a few individuals. For the Arians are heretics as
they, and the like sentence has been passed both against one and the other. And, after
such bold proceedings as these, who are they that have lighted up the flame of discord?
for in your letter you blame us for having done this. Is it we, who have sympathised with
the sufferings of the brethren, and have acted in all respects according to the Canon ; or
they who contentiously and contrary to the Canon have set aside the sentence of the Three
hundred, and dishonoured the Council in every way? For not only have the Arians been
received into communion, but Bishops also have made a practice of removing from one place
to another . Now if you really believe that all Bishops have the same and equal authority
, and you do not, as you assert, account of them according to the magnitude of their
cities; he that is entrusted with a small city ought to abide in the place committed to
him, and not from disdain of his trust to remove to one that has never been put under him;
despising that which God has given him, and making much of the vain applause of men. You
ought then, dearly beloved, to have come and not declined, that the matter may be brought
to a conclusion; for this is what reason demands.

But perhaps you were prevented by the time fixed upon for the Council, for you complain in
your letter that the interval before the day we appointed was too short. But this,
beloved, is a mere excuse. Had the day forestalled any when on the journey, the interval
allowed would then have been proved to be too short. But when persons do not wish to come,
and detain even my Presbyters up to the month of January , it is the mere excuse of those
who have no confidence in their cause; otherwise, as I said before, they would have come,
not regarding the length of the journey, not considering the shortness of the time, but
trusting to the justice and reasonableness of their cause. But perhaps they did not come
on account of the aspect of the times , for again you declare in your letter, that we
ought to have considered the present circumstances of the East, and not to have urged you
to come. Now if as you say you did not come because the times were such, you ought to have
considered such times beforehand, and not to have become the authors of schism, and of
mourning and lamentation in the Churches. But as the matter stands, men, who have been the
cause of these things, shew that it is not the times that are to blame, but the
determination of those who will not meet a Council.

26. But I wonder also how you could ever have written that part of your letter, in which
you say, that I alone wrote, and not to all of you, but to Eusebius and his fellows only.
In this complaint one may discover more of readiness to find fault than of regard for
truth. I received the letters against Athanasius from none other than Martyrius, Hesychius
and their fellows, and I necessarily wrote to them who had written against him. Either
then Eusebius and his fellows ought not alone to have written, apart from you all, or else
you, to whom I did not write, ought not to be offended that I wrote to them who had
written to me. If it was right that I should address my letter to you all, you also ought
to have written with them: but now considering what was reasonable, I wrote to them, who
had addressed themselves to me, and had given me information. But if you were displeased
because I alone wrote to them, it is but consistent that you should also be angry, because
they wrote to me alone. But for this also, beloved, there was a fair and not unreasonable
cause. Nevertheless it is necessary that I should acquaint you that, although I wrote, yet
the sentiments I expressed were not those of myself alone, but of all the Bishops
throughout Italy and in these parts. I indeed was unwilling to cause them all to write,
test the others should be overpowered by their number. The Bishops however assembled on
the appointed day, and agreed in these opinions, which I again write to signify to you; so
that, dearly beloved, although I alone address you, yet you may be assured that these are
the sentiments of all. Thus much for the excuses, not reasonable, but unjust and
suspicious, which some of you have alleged for your conduct.

27. Now although what has already been said were sufficient to shew that we have not
admitted to our communion our brothers Athanasius and Marcellus either too readily, or
unjustly, yet it is but fair briefly to set the matter before you. Eusebius and his
fellows wrote formerly against Athanasius and his fellows, as you also have written now;
but a great number of Bishops out of Egypt and other provinces wrote in his favour. Now in
the first place, your letters against him are inconsistent with one another, and the
second have no sort of agreement with the first, but in many instances the former are
answered by the latter, and the latter are impeached by the former. Now where there is
this contradiction in letters, no credit whatever is due to the statements they contain.
In the next place if you require us to believe what you have written, it is lint
consistent that we should not refuse credit to those who have written in his favour;
especially, considering that you write from a distance, while they are on the spot, are
acquainted with the man, and the events which are occurring there, and testify in writing
to his manner of life, and positively affirm that he has been the victim of a conspiracy
throughout.

Again, a certain Bishop Arsenius was said at one time to have been made away with by
Athanasius, but we have learned that he is alive, nay, that he is on terms of friendship
with him. He has positively asserted that the Reports drawn up in the Mareotis were ex
parte ones; for that neither the Presbyter Macarius, the accused party, was present, nor
yet his Bishop, Athanasius himself. This we have learnt, not only from his own mouth, but
also from the Reports which Martyrius, Hesychius and their fellows, brought to as ; for we
found on reading them, that the accuser Ischyras was present there, but neither Macarius,
nor the Bishop Athanasius; and that the Presbyters of Athanasius desired to attend, but
were not permitted. Now, beloved, if the trial was to be conducted honestly, not only the
accuser, but the accused also ought to have been present. As the accused party Macarius
attended at Tyre, as well as the accuser Ischyras, when nothing was proved, so not only
ought the accuser to have gone to the Mareotis, but also the accused, so that in person he
might either be convicted, or by not being convicted might shew the falseness of the
accusation. But now, as this was not the case, but the accuser only went out thither, with
those to whom Athanasius objected, the proceedings wear a suspicious appearance.

28. And he complained also that the persons who went to the Mareotis went against his
wish, for that Theognius, Maris, Theodorus, Ursacius, Valens, and Macedonius, who were the
persons they sent out, were of suspected character. This he shewed not by his own
assertions merely, but from the letter of Alexander who was Bishop of Thessalonica; for he
produced a letter written by him to Dionysius , the Count who presided in the Council, in
which he shews most clearly that there was a conspiracy on foot against Athanasius. He has
also brought forward a genuine document, all in the handwriting of the accuser Ischyras
himself , in which he calls God Almighty to witness that no cup was broken, nor table
overthrown, but that he had been suborned by certain persons to invent these accusations.
Moreover, when the Presbyters of the Mareotis arrived , they positively affirmed that
Ischyras was not a Presbyter of the Catholic Church and that Macarius had not committed
any such offence as the other had laid to his charge. The Presbyters and Deacons also who
came to us testified in the fullest manner in favour of the Bishop Athanasius, strenuously
asserting that none of those things which were alleged against him were true, but that he
was the victim of a conspiracy.

And all the Bishops of Egypt and Libya wrote and protested that his ordination was lawful
and strictly ecclesiastical, and that all that you had advanced against him was false, for
that no murder had been committed, nor any persons despatched on his account, nor any cup
broken, but that all was false. Nay, the Bishop Athanasius also shewed from the ex parte
reports drawn up in the Mareotis, that a catechumen was examined and said , that he was
within with Ischyras, at the time when they say Macarius the Presbyter of Athanasius burst
into the place; and that others who were examined said,-one, that Ischyras was in a small
cell,-and another, that he was lying down behind the door, being sick at that very time,
when they say Macarius came thither. Now from these representations of his, we are
naturally led to ask the question, How was it possible that a man who was lying behind the
door sick could get up, conduct the service, and offer? and how could it be that Oblations
were offered when catechumens were within ? for if there were catechumens present, it was
not yet the time for presenting the Oblations. These representations, as I said,were made
by the Bishop Athanasius, and he showed from the reports, what was also positively
affirmed by those who were with him, that Ischyras has never been a presbyter at all in
the Catholic Church, nor has ever appeared as a presbyter in the assemblies of the Church;

for not even when Alexander admitted those of the Meletian schism, by the indulgence of
the great Council, was he named by Meletius among his presbyters, as they deposed ; which
is the strongest argument possible that he was not even a presbyter of Meletius; for
otherwise, he would certainly have been numbered with the rest. Besides, it was shewn also
by Athanasius from the reports, that Ischyras had spoken falsely in other instances: for
he set up a charge respecting the burning of certain books, when, as they pretend,
Macarius burst in upon them, but was convicted of falsehood by the witnesses he himself
brought to prove it. 29. Now when these things were thus represented to us, and so many
witnesses appeared in his favour, and so much was advanced by him in his own
justification, what did it become us to do? what did the rule of the Church require of us,
but that we should not condemn him, but rather receive him and treat him like a Bishop, as
we have done? Moreover, besides all this he continued here a year and six months ,
expecting the arrival of yourselves and of whoever chose to come, and by his presence he
put everyone to shame, for he would not have been here, had he not felt confident in his
cause; and he came not of his own accord, but on an invitation by letter from us, in the
manner in which we wrote to you . But still you complain after all of our transgressing
the Canons. Now consider; who are they that have so acted? we who received this man with
such ample proof of his innocence, or they who, being at Antioch at the distance of six
and thirty posts , nominated a stranger to be Bishop, and sent him to Alexandria with a
military force; a thing which was not done even when Athanasius was banished into Gaul,
though it would have been done then, had he been really proved guilty of the offence. But
when he returned, of course he found his Church unoccupied and waiting for him.

30. But now I am ignorant under what colour these proceedings have been carried on. In the
first place, if the truth must be spoken, it was not right, when we had written to summon
a council, that any persons should anticipate its decisions: and in the next place, it was
not fitting that such novel proceedings should be adopted against the Church. For what
canon of the Church, or what Apostolical tradition warrants this, that when a Church was
at peace, and so many Bishops were in unanimity with Athanasius the Bishop of Alexandria,
Gregory should be sent thither, a stranger to the city, not having been baptized there,
nor known to the general body, and desired neither by Presbyters, nor Bishops, nor Laity-
that he should be appointed at Antioch, and sent to Alexandria, accompanied not by
presbyters, nor by deacons of the city, nor by bishops of Egypt, but by soldiers? for they
who came hither complained that this was the case.

Even supposing that Athanasius was in the position of a criminal after the Council, this
appointment ought not to have been made thus illegally and contrary to the rule of the
Church, but the Bishops of the province ought to have ordained one in that very Church, of
that very Priesthood, of that very Clergy ; and the Canons received from the Apostles
ought not thus to be set aside. Had this offence been committed against any one of you,
would you not have exclaimed against it, and demanded justice as for the transgression of
the Canons? Dearly beloved, we speak honestly, as in the presence of God, and declare,
that this proceeding was neither pious, nor lawful, nor ecclesiastical. Moreover, the
account which is given of the conduct of Gregory on his entry into the city, plainly shews
the character of his appointment. In such peaceful times, as those who came from
Alexandria declared them to have been, and as the Bishops also represented in their
letters, the Church was set on fire; Virgins were stripped; Monks were trodden under foot;
Presbyters and many of the people were scourged and suffered violence; Bishops were cast
into prison; multitudes were dragged about from place to place; the holy Mysteries , about
which they accused the Presbyter Macarius, were seized upon by heathens and cast upon the
ground; and all to constrain certain persons to admit the appointment of Gregory. Such
conduct plainly shews who they are that transgress the Canons. Had the appointment been
lawful, he would not have had recourse to illegal proceedings to compel the obedience of
those who in a legal way resisted him. And notwithstanding all this, you write that
perfect peace prevailed in Alexandria and Egypt. Surely not, unless the work of peace is
entirely changed, and you call such doings as these peace.

31. I have also thought it necessary to point out to you this circumstance, viz. that
Athanasius positively asserted that Macarius was kept at Tyre under a guard of soldiers,
while only his accuser accompanied those who went to the Mareotis; and that the Presbyters
who desired to attend the inquiry were not permitted to do so, while the said inquiry
respecting the cup and the Table was carried on before the Prefect and his band, and in
the presence of Heathens and Jews. This at first seemed incredible, but it was proved to
have been so from the Reports; which caused great astonishment to us, as I suppose, dearly
beloved, it does to you also. Presbyters, who are the ministers of the Mysteries, are not
permitted to attend, but an enquiry concerning Christ's Blood and Christ's Body is carried
on before an external judge, in the presence of Catechumens, nay, worse than that, before
Heathens and Jews, who are in ill repute in regard to Christianity. Even supposing that an
offense had been committed, it should have been investigated legally in the Church and by
the Clergy, not by heathens who abhor the Word and know not the Truth. I am persuaded that
both you and all men must perceive the nature and magnitude of this sin. Thus much
concerning Athanasius.

32. With respect to Marcellus , forasmuch as you have charged him also of impiety towards
Christ, I am anxious to inform you, that when he was here, he positively declared that
what you had written concerning him was not true; but being nevertheless requested by us
to give an account of his faith, he answered in his own person with the utmost boldness,
so that we recognised that he maintains nothing outside the truth. He made a confession of
the same godly doctrines concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ as the Catholic
Church confesses; and he affirmed that he had held these opinions for a very long time,
and had not recently adopted them: as indeed our Presbyters , who were at a former date
present at the Council of Nicaea, testified to his orthodoxy; for he maintained then, as
he has done now, his opposition to Arianism (on which points it is right to admonish you,
lest any of you admit such heresy, instead of abominating it as alien from sound doctrine
). Seeing then that he professed orthodox opinions, and had testimony to his orthodoxy,
what, I ask again in his case, ought we to have done, except to receive him as a Bishop,
as we did, and not reject him from our communion? These things I have written, not so much
for the purpose of defending their cause, as in order to convince you, that we acted
justly and canonically in receiving these persons, and that you are contentious without a
cause.

But it is your duty to use your anxious endeavours and to labour by every means to correct
the irregularities which have been committed contrary to the Canon, and to secure the
peace of the Churches; so that the peace of our Lord which has been given to us may
remain, and the Churches may not be divided, nor you incur the charge of being authors of
schism. For I confess, your past conduct is an occasion of schism rather than of peace.
33. For not only the Bishops Athanasius and Marcellus and their fellows came hither and
complained of the injustice that had been done them, but many other Bishops also , from
Thrace, from Coele-Syria, from Phoenicia and Palestine, and Presbyters, not a few, and
others from Alexandria and from other parts, were present at the Council here, and in
addition to their other statements, lamented before all the assembled Bishops the violence
and injustice which the Churches had suffered, and affirmed that similar outrages to those
which had been committed in Alexandria had occurred in their own Churches, and in others
also. Again there lately came Presbyters with letters from Egypt and Alexandria, who
complained that many Bishops and Presbyters who wished to come to the Council were
prevented; for they said that, since the departure of Athanasius even up to this time,
Bishops who are confessors have been beaten with stripes, that others have been cast into
prison, and that but lately aged men, who have been an exceedingly long period in the
Episcopate, have been given up to be employed in the public works, and nearly all the
Clergy of the Catholic Church with the people are the objects of plots and persecutions.
Moreover they said that certain Bishops and other brethren had been banished for no other
reason than to compel them against their will to communicate with Gregory and his Arian
associates.

We have heard also from others, what is confirmed by the testimony of the Bishop
Marcellus, that a number of outrages, similar to those which were committed at Alexandria,
have occurred also at Ancyra in Galatia . And in addition to all this, those who came to
the Council reported against some of you (for I will not mention names) certain charges of
so dreadful a nature that I have declined setting them down in writing: perhaps you also
have heard them from others. It was for this cause especially that I wrote to desire you
to come, that you might be present to hear them, and that all irregularities might be
corrected and differences healed. And those who were called for these purposes ought not
to have refused, but to have come the more readily, lest by failing to do so they should
be suspected of what was alleged against them, and be thought unable to prove what they
had written.

34. Now according to these representations, since the Churches are thus afflicted and
treacherously assaulted, as our informants positively affirmed, who are they that have
lighted up a flame of discords ? We, who grieve for such a state of things and sympathize
with the sufferings of the brethren, or they who have brought these things about? While
then such extreme confusion existed in every Church, which was the cause why those who
visited us came hither, I wonder bow you could write that unanimity prevailed in the
Churches. These things tend not to the edification of the Church, but to her destruction;
and those who rejoice in them are not sons of peace, but of confusion: but our God is not
a God of confusion, but of peace . Wherefore, as the God and Father of our Lord Jesus
Christ knows, it was from a regard for your good name, and with prayers that the Churches
might not fall into confusion, but might continue as they were regulated by the Apostles,
that I thought it necessary to write thus unto you, to the end that you might at length
put to shame those who through the effects of their mutual enmity have brought the
Churches to this condition. For I have heard, that it is only a certain few who are the
authors of all these things.

Now, as having bowels of mercy, take ye care to correct, as I said before, the
irregularities which have been committed contrary to the Canon, so that if any mischief
has already befallen, it may be healed through your zeal. And write not that I have
preferred the communion of Marcellus and Athanasius to yours, for such like complaints are
no indications of peace, but of contentiousness and hatred of the brethren. For this cause
I have written the foregoing, that you may understand that we acted not unjustly in
admitting them to our communion, and so may cease this strife. If you had come hither, and
they had been condemned, and had appeared unable to produce reasonable evidence in support
of their cause, you would have done well in writing thus. But seeing that, as I said
before, we acted agreeably to the Canon, and not unjustly, in holding communion with them,
I beseech you for the sake of Christ, suffer not the members of Christ to be torn asunder,
neither trust to prejudices, but seek rather the peace of the Lord. It is neither holy nor
just, in order to gratify the petty feeling of a few persons, to reject those who have
never been condemned and thereby to grieve the Spirit . But if you think that you are able
to prove anything against them, and to confute them face to face let those of you who
please come hither: for they also promised that they would be ready to establish
completely the truth of those things which they have reported to us.

35. Give us notice therefore of this, dearly beloved, that we may write both to them, and
to the Bishops who will have again to assemble, so that the accused may be condemned in
the presence of all, and confusion no longer prevail in the Churches. What has already
taken place is enough: it is enough surely that Bishops have been sentenced to banishment
in the presence of Bishops; of which it behoves me not to speak at length, lest I appear
to press too heavily on those who were present on those occasions. But if one must speak
the truth, matters ought not to have proceeded so far; their petty feeling ought not to
have been suffered to reach the present pitch. Let us grant the "removal," as you write,
of Athanasius and Marcellus, front their own places, yet what must one say of the case of
the other Bishops and Presbyters who, as I said before, came hither from various parts,
and who complained that they also had been forced away, and had suffered the like
injuries? O beloved, the decisions of the Church areno longer according to the Gospel, but
tend only to banishment and death . Supposing, as you assert, that some offence rested
upon those persons, the case ought to have been conducted against them, not after this
manner, but according to the Canon of the Church. Word should have been written ofit to us
all , that so a just sentence might prceed from all. For the sufferers were Bishops,and
Churches of no ordinary note, but those which the Apostles themselves had governed in
their own persons .

And why was nothing said to us concerning the Church of the Alexandrians in particular?
Are you ignorant that the custom has been for word to be written first to us, and then for
a just decision to be passed from this place ? If then any such suspicion rested upon the
Bishop there, notice thereof ought to have been sent to the Church of this place; whereas,
after neglecting to inform us, and proceeding on their own authority as they pleased, now
they desire to obtain our concurrence in their decisions, though we never condemned him.
Not so have the constitutions of Paul, not so have the traditions of the Fathers directed;
this is another form of procedure, a novel practice. I beseech you, readily bear with me:
what I write is for the common good. For what we have received from the blessed Apostle
Peter , that I signify to you; and I should not have written this, as deeming that these
things were manifest unto all men, had not these proceedings so disturbed us. Bishops are
forced away from their sees and driven into banishment, while others from different
quarters are appointed in their place; others are treacherously assailed, so that the
people have to grieve for those who are forcibly taken from them, while, as to those who
are sent in their room, they are obliged to give over seeking the man whom they desire,
and to receive those they do not.

I ask of you, that such things may no longer be, but that you will denounce in writing
those persons who attempt them; so that the Churches may no longer be afflicted thus, nor
any Bishop or Presbyter be treated with insult, nor any one be compelled to act contrary
to his judgment, as they have represented to us, lest we become a laughing-stock among the
heathen, and above all, lest we excite the wrath of God against us. For every one of us
shall give account in the Day of judgment of the things which he has done in this life.
May we all be possessed with the mind of God! so that the Churches may recover their own
Bishops, and rejoice evermore in Jesus Christ our Lord; through Whom to the Father be
glory, for ever and ever. Amen. I pray for your health in the Lord, brethren dearly
beloved and greatly longer for.

36. Thus wrote the Council of Rome by Julius, Bishop of Rome.


DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS
==========================

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

CHAPTER III. LETTERS OF THE COUNCIL OF SARDICA TO THE CHURCHES OF EGYPT AND OF ALEXANDRIA, AND TO ALL CHURCHES.

But when, notwithstanding, Eusebius and! his fellows proceeded without shame, disturbing
the Churches, and plotting the ruin of many, the most religious Emperors Constantius and
Constans being informed of this, commanded the Bishops from both the West and East to meet
together in the city of Sardica. In the meantime Eusebius died: but a great number
assembled from all parts, and we challenged the associates of Eusebius and his fellows to
submit to a trial. But they, having before their eyes the things that they had done, and
perceiving that their accusers had come up to the Council, were afraid to do this; but,
while all besides met with honest intentions, they again brought with them the Counts
Musonianus and Hesychius the Castrensian , that, as their custom was, they might effect
their own aims by their authority. But when the Council met without Counts, and no
soldiers were permitted to be present, they were conrounded, and conscience-stricken,
because they could no longer obtain the judgment they wished, but such only as reason and
truth required. We, however, frequently repeated our challenge, and the Council of Bishops
called upon them to come forward, saying, "You have come for the purpose of undergoing a
trial; why then do you now withdraw yourselves? Either you ought not to have come, or
having come, not to conceal yourselves. Such conduct will prove your greatest
condemnation. Behold, Athanasius and his fellows are here, whom you accused while absent;
if therefore you think that you have any thing against them, you may convict them face to
face. But if you pretend to be unwilling to do so, while in truth you are unable, you
plainly shew yourselves to be calumniators, and this is the decision the Council will give
you." When they heard this they were self-condemned (for they were conscious of their
machinations and fabrications against us), and were ashamed to appear, thereby proving
themselves to have been guilty of many base calumnies.

The holy Council therefore denounced their indecent and suspicious flight , and admitted
us to make our defence; and when we had related their conduct towards us, and proved the
truth of our statements by witnesses and other evidence, they were filled with
astonishment, and all acknowledged that our opponents had good reason to be afraid to meet
the Council, lest their guilt should be proved before their faces. They said also, that
probably they had come from the East, supposing that Athanasius and his fellows would not
appear, but that, when they saw them confident in their cause, and challenging a trial,
they fled. They accordingly received us as injured persons who had been falsely accused,
and confirmed yet more towards us their fellowship and love. But they deposed Eusebius's
associates in wickedness, who had become even more shameless than himself, viz., Theodorus
of Heraclea, Narcissus of Neronias, Acacius of Caesarea, Stephanus of Antioch, Ursacius
and Valens of Pannonia, Menophantus of Ephesus, and George of Laodicaea; and they wrote to
the Bishops in all parts of the world, and to the diocese of each of the injured persons,
in the following terms.

Letter of the Council of Sardica to the Church of Alexandria. The Holy Council, by the
grace of God assembled at Sardica, from Rome, Spain, Gaul, Italy, Campania, Calabria,
Apulia, Africa, Sardinia, Pannonia, Moesia, Dacia, Noricum, Siscia, Dardania, the other
Dacia, Macedonia, Thessaly, Achaia, Epirus, Thrace, Rhodope, Palestine, Arabia, Crete, and
Egypt, to their beloved brothers, the Presbyters and Deacons, and to all the Holy Church
of God abiding at Alexandria, sends health in the Lord. 37. We were not ignorant, but the
fact was well known to us, even before we received the letters of your piety, that the
supporters of the abominated heresy of the Arians were practising many dangerous
machinations, rather to the destruction of their own souls, than to the injury of the
Church. For this has ever been the object of their unprincipled craft; this is the deadly
design in which they have been continually engaged; viz. how they may best expel from
their places and persecute all who are to be found anywhere of orthodox sentiments, and
maintaining the doctrine of the Catholic Church, which was delivered to them from the
Fathers. Against some they have laid false accusations; others they have driven into
banishment; others they have destroyed by the punishments inflicted on them. At any rate
they endeavoured by violence and tyranny to surprise the innocence of our brother and
fellow-Bishop Athanasius, and therefore conducted their enquiry into his case without any
care, without any faith, without any sort of justice. Accordingly having no confidence in
the part they had played on that occasion, nor yet in the reports they had circulated
against him, but perceiving that they were unable to produce any certain evidence
respecting the case, when they came to the city of Sardica, they were unwilling to meet
the Council of all the holy Bishops. From this it became evident that the decision of our
brother and fellow-Bishop Julius was a just one ; for after cautious deliberation and care
he had determined, that we ought not to hesitate at all about communion with our brother
Athanasius. For he had the credible testimony of eighty Bishops, and was also able to
advance this fair argument in his support that by the mere means of our dearly beloved
brethren his own Presbyters, and by correspondence, he had defeated the design of Eusebius
and his fellows, who relied more upon violence than upon a judicial enquiry.

Wherefore all the Bishops from all parts determined upon holding communion with Athanasius
on the ground that he was innocent. And let your charity also observe, that when he came
to the holy Council assembled at Sardica, the Bishops of the East were informed of the
circumstance, as we said before, both by letter, and by injunctions conveyed by word of
mouth, and were invited by us to be present. But, being condemned by their own conscience,
they had recourse to unbecoming excuses, and set themselves to avoid the enquiry. They
demanded that an innocent man should be rejected from our communion, as a culprit, not
considering how unbecoming, or rather how impossible, such a proceeding was. And as for
the Reports which were framed in the Mareotis by certain most wicked and most abandoned
youths , to whose hands one would not commit the very lowest office of the ministry, it is
certain that they were ex parte statements. For neither was our, brother the Bishop
Athanasius present on the occasion, nor the Presbyter Macarius who was accused by them.
And besides, their enquiry, or rather their falsification of facts, was attended by the
most disgraceful circumstances. Sometimes heathens, sometimes Catechumens, were examined,
not that they might declare what they knew, but that they might assert those falsehoods
which they had been taught by others. And when you Presbyters, who were in charge in the
absence of your Bishop, desired to be present at the enquiry, in order that you might shew
the truth, and disprove the falsehoods, no regard was paid to you; they would not permit
you to be present, but drove you away with insult.

Now although their calumnies have been most plainly exposed before all men by these
circumstances; yet we found also, on reading the Reports, that the most iniquitous
Ischyras, who has obtained from them the empty title of Bishop as his reward for the false
accusation, had convicted himself of calumny. He declares in the Reports that at the very
time when, according to his positive assertions, Macarius entered his cell, he lay there
sick; whereas Eusebius and his fellows had the boldness to write that Ischyras was
standing up and offering when Macarius came in. 38. The base and slanderous charge which
they next alleged against him, has become well-known to all men. They raised a great
outcry, affirming that Athanasius had committed murder, and had made away with one
Arsenius a Meletian Bishop, whose loss they pretended to deplore with feigned lamentations
and fictitious tears, and demanded that the body of a living man, as if a dead one, should
be given up to them. But their fraud was not undetected; one and all knew that the person
was alive, and was numbered among the living. And when these men, who are ready upon any
opportunity, perceived their falsehoods detected (for Arsenius shewed himself alive, and
so proved that he had not been made away with, and was not dead), yet they would not rest,
but proceeded to add other to their former columnies , and to slander the man by a fresh
expedient. Well; our brother Athanasius, dearly beloved, was not confounded, but again in
the present case also with great boldness challenged them to the proof, and we too prayed
and exhorted them to come to the trial, and if they were able, to establish their charge
against him. O great arrogance! O dreadful pride! or rather, if one must say the truth, O
evil and accusing conscience! for this is the view which all men take of it.

Wherefore, beloved brethren, we admonish and exhort you, above all things to maintain the
right faith of the Catholic Church. You have undergone many severe and grievous trials;
many are the insults and injuries which the Catholic Church has suffered, but `he that
endureth to the end, the same shall be saved .' Wherefore even though they still
recklessly assail you, let your tribulation be unto you for joy. For such afflictions are
a sort of martyrdom, and such confessions and tortures as yours will not be without their
reward, but ye shall receive the prize from God. Therefore strive above all things in
support of the sound faith, and of the innocence of your Bishop and our fellow-minister
Athanasius. We also have not held our peace, nor been negligent of what concerns your
comfort, but have deliberated and done whatsoever the claims of charity demand. We
sympathize with our suffering brethren, and their affliction! we consider as our own.

39. Accordingly we have written to beseech our most religious and godly Emperors, that
their kindness would give orders for the release of those who are still suffering from
affliction and oppression, and would command that none of the magistrates, whose duty it
is to attend only to civil causes, give judgment upon Clergy , nor henceforward in any
way, on pretence of providing for the Churches, attempt anything against the brethren; but
that every one may live, as he prays and desires to do, free from persecution, from
violence and fraud, and in quietness and peace may follow the Catholic and Apostolic
Faith. As for Gregory, who has the reputation of being illegally appointed by the
heretics, and has been sent by them to your city, we wish your unanimity to understand,
that he has been deposed by a judgment of the whole sacred Council, although indeed he has
never at any time been considered to be a Bishop at all. Wherefore receive gladly your
Bishop Athanasius, for to this end we have dismissed him in peace. And we exhort all those
who either through fear, or through the intrigues of certain persons, have held communion
with Gregory, that now being admonished, exhorted, and persuaded by us, they withdraw from
that his detestable communion, and straightway unite themselves to the Catholic Church.

40. But forasmuch as we have learnt that Aphthonius, Athanasius the son of Capito, Paul,
and Plutio, our fellow Presbyters , have also suffered from the machinations of Eusebius
and his fellows, so that some of them have had trial of exile, and others have fled on
peril of their lives, we have in consequence thought it necessary to make this known unto
you, that you may understand that we have received and acquitted them also, being aware
that whatever has been done by Eusebius and his fellows against the orthodox has tended to
the glory and commendation of those who have been attacked by them. It were fitting that
your Bishop and our brother Athanasius should make this known to you respecting them, to
his own respecting his own; but as for more abundant testimony he wished the holy Council
also to write to you, we deferred not to do so, but hastened to signify this unto you,
that you may receive them as we have done, for they also are deserving of praise, because
through their piety towards Christ they have been thought worthy to endure violence at the
hands of the heretics.

What decrees have been passed by the holy Council against those who are at the head of the
Arian heresy, and have offended against you, and the rest of the Churches, you will learn
from the subjoined documents . We have sent them to you, that you may understand from them
that the Catholic Church will not overlook those who offend against her. Letter of the
Council of Sardica to the Bishops of Egypt and Libya. The holy Council, by the grace of
God assembled at Sardica, to the Bishops of Egypt and Libya, their fellow-ministers and
dearly beloved brethren, sends health in the Lord. 41. We were not ignorant , but the fact
was well known to us, even before we received the letters of your piety, that the
supporters of the abominated heresy of the Arians were practising many dangerous
machinations, rather to the destruction of their own souls, than to the injury of the
Church. For this has ever been the object of their craft and villainy: this is the deadly
design in which they have been continually engaged, viz. how they may best expel from
their places and persecute all who are to be found anywhere of orthodox sentiments, and
maintaining the doctrine of the Catholic Church, which was delivered to them from the
Fathers. Against some they have laid false accusations; others they have driven into
banishment; others they have destroyed by the punishments inflicted on them. At any rate
they endeavoured by violence and tyranny to surprise the innocence of our brother and
fellow-Bishop Athanasius, and therefore conducted their enquiry into his case without any
faith, without any sort of justice. Accordingly having no confidence in the part they had
played on that occasion, nor yet in the reports they had circulated against him, but
perceiving that they were unable to produce any certain evidence respecting the case, when
they came to the city of Sardica, they were unwilling to meet the Council of all the holy
Bishops. From this it became evident that the decision of our brother and fellow-Bishop
Julius was a just one; for after cautious deliberation and care he had decided, that we
ought not to hesitate at all about communion with our brother Athanasius. For he had the
credible testimony of eighty Bishops, and was also able to advance this fair argument in
his support, that by the mere means of our dearly beloved brethren his own Presbyters, and
by correspondence, he had defeated the designs of Eusebius and his fellows, who relied
more upon violence than upon a judicial inquiry.

Wherefore all the Bishops from all parts determined upon holding communion with Athanasius
on the ground that he was innocent. And let your charity also observe, that when he came
to the holy Council assembled at Sardica, the Bishops of the East were informed of the
circumstance, as we said before, both by letter, and by injunctions conveyed by word of
mouth, and were invited by us to be present. But, being condemned by their own conscience,
they had recourse to unbecoming excuses, and began to avoid the enquiry. They demanded
that an innocent man should be rejected from our communion, as a culprit, not considering
how unbecoming, or rather how impossible, such a proceeding was. And as for the reports
which were framed in the Mareotis by certain most wicked and abandoned youths, to whose
hands one would not commit the very lowest office of the ministry, it is certain that they
were ex parte statements. For neither was our brother the Bishop Athanasius present on the
occasion, nor the Presbyter Macarius, who was accused by them. And besides, their enquiry,
or rather their falsification of facts, was attended by the most disgraceful
circumstances. Sometimes Heathens, sometimes Catechumens, were examined, not that they
might declare what they knew, but that they might assert those falsehoods which they had
been taught by others. And when you Presbyters, who were in charge in the absence of your
Bishop, desired to be present at the enquiry, in order that you might shew the truth, and
disprove falsehood, no regard was paid to you; they would not permit you to be present,
but drove you away with insult.

Now although their calumnies have been most plainly exposed before all men by these
circumstances; yet we found also, on reading the Reports, that the most iniquitous
Ischyras, who has obtained from them the empty title of Bishop as his reward for the false
accusation, had convicted himself of calumny. He declares in the Reports, that at the very
time when, according to his positive assertions, Macarius entered his cell, he lay there
sick; whereas Eusebius and his fellows had the boldness to write that Ischyras was
standing offering when Macarius came in. 42. The base and slanderous charge which they
next alleged against him has become well known unto all men. They raised a great outcry,
affirming that Athanasius had committed murder, and made away with one Arsenius a Meletian
Bishop, whose loss they pretended to deplore with feigned lamentations, and fictitious
tears, and demanded that the body of a living man, as if a dead one, should be given up to
them. But their fraud was not undetected; one and all knew that the person was alive, and
was numbered among the living. And when these men, who are ready upon any opportunity,
perceived their falsehood detected (for Arsenius shewed himself alive, and so proved that
he had not been made away with, and was not dead), yet they would not rest, but proceeded
to add other to their former calumnies, and to slander the man by a fresh expedient. Well:
our brother Athanasius, dearly beloved, was not confounded, but again in the present case
also with great boldness challenged them to the proof, and we too prayed and exhorted them
to come to the trial, and if they were able, to establish their charge against him. O
great arrogance! O dreadful pride! or rather, if one must say the truth, O evil and
accusing conscience! for this is the view which all men take of it.

Wherefore, beloved brethren, we admonish and exhort you, above all things, to maintain the
right faith of the Catholic Church. You have undergone many severe and grievous trials;
many are the insults and injuries which the Catholic Church has suffered, but `he that
endureth to the end, the same shall be saved .' Wherefore, even though they shall still
recklessly assail you, let your tribulation be unto you for joy. For such afflictions are
a sort of martyrdom, and such confessions and tortures as yours will not be without their
reward, but ye shall receive the prize from God. Therefore strive above all things in
support of the sound Faith, and of the innocence of your Bishop and our brother
Athanasius. We also have not held our peace, nor been negligent of what concerns your
comfort, but have deliberated and done whatsoever the claims of charity demand. We
sympathize with our suffering brethren, and their afflictions we consider as our own, and
have mingled our tears with yours. And you, brethren, are not the only persons who have
suffered: many others also of our brethren in ministry have come hither, bitterly
lamenting these things.

43. Accordingly, we have written to beseech our most religious and godly Emperors, that
their kindness would give orders for the release of those who are still suffering from
affliction and oppression, and would command that none of the magistrates, whose duty it
is to attend only to civil causes, give judgment upon Clergy, nor henceforward in any way,
on pretence of providing for the Churches, attempt anything against the brethren, but that
every one may live, as he prays and desires to do, free front persecution, from violence
and fraud, and in quietness and peace may follow the Catholic and Apostolic Faith. As for
Gregory, who has the reputation of being illegally appointed by the heretics, and who has
been sent by them to your city, we wish your unanimity to understand, that he has been
deposed by the judgment of the whole sacred Council, although indeed he has never at any
time been considered to be a Bishop at all. Wherefore receive gladly your Bishop
Athanasius; for to this end we have dismissed him in peace. And we exhort all those, who
either through fear, or through intrigues of certain persons, have held communion with
Gregory, that being now admonished, exhorted, and persuaded by us, they withdraw from his
detestable communion, and straightway unite themselves to the Catholic Church.

What decrees have been passed by the holy Council against Theodorus, Narcissus, Stephanus,
Acacius, Menophantus, Ursacius, Valens, and George , who are the heads of the Arian
heresy, and have offended against you and the rest of the Churches, you will learn from
the subjoined documents. We have sent them to you, that your piety may assent to our
decisions, and that you may understand from them, that the Catholic Church will not
overlook those who offend against her. Encyclical Letter of the Council of Sardica. The
holy Council , by the grace of God, assembled at Sardica, to their dearly beloved
brethren, the Bishops and fellow-Ministers of the Catholic Church every where, sends
health in the Lord. 44. The Arian madmen have dared repeatedly to attack the servants of
God, who maintain the right faith; they attempted to substitute a spurious doctrine, and
to drive out the orthodox; and at last they made so violent an assault against the Faith,
that it became known even to the piety of our most religious Emperors. Accordingly, the
grace of God assisting them, our most religious Emperors have themselves assembled us
together out of different provinces and cities, and have permitted this holy Council to be
held in the city of Sardica; to the end that all dissension may be done away, and all
false doctrine being driven from us, Christian godliness may alone be maintained by all
men. The Bishops of the East also attended, being exhorted to do so by the most religious
Emperors, chiefly on account of the reports they have so often circulated concerning our
dearly beloved brethren and fellow-ministers Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, and
Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyro-Galatia. Their calumnies have probably already reached you,
and perhaps they have attempted to disturb your ears, that you may be induced to believe
their charges against the innocent, and that they may obliterate from your minds any
suspicions respecting their own wicked heresy. But they have not been permitted to effect
this to any great extent; for the Lord is the Defender of His Churches, Who endured death
for their sakes and for us all, and provided access to heaven for us all through Himself.
When therefore Eusebius and his fellows wrote long ago to Julius our brother and Bishop of
the Church of the Romans, against our fore-mentioned brethren, that is to say, Athanasius,
Marcellus, and Asclepas , the Bishops from the other parts wrote also, testifying to the
innocence of our fellow-minister Athan- sius, and declaring that the representations of
Eusebius and his fellows were nothing else but mere falsehood and calumny.

And indeed their calumnies were clearly proved by the fact that, when they were invited to
a Council by our dearly beloved fellow-minister Julius, they would not come, and also by
what was written to them by Julius himself. For had they had confidence in the measures
and the acts in which they were engaged against our brethren, they would have come. And
besides, they gave a still more evident proof of their conspiracy by their conduct in this
great and holy Council. For when they arrived at the city of Sardica,and saw our brethren
Athanasius, Marcellus, Asclepas, and the rest, they were afraid to come to a trial and
though they were repeatedly invited to attend, they would not obey the summons. Although
all we Bishops met together, and above all that man of most happy old age, Hosius, one who
on account of his age, his confession, and the many labours he has undergone, is worthy of
all reverence; and although we waited and urged them to come to the trial, that in the
presence of our fellow-ministers they might establish the truth of those charges which
they had circulated and written against them in their absence; yet they would not come,
when they were thus invited, as we said before, thus giving proof of their calumnies, and
almost proclaiming to the world by this their refusal, the plot and conspiracy in which
they have been engaged. They who are confident of the truth of their assertions are able
to make them good against their opponents face to face. But as they would not meet us, we
think that no one can now doubt, however they may again have recourse to their bad
practices, that they possess no proof against our fellow-ministers, but calumniate them in
their absence, while they avoid their presence.

45. They fled, beloved brethren, not only on account of the calumnies they had uttered,
but because they saw that those had come who had various charges to advance against them.
For chains and irons were brought forward which they had used; persons appeared who had
returned from banishment; there came also our brethren, kinsmen of those who were still
detained in exile, and friends of such as had perished through their means. And what was
the most weighty ground of accusation, Bishops were present, one of whom brought forward
the irons and chains which they had caused him to wear, and others appealed to the death
which had been brought about by their calumnies. For they had proceeded to such a pitch of
madness, as even to attempt to destroy Bishops; and would have destroyed them, had they
not escaped their hands. Our fellow-ministers, Theodulus of blessed memory , died during
his flight from their false accusations, orders having been given in consequence of these
to put him to death. Others also exhibited sword-wounds; and others complained that they
had been exposed to the pains of hunger through their means. Nor were they ordinary
persons who testified to these things, but whole Churches, in whose behalf legates
appeared , and told us of soldiers sword in hand, of multitudes armed with clubs, of the
threats of judges, of the forgery of false letters. For there were read certain false
letters of Theognius and his fellows against our fellow-ministers Athanasius, Marcellus,
and Asclepas, written with the design of exasperating the Emperors against them; and those
who had then been Deacons of Theognius proved the fact. From these men, we heard of
virgins stripped naked, churches burnt, ministers in custody, and all for no other end,
but only for the sake of the accursed heresy of the Arian madmen, whose communion whoso
refused was forced to suffer these things.

When they perceived then how matters lay, they were in a strait what course to choose.
They were ashamed to confess what they had done, but were unable to conceal it any longer.
They therefore came to the city of Sardica, that by their arrival they might seem to
remove suspicion from themselves of such offences. But when they saw those whom they had
calumniated, and those who had suffered at their hands; when they had before their eyes
their accusers and the proofs of their guilt, they were unwilling to come forward, though
invited by our fellow-ministers Athanasius, Marcellus, and Asclepas, who with great
freedom complained of their conduct, and urged and challenged them to the trial, promising
not only to refute their calumnies, but also to bring proof of the offences which they had
committed against their Churches. But they were seized with such terrors of conscience,
that they fled; and in doing so they exposed their own calumnies and confessed by running
away the offences of which they had been guilty.

46. But although their malice and their calumnies have been plainly manifested on this as
well as on former occasions, yet that they may not devise means of practising a further
mischief in consequence of their flight, we have considered it advisable to examine the
part they have played according to the principles of truth; this has been our purpose, and
we have found them calumniators by their acts, and authors of nothing else than a plot
against our brethren in ministry. For Arsenius, who they said had been murdered by
Athanasius, is still alive, and is numbered among the living; from which we may infer that
the reports they have spread abroad on other subjects are fabrications also. And whereas
they spread abroad a rumour concerning a cup, which they said had been broken by Macarius
the Presbyter of Athanasius, those who came from Alexandria, the Mareotis, and the other
parts, testified that nothing of the kind had taken place. And the Egyptian Bishops who
wrote to Julius our fellow-minister, positively affirmed that there had not arisen among
them even any suspicion whatever of such a thing.

Moreover, the Reports, which they say they have to produce against him, are, as is
notorious, ex parte statements; and even in the formation of these very Reports, Heathens
and Catechumens were examined; one of whom, a Catechumen, said in his examination that he
was present in the room when Macarius broke in upon them; and another declared, that
Ischyras of whom they speak so much, lay sick in his cell at the time; from which it
appears that the Mysteries were never celebrated at all, because Catechumens were present,
and also that Ischyras was not present, but was lying sick on his bed. Besides, this most
worthless Ischyras, who has falsely asserted, as he was convicted of doing, that
Athanasius bad burnt some of the sacred books, has himself confessed that he was sick, and
was lying in his bed when Macarius came; from which it is plain that he is a slanderer.
Nevertheless, as a reward for these his calumnies, they have given to this very Ischyras
the title of Bishop, although he is not even a Presbyter. For two Presbyters, who were
once associated with Meletius, but were afterwards received by the blessed Alexander,
Bishop of Alexandria, and are now with Athanasius, appeared before the Council, and
testified that he was not even a Presbyter of Meletius, and that Meletius never had either
Church or Minister in the Mareotis. And yet this man, who has never been even a Presbyter,
they have now brought forward as a Bishop, that by this name they may have the means of
overpowering those who are within hearing of his calumnies.

47. The book of our fellow-minister Marcellus was also read, by which the fraud of
Eusebius and his fellows was plainly discovered. For what Marcellus had advanced by way of
enquiry , they falsely represented as his professed opinion; but when the subsequent parts
of the book were read, and the parts preceding the queries themselves, his faith was found
to be correct. He had never pretended, as they positively affirmed , that the Word of God
had His beginning from holy Mary, nor that His kingdom had an end; on the contrary he had
written that His kingdom was both without beginning and without end. Our fellow-minister
Asclepas also produced Reports which had been drawn up at Antioch in the presence of his
accusers and Eusebius of Caesarea, and proved that he was innocent by the declarations of
the Bishops who judged his cause . They had good reason therefore, dearly beloved
brethren, for not hearkening to our frequent summons, and for deserting the Council. They
were driven to this by their own consciences; but their flight only confirmed the proof of
their own calumnies, and caused those things to be believed against them, which their
accusers, who were present, were asserting and arguing. But besides all these things, they
had not only received those who were formerly degraded and ejected on account of the
heresy of Arius, but had even promoted them to a higher station, advancing Deacons to the
Presbytery, and of Presbyters making Bishops, for no other end, but that they might
disseminate and spread abroad impiety, and corrupt the orthodox faith.

48. Their leaders are now, after Eusebius and his fellows, Theodorus of Heraclea,
Narcissus of Neronias in Cilicia, Stephanus of Antioch, George of Laodicea, Acacius of
Caesarea in Palestine, Menophantus of Ephesus in Asia, Ursacius of Singidunum in Moesia,
and Valens of Mursa in Pannonia . These men would not permit those who came with them from
the East to meet the holy Council, nor even to approach the Church of God; but as they
were coming to Sardica, they held Councils in various places by themselves, and made an
engagement under threats, that when they came to Sardica, they would not so much as appear
at the trial, nor attend the assembling of the holy Council, but simply coming and making
known their arrival as a matter of form, would speedily take to flight. This we have been
able to ascertain from our fellow-ministers, Macarius of Palestine and Asterius of Arabia
, who after coming in their company, separated themselves from their unbelief. These came
to the holy Council, and complained of the violence they had suffered, and said that no
right act was being done by them; adding that there were many among them who adhered to
orthodoxy, but were prevented by those men from coming hither, by means of the threats and
promises which they held out to those who wished to separate from them. On this account it
was that they were so anxious that all should abide in one dwelling, and would not suffer
them to be by themselves even for the shortest space of time.

49. Since then it became us not to hold our peace, nor to pass over unnoticed their
calumnies, imprisonments, murders, wounds, conspiracies by means of false letters,
outrages, stripping of the virgins, banishments, destruction of the Churches, burnings,
translations from small cities to larger dioceses, and above all, the rising of the ill-
named Arian heresy by their means against the orthodox faith; we have therefore pronounced
our dearly beloved, brethren and fellow-ministers Athanasius, Marcellus, and Asclepas, and
those who minister to the Lord with them, to be innocent and clear of offence, and have
written to the diocese of each, that the people of each Church may know the innocence of
their own Bishop, and may esteem him as their Bishop and expect his coming. And as for
those who like wolves have invaded their Churches, Gregory at Alexandria Basil at Ancyra,
and Quintianus at Gaza, let them neither give them the title of Bishop, nor hold any
communion at all with them, nor receive letters from them, nor write to them. And for
Theodorus, Narcissus, Acacius, Stephanus, Ursacius, Valens, Menophantus, and George,
although the last from fear did not come from the East, yet because he was deposed by the
blessed Alexander, and because both he and the others were connected with the Arian
madness, as well as on account of the charges which lie against them, the holy Council has
unanimously deposed them from the Episcopate, and we have decided that they not only are
not Bishops, but that they are unworthy of holding communion with the faithful.

For they who separate the Son and alienate the Word from the Father, ought themselves to
be separated from the Catholic Church and to be alien from the Christian name. Let them
therefore be anathema to you, because they have `corrupted the word of truth .' It is an
Apostolic injunction , `If any man preach any other Gospel unto you than that ye have
received, let him he accursed.' Charge your people that no one hold communion with them,
for there is no communion of light with darkness; put away from you all these, for there
is no concord of Christ in Belial . And take heed, dearly beloved, that ye neither write
to them, nor receive letters from them; but desire rather, brethren and fellow-ministers,
as being present in spirit with our Council, to assent to our judgments by your
subscriptions , to the end that concord may be preserved by all our fellow-ministers
everywhere. May Divine Providence protect and keep you, dearly beloved brethren, in
sanctification and joy.

I, Hosius, Bishop, have subscribed this, and all the rest likewise. This is the letter
which the Council of Sardica sent to those who were unable to attend, and they on the
other hand gave their judgment in accordance; and the following are the names both of
those Bishops who subscribed in the Council, and of the others also. 50. Hosius of Spain ,
Julius of Rome by his Presbyters Archidamus and Philoxenus, Protogenes of Sardica,
Gaudentius, Macedonius, Severus, Praetextatus, Ursicius, Lucillus, Eugenius, Vitalius,
Calepodius, Florentius, Bassus, Vincentius, Stercorius, Palladius, Domitianus, Chalbis,
Gerontius, Protasius, Eulogus, Porphyrius, Dioscorus, Zosimus, Januarius, Zosimus,
Alexander, Eutychius, Socrates, Diodorus, Martyrius, Eutherius, Eucarpus, Athenodorus,
Irenaeus, Julianus, Alypius, Jonas, Aetius, Restitutus, Marcellinus, Aprianus, Vitalius,
Valens, Hermogenes, Castus, Domitianus, Fortunatius, Marcus, Anuianus, Heliodorus,
Musaeus, Asterius, Paregorius, Plutarchus, Hymenaeus, Athanasius, Lucius, Amantius, Arius,
Asclepius, Dionysius, Maximus, Tryphon, Alexander, Antigonus, Aelianus, Petrus, Symphorus,
Musonius, Eutychus, Philologius, Spudasius, Zosimus, Patricius, Adolius, Sapricius .

From Gaul the following; Maximianus , Verissimus , Victurus, Valentinus , Desiderius,
Eulogius, Sarbatius, Dyscolius , Superior, Mercurius, Declopetus, Eusebius, Severinus ,
Satyrus, Martinus, Paulus, Optatianus, Nicasius, Victor , Sempronius, Valerinus, Pacatus,
Jesses, Ariston, Simplicius, Metianus, Amantus , Amillianus, Justinianus, Victorinus ,
Satornilus, Abundantius, Donatuanus, Maximus. From Africa; Nessus, Gratus , Megasius,
Coldaeus, Rogatianus, Consortius, Rufinus, Manninus, Cessilianus, Herennianus, Marianus,
Valerius, Dynamius, Mizonius, Justus, Celestinus, Cyprianus, Victor, Honoratus, Marinus,
Pantagathus, Felix, Baudius, Liber, Capito, Minervalis, Cosmus, Victor, Hesperio, Felix,
Severianus, Optantius, Hesperus, Fidentius, Salustius, Paschasius. From Egypt; Liburnius,
Amantius, Felix, Ischyrammon, Romulus, Tiberinus, Consortius, Heraclides, Fortunatius,
Dioscorus, Fortunatianus, Bastamon, Datyllus, Andreas, Serenus, Arius, Theodorus,
Evagoras, Helias, Timotheus, Orion, Andronicus, Paphnutius, Hermias, Arabion, Psenosiris,
Apollonius, Muis, Sarapampon , Philo, Philippus, Apollonius, Paphnutius, Paulus,
Dioscorus, Nilammon, Serenus, Aquila, Aotas, Harpocration, Isaac, Theodorus, Apollos,
Ammonianus, Nilus, Heraclius, Arion, Athas, Arsenius, Agathammon, Theon, Apollonius,
Helias, Paninuthius, Andragathius, Nemesion, Sarapion, Ammonius, Ammonius, Xenon,
Gerontius, Quintus, Leonides, Sempronianus, Philo, Heraclides, Hieracys, Rufus, Pasophius,
Macedonius, Apollodorus, Flavianus, Psaes, Syrus, Apphus, Sarapion, Esaias, Paphnutius,
Timotheus, Elurion, Gaius, Musaeus, Pistus, Heraclammon, Heron, Helias, Anagamphus,
Apollonius, Gaius, Philotas, Paulus, Tithoes, Eudaemon, Julius.

Those on the road of Italy are Probatius, Viator, Facundinus, Joseph, Numedius,
Sperantius, Severus, Heraclianus, Faustinus, Antoninus, Heraclius, Vitalins, Felix,
Crispinus, Paulianus. From Cyprus; Auxibius, Photius, Gerasius, Aphrodisius, Irenicus,
Nunechius, Athanasius, Macedonius, Triphyllius, Spyridon, Norbanus, Sosicrates. From
Palestine; Maximus, Aetius, Arius, Theodosius, Germanus, Silvanus, Paulus, Claudius,
Patricius, Elpidius, Germanus, Eusebius, Zenobius, Paulus, Petrus. These are the names of
those who subscribed to the acts of the Council; but there are very many beside, out of
Asia, Phrygia, and Isauria , who wrote in my behalf before this Council was held, and
whose names, nearly sixty-three in number, may be found in their own letters. They amount
altogether to three hundred and forty-four .

CHAPTER IV. IMPERIAL AND ECCLESIASTICAL ACTS IN CONSEQUENCE OF THE DECISION OF THE COUNCIL OF SARDICA.

51. When the most religious Emperor Constantius heard of these things, he sent for me,
having written privately to his brother Constans of blessed memory, and to me three
several times in the following terms. Constantius Victor Augustus to Athanasius . Our
benignant clemency will not suffer you to be any longer tempest-tossed by the wild waves
of the sea; for our unwearied piety has not lost sight of you, while you have been bereft
of your native home, deprived of your goods, and have been wandering in savage
wildernesses. And although I have for a long time deferred expressing by letter the
purpose of my mind concerning you, principally because I expected that you would appear
before us of your own accord, and would seek a relief of your sufferings; yet forasmuch as
fear, it may be, has prevented you from fulfilling your intentions, we have therefore
addressed to your fortitude letters full of our bounty, to the end that you may use all
speed and without fear present yourself in our presence, thereby to obtain the enjoyment
of your wishes, and that, having experience of our kindness, you may be restored again to
your own. For this purpose I have besought my lord and brother Constans Victor Augustus,
in your behalf, that he would give you permission to come, in order that you may be
restored to your country with the consent of us both, receiving this as a pledge of our
favour.

The Second Letter. Although we made it very plain to you in a former letter that you may
without hesitation come to our Court, because we greatly wished to send you home, yet, we
have further sent this present letter to your fortitude to exhort you without any distrust
or apprehension, to place yourself in the public conveyances , and to hasten to us, that
you may enjoy the fulfilment of your wishes. The Third Letter. Our pleasure was, while we
abode at Edessa, and your Presbyters were there, that, on one of them being sent to you,
you should make haste to come to our Court, in order that you might see our face, and
straightway proceed to Alexandria. But as a very long period has elapsed since you
received letters from us, and you have not yet come, we therefore hasten to remind you
again, that you may endeavour even now to present yourself before us with speed, and so
may be restored to your country, and obtain the accomplishment of your prayers. And for
your fuller information we have sent Achitas the Deacon, from whom you will be able to
learn the purpose of our soul, that you may now secure the objects of your prayers.

Such was the tenor of the Emperor's letters; on receiving which I went up to Rome to bid
farewell to the Church and the Bishop: for I was at Aquileia when the above was written.
The Church was filled with all joy, and the Bishop Julius rejoiced with me in my return
and wrote to the Church ; and as we passed along, the Bishops of every place sent us on
our way in peace. The letter of Julius was as follows. 52. Julius to the Presbyters,
Deacons, and people residing at Alexandria . I congratulate you, beloved brethren, that
you now behold the fruit of your faith before your eyes; for any one may see that such
indeed is the case with respect to my brother and fellow-Bishop Athanasius, whom for the
innocency of his life, and by reason of your prayers, God is restoring to you again.
Wherefore it is easy to perceive, that you have continually offered up to God pure prayers
and full of love. Being mindful of the heavenly promises, and of the conversation that
leads to them, which you have learnt from the teaching of my brother aforesaid, you knew
certainly and understood by the right faith that is in you, that he, whom you always had
as present in your most pious minds, would not be separated from you for ever. Wherefore
there is no need that I should use many words in writing to you; for your faith has
already anticipated whatever I could say to you, and has by the grace of God procured the
accomplishment of the common prayers of you all. Therefore, I repeat again, I congratulate
you, because you have preserved your souls unconquered in the faith; and I also
congratulate no less my brother Athanasius, in that, though he is enduring many
afflictions, he has at no time been forgetful of your love and earnest desires towards
him. For although for a season he seemed to be withdrawn from you in body, yet he has
continued to live as always present with you in spirit .

53. Wherefore he returns to you now more illustrious than when he went away from you. Fire
tries and purifies the precious materials, gold and silver: but how can one describe the
worth of such a man, who, having passed victorious through the perils of so many
tribulations, is now restored to you, being pronounced innocent not by our voice only, but
by the voice of the whole Council ? Receive therefore, beloved brethren, with all godly
honour and rejoicing, your Bishop Athanasius, together with those who have been partners
with him in so many labours. And rejoice that you now obtain the fulfilment of your
prayers, after that in your salutary letter you have given meat and drink to your Pastor,
who, so to speak, longed and thirsted after your godliness. For while he sojourned in a
foreign land, you were his consolation; and you refreshed him during his persecutions by
your most faithful minds and spirits. And it delights me now to conceive and figure to my
mind the joy of every one of you at his return, and the pious greetings of the concourse,
and the glorious festivity of those that run to meet him. What a day will that be to you,
when my brother comes back again, and your former sufferings terminate, and his much-
prized and desired return inspires you all with an exhilaration of perfect joy!

The like joy it is ours to feel in a very great degree, since it has been granted us by
God, to be able to make the acquaintance of so eminent a man. It is fitting therefore that
I should conclude my letter with a prayer. May Almighty God, and His Son our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ, afford you continual grace, giving you a reward for the admirable
faith which you displayed in your noble confession in behalf of your Bishop, that He may
impart unto you and unto them that are with you, both here and hereafter, those better
things, which `the eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath entered into the heart
of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him ,' through our Lord
Jesus Christ, through Whom to Almighty God be glory for ever and ever. Amen. I pray,
dearly beloved brethren, for your health and strength in the Lord.

54. The Emperor, when I came to him with these letters, received me kindly, and sent me
forth to my country and Church addressing the following to the Bishops, Presbyters, and
People. Constantius, Victor, Maximus, Augustus, to the Bishops and Presbyters of the
Catholic Church. The most reverend Athanasius has not been deserted by the grace of God,
but although for a brief season he was subjected to trial to which human nature is liable,
he has obtained from the all-surveying Providence such an answer to his prayers as was
meet, and is restored by the will of the Most High, and by our sentence, at once to his
country and to the Church, over which by divine permission he presided. Wherefore, in
accordance with this, it is fitting that it should be provided by our clemency, that all
the decrees which have heretofore been passed against those who held communion with him,
be now consigned to oblivion, and that all suspicions respecting them be henceforward set
at rest, and that immunity, such as the Clergy who are associated with him formerly
enjoyed, be duly confirmed to them. Moreover to our other acts of favour towards him we
have thought good to add the following, that all persons of the sacred catalogue should
understand, that an assurance of safety is given to all who adhere to him, whether
Bishops, or other Clergy. And union with him will be a sufficient guarantee, in the case
of any person, of an upright intention. For whoever, acting according to a better judgment
and part, shall choose to hold communion with him, we order, in imitation of that
Providence which has already gone before, that all such should have the advantage of the
grace which by the will of the Most High is now offered to them from us. May God preserve
you.

The Second Letter. Constantius, Victor, Maximus, Augustus, to the people of the Catholic
Church at Alexandria. 55. Having in view your welfare in all respects, and knowing that
you have for a long time been deprived of episcopal superintendence, we have thought good
to send back to you your Bishop Athanasius, a man known to all men for the uprightness
that is in him, and for the good disposition of his personal character. Receive him, as
you are wont to receive every one, in a suitable manner, and, using his advocacy as your
succour in your prayers to God, endeavour to preserve continually that unanimity and peace
according to the order of the Church which is at the same time becoming in you, and most
advantageous for us. For it is not becoming that any dissension or faction should be
raised among you, contrary to the prosperity of our times. We desire that this offence may
be altogether removed from you, and we exhort you to continue stedfastly in your
accustomed prayers, and to make him, as we said before, your advocate and helper towards
God. So that, when this your determination, beloved, has influenced the prayers of all
men, even those heathen who are still addicted to the false worship of idols may eagerly
desire to come to the knowledge of our sacred religion. Again therefore we exhort you to
continue in these things, and gladly to receive your Bishop, who is sent back to you by
the decree of the Most High, and by our decision, and determine to greet him cordially
with all your soul and with all your mind.

For this is what is both becoming in you, and agreeable to our clemency. In order that all
occasions of disturbance and sedition may be taken away from those who are maliciously
disposed, we have by letter commanded the magistrates who are among you to subject to the
vengeance of the law all whom they find to be factious. Wherefore taking into
consideration both these things, our decision in accordance with the will of the Most
High, and our regard for you and for concord among you, and the punishment that awaits the
disorderly, observe such things as are proper and suitable to the order of our sacred
religion, and receiving the afore-mentioned Bishop with all reverence and honour, take
care to offer up with him your prayers to God, the Father of all, in behalf of yourselves,
and for the well-being of your whole lives. 56. Having written these letters, he also
commanded that the decrees, which he had formerly sent out against me in consequence of
the calumnies of Eusebius and his fellows, should be cancelled and struck out from the
Orders of the Duke and the Prefect of Egypt; and Eusebius the Decurion was sent to
withdraw them from the Order-books. His letter on this occasion was as follows.
Constantius, Victor, Augustus, to Nestorius . (And in the same terms, to the Governors of
Augustamnica, the Thebais, and Libya.) Whatever Orders are found to have been passed
heretofore, tending to the injury and dishonour of those who hold communion with the
Bishop Athanasius, we wish them to be now erased. For we desire that whatever immunities
his Clergy possessed before, they should again possess the same. And we wish this our
Order to be observed, that when the Bishop Athanasius is restored to his Church, those who
hold communion with him may enjoy the immunities which they have always enjoyed, and which
the rest of the Clergy enjoy; so that they may have the satisfaction of being on an equal
footing with others.

57. Being thus set forward on my journey, as I passed through Syria, I met with the
Bishops of Palestine, who when they had called a Council at Jerusalem, received me
cordially, and themselves also sent me on my way in peace, and addressed the following
letter to the Church and the Bishops. The Holy Council, assembled at Jerusalem, to the
fellow-ministers in Egypt and Libya, and to the Presbyters, Deacons, and People at
Alexandria, brethren beloved and greatly longed for, sends health in the Lord. We cannot
give worthy thanks to the God of all, dearly beloved, for the wonderful things which He
has done at all times, and especially at this time for your Church, in restoring to you
your pastor and lord, and our fellow-minister Athanasius. For who ever hoped that his eyes
would see what you are now actually obtaining? Of a truth, your prayers have been heard by
the God of all, Who cares for His Church, and has looked upon your tears and groans, and
has therefore heard your petitions. For ye were as sheep scattered and fainting, not
having a shepherd . Wherefore the true Shepherd, Who careth for His own sheep, has visited
you from heaven, and has restored to you him whom you desire. Behold, we also, being ready
to do all things for the peace of the Church, and being prompted by the same affection as
yourselves, have saluted him before you; and communicating with you through him, we send
you these greetings, and our offering of thanksgiving, that you may know that we also are
united in the bond of love that joins you to him. You are bound to pray also for the piety
of our most God-beloved Emperors, who, when they knew your earnest longings after him, and
his innocency, determined to restore him to you with all honour. Wherefore receive him
with uplifted hands, and take good heed that you offer up due thanksgiving on his behalf
to God Who has bestowed these blessings upon you; so that you may continually rejoice with
God and glorify our Lord, in Christ Jesus our Lord, through Whom to the Father be glory
for ever. Amen.

I have set down here the names of those who subscribed this letter, although I have
mentioned them before . They are these; Maximus, Aetius, Arius, Theodorus , Germanus,
Silvanus, Paulus, Patricius, Elpidius, Germanus, Eusebius, Zenobius, Paulus, Macrinus ,
Petrus, Claudius. 58. When Ursacius and Valens saw all this, they forthwith condemned
themselves for what they had done, and going up to Rome, confessed their crime, declared
themselves penitent, and sought forgiveness , addressing the following letters to Julius,
Bishop of ancient Rome, and to ourselves. Copies of them were sent to me from Paulinus,
Bishop of Treveri . A Translation from the Latin of a Letter to Julius, concerning the
recantation of Ursacius and Valens . Ursacius and Valens to the most blessed lord, pope
Julius. Whereas it is well known that we have heretofore in letters laid many grievous
charges against the Bishop Athanasius, and whereas when we were corrected by the letters
of your Goodness, we were unable to render an account of the statement we had made; we do
now confess before your Goodness, and in the presence of all the Presbyters our brethren,
that all the reports which have heretofore come to your hearing respecting the case of the
aforesaid Athanasius, are falsehoods and fabrications, and are utterly inconsistent with
his character. Wherefore we earnestly desire communion with the aforesaid Athanasius,
especially since your Piety, with your characteristic generosity, has vouchsafed to pardon
our error. But we also declare, that if at any time the Eastern Bishops, or even
Athanasius himself, ungenerously should wish to bring us to judgment for this matter, we
will not depart contrary to your judgment. And as for the heretic Arius and his
supporters, who say that once the Son was not, and that the Son was made of that which was
not, and who deny that Christ is God and the Son of God before the worlds, we anathematize
them both now and for evermore, as also we have set forth in our former declaration at
Milan . We have written this with our own hands, and we profess again, that we have
renounced for ever, as we said before, the Arian heresy and its authors.

I Ursacius subscribed this my confession in person; and likewise I Valens. Ursacius and
Valens, Bishops, to their lord and brother, the Bishop Athanasius. Having an opportunity
of sending by our brother and fellow Presbyter Musaeus, who is coming to your Charity, we
salute you affectionately, beloved brother, through him, from Aquileia, and pray you,
being as we trust in health, to read our letter. You will also give us confidence, if you
will return to us an answer in writing. For know that we are at peace with you, and in
communion with the Church, of which the salutation prefixed to this letter is a proof. May
Divine Providence preserve you, my Lord, our beloved brother! Such were their letters, and
such the sentence and the judgment of the Bishops in my behalf. But in order to prove that
they did not act thus to ingratiate themselves, or under compulsion in any quarter, I
desire, with your permission, to recount the whole matter from the beginning, so that you
may perceive that the bishops wrote as they did with upright and just intentions, and that
Ursacius and Valens, though they were slow to do so, at last confessed the truth.


DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS
==========================

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS continued

PART 2

Chapter V. Documents Connected with the Charges of the Meletians Against S. Athanasius.

59. Peter was Bishop among us before the persecution, and during the course of it he
suffered martyrdom. When Meletius, who held the title of bishop in Egypt, was convicted of
many crimes, and among the rest of offering sacrifice to idols, Peter deposed him in a
general council of the bishops. Whereupon Meletius did not appeal to another council, or
attempt to justify himself before those who should come after, but made a schism, so that
they who espoused his cause are even yet called Meletians instead of Christians . He began
immediately to revile the bishops, and made false accusations, first against Peter
himself, and against his successor Achillas, and after Achillas, against Alexander . And
he thus practised craftily, following the example of Absalom, to the end that, as he was
disgraced by his deposition, he might by his calumnies mislead the simple. While Meletius
was thus employed, the Arian heresy also had arisen. But in the Council of Nicaea, while
the heresy was anathematized, and the Arians were cast out, the Meletians on whatever
grounds (for it is not necessary now to mention the reason) were received. Five months
however had not yet passed when, the blessed Alexander having died, the Meletians, who
ought to have remained quiet, and to have been grateful that they were received on any
terms, like dogs unable to forget their vomit, were again troubling the Churches.

Upon learning this, Eusebius, who had the lead in the Arian heresy, sends and buys the
Meletians with large promises, becomes their secret friend, and arranges with them for
their assistance on any occasion when he might wish for it. At first he sent to me, urging
me to admit Arius and his fellows to communion , and threatened me in his verbal
communications, while in his letters he [merely] made a request. And when I refused,
declaring that it was not right that those who had invented heresy contrary to the truth,
and had been anathematized by the Ecumenical Council, should be admitted to communion, he
caused the Emperor also, Constantine, of blessed memory, to write to me, threatening me,
in case I should not receive Arius and his fellows, with those afflictions, which I have
before undergone, and which I am still suffering. The following is a part of his letter.
Syncletius and Gaudentius, officers of the palace , were the bearers of it.

Part of a Letter from the Emperor Constantine. Having therefore knowledge of my will,
grant free admission to all who wish to enter into the Church. For if I learn that you
have hindered or excluded any who claim to be admitted into communion with the Church, I
will immediately send some one who shall depose you by my command, and shall remove you
from your place. 60. When upon this I wrote and endeavoured to convince the Emperor, that
that anti-Christian heresy had no communion with the Catholic Church, Eusebius forthwith,
availing himself of the occasion which he had agreed upon with the Meletians, writes and
persuades them to invent some pretext, so that, as they had practised against Peter and
Achillas and Alexander, they might devise and spread reports against us also. Accordingly,
after seeking for a long time, and finding nothing, they at last agree together, with the
advice of Eusebius and his fellows, and fabricate their first accusation by means of
Ision, Eudaemon, and Callinicus , respecting the linen vestments , to the effect that I
had imposed a law upon the Egyptians, and had required its observance of them first. But
when certain Presbyters of mine were found to be present, and the Emperor took cognizance
of the matter, they were condemned (the Presbyters were Apis and Macarius), and the
Emperor wrote, condemning Ision, and ordering me to appear before him. His letters were as
follows .

Eusebius, having intelligence of this, persuades them to wait; and when I arrive, they
next accuse Macarius of breaking the cup, and bring against me the most heinous accusation
possible, viz. that, being an enemy of the Emperor, I had sent a purse of gold to one
Philumenus. The Emperor therefore heard us on this charge also in Psammathia , when they,
as usual, were condemned, and driven from the presence; and, as I returned, he wrote the
following letter to the people. Constantine, Maximus, Augustus, to the people of the
Catholic Church at Alexandria. 61. Beloved brethren, I greet you well, calling upon God,
Who is the chief witness of my intention, and on the Only-begotten, the Author of our Law,
Who is Sovereign over the lives of all men, and Who hates dissensions. But what shall I
say to you? That I am in good health? Nay, but I should be able to enjoy better health and
strength, if you were possessed with mutual love one towards another, and had rid
yourselves of your enmities, through which, in consequence of the storms excited by
contentious men, we have left the haven of brotherly love. Alas! what perverseness is
this! What evil consequences are produced every day by the tumult of envy which has been
stirred up among you! Hence it is that evil reports have settled upon the people of God.
Whither has the faith of righteousness departed? For we are so involved in the mists of
darkness, not only through manifold errors, but through the faults of ungrateful men, that
we bear with those who favour folly, and though we are aware of them, take no heed of
those who set aside goodness and truth. What strange inconsistency is this! We do not
convict our enemies, but we follow the example of robbery which they set us, whereby the
most pernicious errors, finding no one to oppose them, easily, if I may so speak, make a
way for themselves. Is there no understanding among us, for the credit of our common
nature, since we are thus neglectful of the injunctions of the law?

But some one will say, that love is a thing brought out by nature. But, I ask, how is it
that we who have got the law of God for our guide in addition to our natural advantages,
thus tolerate the disturbances and disorders raised by our enemies, who seem inflamed, as
it were, with firebrands? How is it, that having eyes, we see not, neither understand,
though we are surrounded by the intelligence of the law? What a stupor has seized upon our
life, that we are thus neglectful of ourselves, and that although God admonishes us, Is it
not an intolerable evil? and ought we not to esteem such men as our enemies, and not the
household and people of God? For they are infuriated against us, abandoned as they are:
they lay grievous crimes to our charge, and make attacks upon us as enemies. 62. And I
would have you yourselves to consider with what exceeding madness they do this. The
foolish men carry their maliciousness at their tongues' end. They carry about with them a
sort of leaden anger, so that they reciprocally smite one another, and involve us by way
of increasing their own punishment. The good teacher is accounted an enemy, while he who
clothes himself with the vice of envy, contrary to all justice makes his gain of the
gentle temper of the people; he ravages, and consumes, he decks himself out, and
recommends himself with false praises; he subverts the truth, and corrupts the faith,
until he finds out a hole and hiding-place for his conscience. Thus their very
perverseness makes them wretched, while they impudently prefer themselves to places of
honour, however unworthy they may be. Ah! what a mischief is this! they say "Such an one
is too old; such an one is a mere boy; the office belongs to me; it is due to me, since it
is taken away from him. I will gain over all men to my side, and then I will endeavour
with my power to ruin him. Plain indeed is this proclamation of their madness to all the
world; the sight of companies, and gatherings, and rowers under command in their offensive
cabals. Alas! what preposterous conduct is ours, if I may say it! Do they make an
exhibition of their folly in the Church of God? And are they not yet ashamed of
themselves? Do they not yet blame themselves?

Are they not smitten in their consciences, so that they now at length shew that they
entertain a proper sense of their deceit and contentiousness? Theirs is the mere force of
envy, supported by those baneful influences which naturally belong to it. But those
wretches have no power against your Bishop. Believe me, brethren, their endeavours will
have no other effect than this, after they have worn down our days, to leave to themselves
no place of repentance in this life. Wherefore I beseech you, lend help to yourselves;
receive kindly our love, and with all your strength drive away those who desire to
obliterate from among us the grace of unanimity; and looking unto God, love one another. I
received gladly your Bishop Athanasius, and addressed him in such a manner, as being
persuaded that he was a man of God. It is for you to understand these things, not for me
to judge of them. I thought it becoming that the most reverend Athanasius himself should
convey my salutation to you, knowing his kind care of you, which, in a manner worthy of
that peaceable faith which I myself profess, is continually engaged in the good work of
declaring saving knowledge, and will be able to exhort you as is suitable, May God
preserve you, beloved brethren. Such was the letter of Constantine.

63. After these occurrences the Meletians remained quiet for a little time, but after
wards shewed their hostility again, and contrived the following plot, with the aim of
pleasing those who had hired their services. The Mareotis is a country district of
Alexandria, in which Meletius was not able to make a schism. Now while the Churches still
existed within their appointed limits, and all the Presbyters had congregations in them,
and while the people were living in peace, a certain person named Ischyras , who was not a
clergyman, but of a worthless disposition, endeavoured to lead astray the people of his
own village, declaring himself to be a clergyman. Upon learning this, the Presbyter of the
place informed me of it when I was going through my visitation of the Churches, and I sent
Macarius the Presbyter with him to summon Ischyras. They found him sick and lying in a
cell, and charged his father to admonish his son not to continue any such practices as had
been reported against him. But when he recovered from his sickness, being prevented by his
friends and his father from pursuing the same course, he fled over to the Meletians; and
they communicate with Eusebius and his fellows, and at last that calumny is invented by
them, that Macarius had broken a cup, and that a certain Bishop named Arsenius had been
murdered by me. Arsenius they placed in concealment, in order that he might seem made away
with, when he did not make his appearance;

and they carried about a hand, pretending that he had been cut to pieces. As for Ischyras,
whom they did not even know, they began to spread a report that he was a Presbyter, in
order that what he said about the cup might mislead the people. Ischyras, however, being
censured by his friends, came to me weeping, and said that no such thing as they had
reported had been done by Macarius, and that himself had been suborned by the Meletians to
invent this calumny. And he wrote the following letter. To the Blessed pope Athanasius,
Ischyras sends health in the Lord. 64. As when I came to you, my Lord Bishop, desiring to
be received into the Church, you reproved me for what I formerly said, as though I had
proceeded to such lengths of my own free choice, I therefore submit to you this my apology
in writing, in order that you may understand, that violence was used towards me, and blows
inflicted on me by Isaac and Heraclides, and Isaac of Letopolis, and those of their party.
And I declare, and take God as my witness in this matter, that of none of the things which
they have stated, do I know you to be guilty. For no breaking of a cup or overturning of
the Holy Table ever took place, but they compelled me by violent usage to assert all this.
And this defence I make and submit. to you in writing, desiring and claiming for myself to
be admitted among the members of your congregation.I pray that you may have health in the
Lord.

I submit this my handwriting to you the Bishop Athanasius in the presence of the
Presbyters, Ammonas of Dicella, Heraclius of Phascos, Boccon of Chenebri, Achillas of
Myrsine, Didymus of Taphosiris, and Justus from Bomotheus ; and of the Deacons, Paul,
Peter, and Olympius, of Alexandria, and Ammonius, Pistus, Demetrius, and Gaius, of the
Mareotis. 65. Notwithstanding this statement of Ischyras, they again spread abroad the
same charges against me everywhere, and also reported them to the Emperor Constantine. He
too had heard before of the affair of the cup in Psammathia , when I was there, and had
detected the falsehood of my enemies. But now he wrote to Antioch to Dalmatius the Censor
requiring him to institute a judicial enquiry respecting the murder. Accordingly the
Censor sent me notice to prepare for my defence against the charge. Upon receiving his
letters, although at first I paid no regard to the thing because I knew that nothing of
what they said was true, yet seeing that the Emperor was moved, I wrote to my fellow-
ministers into Egypt, and sent a deacon, desiring to learn something of Arsenius, for I
had not seen the man for five or six years. Well, not to relate the matter at length,
Arsenius was found in concealment, in the first instance in Egypt, and afterwards my
friends discovered him again in concealment in Tyre also. And what was most remarkable,
even when he was discovered he would not confess that he was Arsenius, until he was
convicted in court before Paul, who was then Bishop of Tyre, and at last out of very shame
could not deny it.

This he did in order to fulfil his contract with Eusebius and his fellows, lest, if he
were discovered, the game they were playing should at length be broken up; which in fact
came to pass. For when I wrote the Emperor word, that Arsenius was discovered, and
reminded him of what he had heard in Psammathia concerning Macarius the Presbyter, he
stopped the proceedings of the Censor's court, and wrote condemning the proceedings
against me as calumnious, and commanded Eusebius and his fellows, who were coming into the
East to appear against me, to return. Now in order to shew that they accused me of having
murdered Arsenius (not to bring forward the letters of many persons on the subject), it
shall be sufficient only to produce one from Alexander the Bishop of Thessalonica, from
which the tenor of the rest may be inferred. He then being acquainted with the reports
which Archaph, who is also called John, circulated against me on the subject of the
murder, and having heard that Arsenius was alive, wrote as follows.

Letter of Alexander. To his dearly beloved son and fellow-minister like-minded, the lord
Athanasius, Alexander the Bishop sends health in the Lord. 66. I congratulate the most
excellent Sarapion, that he is striving so earnestly to adorn himself with holy habits,
and is thus advancing to higher praise the memory of his father. For, as the Holy
Scripture somewhere says, `though his father die, yet he is as though he were not dead :'
for he has left behind him a memorial of his life. What my feelings were towards the ever
memorable Sozon, you yourself, my lord , are not ignorant, for you know the sacredness of
his memory, as well as the goodness of the young than. I have received only one letter
from your reverence, which I had by the hands of this youth. I mention this to you, my
lord, in order that you may know. Our dearly beloved brother and deacon Macarius, afforded
me great pleasure by writing to me from Constantinople, that the false accuser Archaph had
met with disgrace, for having given out before all men that a live man had been murdered.
That he will receive from the righteous Judge, together with all the tribe of his
associates, that punishment, which his crimes deserve, the unerring Scriptures assure us.
May the Lord of all preserve you for very many years, my lord, in every way most kind.

67. And they who lived with Arsenius bear witness, that he was kept in concealment for
this purpose, that they might pretend his death for in searching after him we found the
person [who had done so], and he in consequence wrote the following letter to John, who
played the chief part in this false accusation. To his dearly beloved brother John,
Pinnes, Presbyter of the Monastery of Ptemencyrcis, in the home of Anteopolis, sends
greeting. I wish you to know, that Athanasius sent his deacon into the Thebais, to search
everywhere for Arsenius; and Pecysius the Presbyter, and Silvanus the brother of Helias,
and Tapenacerameus, and Paul monk of Hypsele, whom he first fell in with, confessed that
Arsenius was with us. Upon learning this we caused him to be put on board a vessel, and to
sail to the lower countries with Helias the monk. Afterwards the deacon returned again
suddenly with certain others, and entered our monastery, in search of the same Arsenius,
and him they found not, because, as I said before, we had sent him away to the lower
countries; but they conveyed me together with Helias the monk, who took him out of the
way, to Alexandria, and brought us before the Duke ; when I was unable to deny, but
confessed that he was alive, and had not been murdered: the monk also who took him out of
the way confessed the same. Wherefore I acquaint you with these things, Father, lest you
should determine to accuse Athanasius; for I said that he was alive, and had been
concealed with us, and all this is become known in Egypt, and it cannot any longer be kept
secret.

I, Paphnutius, monk of the same monastery, who wrote this letter, heartily salute you. I
pray for your health. The following also is the letter which the Emperor wrote when he
learnt that Arsenius, was found to be alive. Constantine, Victor, Maximus, Augustus, to
the pope Athanasius. 68. Having read the letters of your wisdom, I felt the inclination to
write in return to your fortitude, and to exhort you that you would endeavour to restore
the people of God to tranquillity, and to merciful feelings. For in my own mind I hold
these things to be of the greatest importance, that we should cultivate truth, and ever
keep righteousness in our thoughts, and have pleasure especially in those who walk in the
right way of life. But as concerning those who are deserving of all execration, I mean the
most perverse and ungodly Meletians, who have at last stultified themselves by their
folly, and are now raising unreasonable commotions by envy, uproar, and tumult, thus
making manifest their own ungodly dispositions, I will say thus much. You see that those
who they pretended had been slain with the sword, are still amongst us, and in the
enjoyment of life. Now what could be a stronger presumption against them, and one so
manifestly and clearly tending to their condemnation, as that those whom they declared to
have been murdered, are yet in the enjoyment of life, and accordingly will be able to
speak for themselves?

But this further accusation was advanced by these same Meletians. They positively affirmed
that you, rushing in with lawless violence, had seized upon and broken a cup, which was
deposited in the most Holy Place; than which there certainly could not be a more serious
charge, nor a more grievous offence, had such a crime actually been perpetrated. But what
manner of accusation is this? What is the meaning of this change and variation and
difference in the circumstances of it, insomuch that they now transfer this same
accusation to another person , a fact which makes it clearer, so to speak, than the light
itself, that they designed to lay a plot for your wisdom? After this, who can be willing
to follow them, men that have fabricated such charges to the injury of another, seeing too
that they are hurrying themselves on to ruin, and are conscious that they are accusing you
of false and reigned crimes? Who then, as I said, will follow after them, and thus go
headlong in the way of destruction; in that way in which it seems they alone suppose that
they have hope of safety and of help? But if they were willing to walk according to a pure
conscience, and to be directed by the best wisdom, and to go in the way of a sound mind,
they would easily perceive that no help can come to them from Divine Providence, while
they are given up to such doings, and tempt their own destruction. I should not call this
a harsh judgment of them, but the simple truth.

And finally, I will add, that I wish this letter to be read frequently by your wisdom in
public, that it may thereby come to the knowledge of all men, and especially reach the
ears of those who thus act, and thus raise disturbances; for the judgment which is
expressed by me according to the dictates of equity is confirmed also by real facts.
Wherefore, seeing that in such conduct there is so great an offence, let them understand
that I have thus judged; and that I have come to this determination, that if they excite
any further commotion of this kind, I will myself in person take cognizance of the matter,
and that not according to the ecclesiastical, but according to the civil laws, and so I
will in future find them out, because they clearly are robbers, so to speak, not only
against human kind, but against the divine doctrine itself. May God ever preserve you,
beloved brother!

69. But that the wickedness of the calumniators might be more fully displayed, behold
Arsenius also wrote to me after he was discovered in his place of concealment; and as the
letter which Ischyras had written confessed the falsehood of their accusation, so that of
Arsenius proved their maliciousness still more completely. To the blessed Pope Athanasius,
Arsenius, Bishop of those who were heretofore under Meletius in the city of the
Hypselites, together with the Presbyters and Deacons, wishes much health in the Lord.
Being earnestly desirous of peace and union with the Catholic Church, over which by the
grace of God you preside, and wishing to submit ourselves to the Canon of the Church,
according to the ancient rule , we write unto you, dearly beloved Pope, and declare in the
name of the Lord, that we will not for the future hold communion with those who continue
in schism, and are not yet at peace with the Catholic Church, whether Bishops, Presbyters,
or Deacons. Neither will we take part with them if they wish to establish anything in a
Council; neither will we send letters of peace unto them nor receive such from them;
neither yet without the consent of you, the bishop of the metropolis, will we publish any
determination concerning Bishops, or on any other general ecclesiastical question; but we
will yield obedience to all the canons that have heretofore been ordained, after the
example of the Bishops Ammonian, Tyrannus, Plusian, and the rest. Wherefore we beseech
your goodness to write to us speedily in answer, and likewise to our fellow-ministers
concerning us, informing them that we will henceforth abide by the fore-mentioned
resolution and will be at peace with the Catholic Church, and at unity with our fellow-
ministers in the [various] districts. And we are persuaded that your prayers, being
acceptable unto God, will so prevail with Him, that this peace shall be firm and
indissoluble unto the end, according to the will of God the Lord of all, through Jesus
Christ our Lord.

The sacred Ministry that is under you, we and those that are with us salute. Very shortly,
if God permit, we will come to visit your goodness. I, Arsenius, pray for your health in
the Lord for many years, most blessed Pope. 70. But a stronger and clearer proof of the
calumny against us is the recantation of John, of which the most God-beloved Emperor
Constantine of blessed memory is a witness, for. knowing how John had accused himself, and
having received letters from him expressing his repentance, he wrote to him as follows.
Constantine, Maximus, Augustus to John. The letters which I have received from your
prudence were extremely pleasing to me, because I learned from them what I very much
longed to hear, that you had laid aside every petty feeling, had joined the Communion of
the Church as became you, and were now in perfect concord with the most reverend Bishop
Athanasius. Be assured therefore that so far I entirely approve of your conduct; because,
giving up all skirmishing, you have done that which is pleasing to God, and have embraced
the unity of His Church. In order therefore that you may obtain the accomplishment of your
wishes, I have thought it right to grant you permission to enter the public conveyance ,
and to come to the court of my clemency. Let it then be your care to make no delay; but as
this letter gives you authority to use the public conveyance, come to me immediately, that
you may have your desires fulfilled, and by appearing in my presence may enjoy that
pleasure which it is fit for you to receive. May God preserve you continually, dearly
beloved brother.

Chapter VI. Documents Connected with the Council of Tyre.

71. Thus ended the conspiracy. The Meletians were repulsed and covered with shame but
notwithstanding this Eusebius and his fellows still did not remain quiet, for it was not
for the Meletians but for Arius and his fellows, that they cared, and they were afraid
lest, if the proceedings of the former should be, stopped, they should no longer find
persons to play the parts , by whose assistance they might bring in that heresy. They
therefore again stirred up the Meletians, and persuaded the Emperor to give orders that a
Council should be held afresh at Tyre, and Count Dionysius was despatched thither, and a
military guard was given to Eusebius and his fellows. Macarius also was sent as a prisoner
to Tyre under a guard of soldiers; and the Emperor wrote to me, and laid a peremptory
command upon me, so that, however unwilling, I set out. The whole conspiracy may be
understood from the letters which the Bishops of Egypt wrote; but it will be necessary to
relate how it was contrived by them in the outset, that so may be perceived the malice and
wickedness that was exercised against me. There are in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis,
nearly one hundred Bishops; none of whom laid anything to my charge; none of the
Presbyters found any fault with me; none of the people spoke aught against me;

but it was the Meletians who were ejected by Peter, and the Arians, that divided the plot
between them, while the one party claimed to themselves the right of accusing me, the
other of sitting in judgment on the case. I objected to Eusebius and his fellows as being
my enemies on account of the heresy; next, I shewed in the following manner that the
person who was called my accuser was not a Presbyter at all. When Meletius was admitted
into communion (would that he had never been so admitted ! the blessed Alexander who knew
his craftiness required of him a schedule of the Bishops whom he said he had in Egypt, and
of the presbyters and deacons that were in Alexandria itself, and if he had any in the
country district. This the Pope Alexander has done, test Meletius, having received the
freedom of the Church, should tender many, and thus continually, by a fraudulent
procedure, foist upon us whomsoever he pleased. Accordingly he has made out the following
schedule of those in Egypt.

A schedule presented by Meletius to the Bishop Alexander. I, Meletius of Lycopolis, Lucius
of Antinopolis, Phasileus of Hermopolis, Achilles of Cusae, Ammonius of Diospolis. In
Ptolemais, Pachymes of Tentyrae. In Maximianopolis, Theodorus of Coptus. In Thebais, Cales
of Hermethes, Colluthus of Upper Cynopolis, Pelagius of Oxyrynchus, Peter of
Heracleopolis, Theon of Nilopolis, Isaac of Letopolis, Heraclides of Niciopolis , Isaac of
Cleopatris, Melas of Arsenoitis. In Heliopolis, Amos of Leontopolis, Ision of Athribis. In
Pharbethus, Harpocration of Bubastus, Moses of Phacusae, Callinicus of Pelusium, Eudaemon
of Tunis , Ephraim of Thmuis. In Sais, Hermaeon of Cynopolis and Busiris, Soterichus of
Sebennytus, Pininuthes of Phthenegys, Cronius of Metelis, Agathammon of the district of
Alexandria. In Memphis, John who was ordered by the Emperor to be with the Archbishop .
These are those of Egypt. And the Clergy that he had in Alexandria were Apollonius
Presbyter, Irenaeus Presbyter, Dioscorus Presbyter, Tyrannus Presbyter. And Deacons;
Timotheus Deacon, Antinous Deacon, Hephaestion Deacon. And Macarius Presbyter of Parembole
.

72. These Meletius presented actually in person to the Bishop Alexander, but he made no
mention of the person called Ischyras, nor ever professed at all that he had any Clergy in
the Mareotis. Notwithstanding our enemies did not desist from their attempts, but still he
that was no Presbyter was feigned to be one, for there was the Count ready to use
compulsion towards us, and soldiers were hurrying us about. But even then the grace of God
prevailed: for they could not convict Macarius in the matter of the cup; and Arsenius,
whom they reported to have been murdered by me, stood before them alive and shewed the
falseness of their accusation. When therefore they were unable to convict Macarius,
Eusebius and his fellows, who became enraged that they had lost the prey of which they had
been in pursuit, persuaded the Count Dionysius, who is one of them, to send to the
Mareotis, in order to see whether they could not find out something there against the
Presbyter, or rather that they might at a distance patch up their plot as they pleased in
our absence: for this was their aim. However,-when we represented that the journey to the
Mareotis was a superfluous undertaking (for that they ought not to pretend that statements
were defective which they had been employed upon so long, and ought not now to defer the
matter; for they had said whatever they thought they could say, and now being at a loss
what to do, they were making pretences);

or if they must needs go to the Mareotis, that at least the suspected parties should not
be sent,-the Count was convinced by my reasoning, with respect to the suspected persons;
but they did anything rather than what I proposed, for the very persons whom I objected
against on account of the Arian heresy, these were they who promptly went off, viz.
Diognius, Maris Theodorus, Macedonius, Ursacius, and Valens. Again, letters were written
to the Prefect of Egypt and a military guard was provided; and, what was remarkable and
altogether most suspicious, they caused Macarius the accused party to remain behind under
a guard of soldiers, while they took with them the accuser . Now who after this does not
see through this conspiracy? Who does not clearly perceive the wickedness of Eusebius and
his fellows? For if a judicial enquiry must needs take place in the Mareotis, the accused
also ought to have been sent thither. But if they did not go for the purpose of such an
enquiry, why did they take the accuser? It was enough that he had not been able to prove
the fact. But this they did in order that they might carry on their designs against the
absent Presbyter, whom they could not convict when present, and might concoct a plan as
they pleased.

For when the Presbyters of Alexandria and of the whole district found fault with them
because they were there by themselves, and required that they too might be present at
their proceedings (for they said that they knew both the circumstances of the case, and
the history of the person named Ischyras), they would not allow them; and although they
had with them Philagrius the Prefect of Egypt , who was an apostate, and heathen soldiers,
during an enquiry which it was not becoming even for Catechumens to witness, they would
not admit the Clergy, lest there as well as at Tyre there might be those who would expose
them. 73. But in spite of these precautions they were not able to escape detection: for
the Presbyters of the City and of the Mareotis, perceiving their evil designs, addressed
to them the following protest. To Theognius, Maris, Macedonius, Theodorus, Ursacius, and
Valens, the Bishops who have come from Tyre, these from the Presbyters and Deacons of the
Catholic Church of Alexandria under the most reverend Bishop Athanasius. It was incumbent
upon you when you came hither and brought with you the accuser, to bring also the
Presbyter Macarius; for trials are appointed by Holy Scripture to be so constituted, that
the accuser and accused may stand up together. But since neither you brought Macarius, nor
our most reverend Bishop Athanasius came hither with you, we claimed for ourselves the
right of being present at the investigation, that we might see that the enquiry was
conducted impartially, and might ourselves be convinced of the truth. But when you refused
to allow this, and wished, in company only with the Prefect of Egypt and the accuser, to
do whatever you pleased, we confess that we saw a suspicion of evil in the affair, and
perceived that your coming was only the act of a cabal and a conspiracy. Wherefore we
address to you this letter, to be a testimony before a genuine Council, that it may be
known to all men, that you have carried on an ex parte proceeding and for your own ends,
and have desired nothing else but to form a conspiracy against us. A copy of this, lest it
should be kept secret by you, we have handed in to Palladius also the Controller of
Augustus. For what you have already done causes us to suspect you, and to. reckon on the
like conduct from you hereafter.

I Dionysius Presbyter have handed in this letter. Alexander Presbyter, Nilaras
Presbyter,Longus Presbyter, Aphthonius Presbyter, Athanasius Presbyter, Amyntius
Presbyter, Pistus Presbyter, Plution Presbyter, Dioscorus Presbyter, Apollonius Presbyter,
Sarapion Presbyter, Ammonius Presbyter, Gaius Presbyter, Rhinus Presbyter, Aethales
Presbyter. Deacons; Marcellinus Deacon, Appianus Deacon, Theon Deacon, Timotheus Deacon, a
second Timotheus Deacon. 74. This is the letter, and these the names of the Clergy of the
city; and the following was written by the Clergy of the Mareotis, who know the character
of the accuser, and who were with me in my visitation. To the holy Council of blessed
Bishops of the Catholic Church, all the Presbyters and Deacons of the Mareotis send health
in the Lord. Knowing that which is written, `Speak that thine eyes have seen,' and, `A
false witness shall not be unpunished ', we testify what we have seen, especially since
the conspiracy which has been formed against our Bishop Athanasius has made our testimony
necessary. We wonder how Ischyras ever came to be reckoned among the number of the
Ministers of the Church, which is the first point we think it necessary to mention.
Ischyras never was a Minister of the Church; but when formerly he represented himself to
be a Presbyter of Colluthus, he found no one to believe him, except only his own relations
. For he never had a Church, nor was ever considered a Clergyman by those who lived but a
short distance from his village, except only, as we said before, by his own relations.
But, notwithstanding he assumed this designation, he was deposed in the presence of our
Father Hosius at the Council which assembled at Alexandria , and was admitted to communion
as a layman, and so he continued subsequently, having fallen from his falsely reputed rank
of presbyter. Of his character we think it unnecessary to speak, as all men have it in
their power to become acquainted therewith. But since he has falsely accused our Bishop
Athanasius of breaking a cup and overturning a table, we are necessarily obliged to
address you on this point. We have said already that he never had a Church in the
Mareotis;

and we declare before God as our witness, that no cup was broken, nor table overturned by
our Bishop, nor by any one of those who accompanied him; but all that is alleged
respecting this affair is mere calumny. And this we say, not as having been absent from
the Bishop, for we are all with him when he makes his visitation of the Mareotis, and he
never goes about alone, but is accompanied by all of us Presbyters and Deacons, and by a
considerable number of the people. Wherefore we make these assertions as having been
present with him in every visitation which he has made amongst us, and testify that
neither was a cup ever broken, nor table overturned, but the whole story is false, as the
accuser himself also witnesses under his own hand . For when, after he had gone off with
Meletians, and had reported these things against our Bishop Athanasius, he wished to be
admitted to communion, he was not received, although he wrote and confessed under his own
hand that none of these things were true, but that he had been suborned by certain persons
to say so.

75. Wherefore also Theognius, Theodorus, Maris, Macedonius, Ursacius, Valens, and their
fellows came into the Mareotis, and when they found that none of these things were true,
but it was likely to be discovered that they had framed a false accusation against our
Bishop Athanasius, Theognius and his fellows being themselves his enemies, caused the
relations of Ischyras and certain Arian madmen to say whatever they wished. For none of
the people spoke against the Bishop; but these persons, through fear of Philagrius the
Prefect of Egypt, and by threats and with the support of the Arian madmen, accomplished
whatever they desired. For when we came to disprove the calumny, they would not permit us,
but cast us out, while they admitted whom they pleased to a participation in their
schemes, and concerted matters with them, influencing them by fear of the Prefect
Philagrius. Through his means they prevented us from being present, that we might discover
whether those who were suborned by them were members of the Church or Arian madmen. And
you also, dearly beloved Fathers, know, as you teach us, that the testimony of enemies
avails nothing. That what we say is the truth the handwriting of Ischyras testifies, as do
also the facts themselves, because when we were conscious that no such thing as was
pretended had taken place, they took with them Philagrius, that through fear of the sword
and by threats they might frame whatever plots they wished. These things we testify as in
the presence of God; we make these assertions as knowing that there will be a judgment
held by God; desiring indeed all of us to come to you, but being content with certain of
our number, so that the letters may be instead of the presence of those who have not come.

I, Ingenius Presbyter, pray you health in the Lord, beloved fathers. Theon Presbyter,
Ammonas P., Heraclius P., Boccon P., Tryphon P., Peter P., Hierax P., Sarapion P., Marcus
P., Ptollarion P., Gaius P., Dioscorus P., Demetrius P., Thyrsus P. Deacons; Pistus
Deacon, Apollos D., Serras D., Pistus D., Polynicus D., Ammonius D., Maurus D., Hephaestus
D., Apollos D., Metopus D., Apollos D., Serapas D., Meliphthongus D., Lucius D., Gregoras
D. 76. The same to the Controller, and to Philagrius, at that time Prefect of Egypt. To
Flavius Philagrius, and to Flavius Palladius, Ducenary , Officer of the Palace, and
Controller, and to Flavius Antoninus, Commissary of Provisions, and Centenary of my lords
the most illustrious Prefects of the sacred Praetorium, these from the Presbyters and
Deacons of the Mareotis, a nome of the Catholic Church which is under the most Reverend
Bishop Athanasius, we address this testimony by those whose names are underwritten:-

Whereas Theognius, Maris, Macedonius, Theodorus, Ursacius, and Valens, as if sent by all
the Bishops who assembled at Tyre, came into our Diocese alleging that they had received
orders to investigate certain ecclesiastical affairs, among which they spoke of the
breaking of a cup of the Lord, of which information was given them by Ischyras, whom they
brought with them, and who says that he is a Presbyter, although he is not,-for he was
ordained by the Presbyter Colluthus who pretended to the Episcopate, and was afterwards
ordered by a whole Council, by Hosius and the Bishops that were with him, to take the
place of a Presbyter, as he was before; and accordingly all that were ordained by
Colluthus resumed the same rank which they held before, and so Ischyras himself proved to
be a layman,-and the church which he says he has, never was a church at all, but a quite
small private house belonging to an orphan boy of the name of Ision;-for this reason we
have offered this testimony, adjuring you by Almighty God, and by our Lords Constantine
Augustus, and the most illustrious Caesars his sons, to bring these things to the
knowledge of their piety. For neither is he a Presbyter of the Catholic Church nor does he
possess a church, nor has a cup ever been broken, but the whole story is false and an
invention.

Dated in the Consulship of Julius Constantius the most illustrious Patrician , brother of
the most religious Emperor Constantine Augustus, and of Rufinus Albinus, most illustrious
men, on the tenth day of the month Thoth . These were the letters of the Presbyters. 77.
The following also are the letters and protests of the Bishops who came with us to Tyre,
when they became aware of the conspiracy and plot. To the Bishops assembled at Tyre, most
honoured Lords, those of the Catholic Church who have come from Egypt with Athanasius send
greeting in the Lord. We suppose that the conspiracy which has been formed against us by
Eusebius, Theognius, Maris, Narcissus, Theodorus, Patrophilus, and their fellows is no
longer uncertain. From the very beginning we all demurred, through our fellow-minister
Athanasius, to the holding of the enquiry in their presence, knowing that the presence of
even one enemy only, much more of many, is able to disturb and injure the hearing of a
cause. And you also yourselves know the enmity which they entertain, not only towards us,
but towards all the orthodox, how that for the sake of the madness of Arius, and his
impious doctrine, they direct their assaults, they form conspiracies against all. And
when, being confident in the truth, we desired to shew the falsehood, which the Meletians
had employed against the Church, Eusebius and his fellows endeavoured by some means or
other to interrupt our representations, and strove eagerly to set aside our testimony,
threatening those who gave an honest judgment, and insulting others, for the sole purpose
of carrying out the design they had against us. Your godly piety, most honoured Lords, was
probably ignorant of their conspiracy, but we suppose that it has now been made manifest.
For indeed they have themselves plainly disclosed it; for they desired to send to the
Mareotis those of their party who are suspected by us, so that, while we were absent and
remained here, they might disturb the people and accomplish what they wished.

They knew that the Arian madmen, and Colluthians and Meletians, were enemies of the
Catholic Church and therefore they were anxious to send them, that in the presence of our
enemies they might devise against us whatever schemes they pleased. And those of the
Meletians who, are here, even four days previously (as they knew that this enquiry was
about to take place), despatched at evening certain of their party, as couriers, for the
purpose of collecting Meletians out of Egypt into the Mareotis, because there were none at
all there, and Colluthians and Arian madmen, from other parts, and to prepare them to
speak against us. For you also know that Ischyras himself confessed before you, that he
had not more than seven persons in his congregation. When therefore we heard that, after
they had made what preparations they pleased against us, and had sent these suspected
persons, they were going about to each of you, and requiring your subscriptions, in order
that it might appear as if this had been done with the consent of you all; for this reason
we hastened to write to you, and to present this our testimony; declaring that we are the
objects of a conspiracy under which we are suffering by and through them, and demanding
that having the fear of God in your minds, and condemning their conduct in sending whom
they pleased without our consent, you would refuse your subscriptions, lest they pretend
that those things are done by you, which they are contriving only among themselves.

Surely it becomes those who are in Christ, not to regard human motives, but to prefer the
truth before all things. And be not afraid of their, threatenings, which they employ
against all,nor of their plots, but rather fear God. If it was at all, necessary that
persons should be sent to the Mareotis, we also ought to have been there with them, in
order that we might convict the enemies of the Church, and point out those who were
aliens, and that the investigation of the matter might be impartial. For you know that
Eusebius and his fellows contrived that a letter should be presented, as coming from the
Collutians, the Meletians, and Arians, and directed against us: but it is evident that
these enemies of the Catholic Church speak nothing that is true concerning us, but say
everything against us. And the law of God forbids an enemy to be either a witness or a
judge. Wherefore as you will have to give an account in the day of judgment, receive this
testimony, and recognising the conspiracy which has been framed against us, beware, if you
are requested by them, of doing anything against us, and of taking part in the designs of
Eusebius and his fellows. For you know, as we said before, that they are our enemies, and
you are aware why Eusebius of Caesarea became such last year . We pray that you may be in
health, greatly beloved Lords.

78. To the most illustrious Count Flavius Dionysius, from the Bishops of the Catholic
Church in Egypt who have come to Tyre. We suppose that the conspiracy which has been
formed against us by Eusebius, Theognius, Maris, Narcissus, Theodorus, Patrophilus and
their fellows, is no longer uncertain. From the very beginning we all demurred, through
our fellow-minister Athanasius, to the holding of the enquiry in their presence, knowing
that the presence of even one enemy only, much more of many, is able to disturb and injure
the hearing of a cause. For their enmity is manifest which they entertain, not only
towards us, but also towards all the orthodox, because they direct their assaults, they
form conspiracies against all. And when, being confident in the truth, we desired to shew
the falsehood which the Meletians had employed against the Church, Eusebius and his
fellows endeavoured by some means or other to interrupt our representations, and strove
eagerly to set aside our testimony, threatening those who gave an honest judgment and
insulting others, for the sole purpose of carrying out the design they had against us.
Your goodness was probably ignorant of the conspiracy which they have formed against us,
but we suppose that it has now been made manifest. For indeed they have themselves plainly
disclosed it; for they desired to send to the Mareotis those of their party who are
suspected by us, so that, while we were absent and remained here, they might disturb the
people and accomplish what they wished.

They knew that Arian madmen, Colluthians, and Meletians were enemies of the Church, and
therefore they were anxious to send them, that in the presence of our enemies, they might
devise against us whatever schemes they pleased. And those of the Meletians who are here,
even four days previously (as they knew that this enquiry was about to take place),
despatched at evening two individuals of their own party, as couriers, for the purpose of
collecting Meletians out of Egypt into the Mareotis, because there were none at all there.
and Colluthians, and Arian madmen, from other parts, and to prepare them to speak against
us. And your goodness knows that he himself confessed before you, that he had not more
than seven persons in his congregation. When therefore we heard that, after they had made
what preparations they pleased against us, and had sent these suspected persons, they were
going about to each of the Bishops and requiring their subscriptions, in order that it
might appear that this was done with the consent of them all; for this reason we hastened
to refer the matter to your honour, and to present this our testimony, declaring that we
are the objects of a conspiracy, under which we are suffering by and through them, and
demanding of you that having in your mind the fear of God, and the pious commands of our
most religious Emperor, you would no longer tolerate these persons, but condemn their
conduct in sending whom they pleased without our consent.

I Adamantins Bishop have subscribed this letter, Ischyras, Ammon, Peter, Ammonianus
Tyrannus, Taurinus, Sarapammon, Aelurion, Harpocration, Moses, Optatus, Anubion, Saprion,
Apollonius, Ischyrion, Arbaethion, Potamen, Paphnutius, Heraclides, Theodorus, A
gathammon, Gaius, Pistus, Athas, Nicon, Pelagius, Theon, Paninuthius, Nonnus, Ariston,
Theodorus, Irenaeus, Blastammon, Philippus, Apollos, Dioscorus, Timotheus of Diospolls,
Macarius Heraclammon, Cronius, Myis, Jacobus, Ariston Artemidorus, Phinees, Psais,
Heraclides. Another from the same. 79. The Bishops of the Catholic Church who have come
from Egypt to Tyre, to the most illustrious Count Flavius Dionysius. Perceiving that many
conspiracies and plots are being formed against us through the machinations of Eusebius,
Narcissus, Flacillus, Theognius, Maris, Theodorus, Patrophilus, and their fellows (against
whom we wished at first to enter an objection, but were not permitted), we are constrained
to have recourse to the present appeal. We observe also that great zeal is exerted in
behalf of the Meletians, and that a plot is laid against the Catholic Church in Egypt in
our persons. Wherefore we present this letter to you, beseeching you to bear in mind the
Almighty Power of God, who defends the kingdom of our most religious and godly Emperor
Constantine, and to reserve the hearing of the affairs which concern us for the most
religious Emperor himself. For it is but reasonable, since you were commissioned by his
Majesty, that you should reserve the matter for him upon our appealing to his piety. We
can no longer endure to be the objects of the treacherous designs of the fore-mentioned
Eusebius and his fellows, and therefore we demand that the case be reserved for the most
religious and God-beloved Emperor, before whom we shall be able to set forth our own and
the Church's just claims. And we are convinced that when his piety shall have heard our
cause, he will not condemn us. Wherefore we again adjure you by Almighty God, and by our
most religious Emperor, who, together with the children of his piety, has thus ever been
victorious and prosperous these many years, that you proceed no further, nor suffer
yourselves to move at all in the Council in relation to our affairs, but reserve the
hearing of them for his piety. We have likewise made the same representations to my Lords
the orthodox Bishops.

80. Alexander , Bishop of Thessalonica, on receiving these letters, wrote to the Count
Dionysius as follows. The Bishop Alexander to my master Dionysius. I see that a conspiracy
has evidently been formed against Athanasius; for they have determined, I know not on what
grounds, to send all those to whom he has objected, without giving any information to us,
although it was agreed that we should consider together who ought to be sent. Take care
therefore that nothing be done rashly (for they have come to me in great alarm, saying
that the wild beasts have already roused themselves, and are going to rush upon them; for
they had heard it reported, that John had sent certain ), lest they be beforehand with us,
and concoct what schemes they please. For you know that the Colluthians who are enemies of
the Church, and the Arians, and Meletians, are all of them leagued together, and are able
to work much evil. Consider therefore what is best to be done, lest some mischief arise,
and we be subject to censure, as not having judged the matter fairly. Great suspicions are
also entertained of these persons, lest, as being devoted to the Meletians, they should go
through those Churches whose Bishops are here , and raise an alarm amongst them, and so
disorder the whole of Egypt. For they see that this is already taking place to a great
extent.

Accordingly the Count Dionysius wrote to Eusebius and his fellows as follows. 81. This is
what I have already mentioned to my lords, Flacillus and his fellows, that Athanasius has
come forward and complained that those very persons have been sent whom he objected to;
and crying out that he has been wronged and deceived. Alexander the lord of my soul has
also written to me on the subject; and that you may perceive that what his Goodness has
said is reasonable, I have subjoined his letter to be read by you. Remember also what I
wrote to you before: I impressed upon your Goodness, my lords, that the persons who were
sent ought to be commissioned by the general vote and decision of all. Take care therefore
lest our proceedings fall under censure, and we give just grounds of blame to those who
are disposed to find fault with us. For as the accuser's side ought not to suffer any
oppression, so neither ought the defendant's. And I think that there is no slight ground
of blame against us, when my lord Alexander evidently disapproves of what we have done.

82. While matters were proceeding thus we withdrew from them, as from an assembly of
treacherous men , for whatsoever they pleased they did, whereas there is no man in the
world but knows that ex parte proceedings cannot stand good. This the divine law
determines for when the blessed Apostle was suffering under a similar conspiracy and was
brought to trial, he demanded, saying, `The Jews from Asia ought to have been here before
thee, and object, if they had aught against me .' On which occasion Festus also, when the
Jews wished to lay such a plot against him, as these men have now laid against me, said,
`It is not the manner of Romans to deliver any man to die, before that he which is accused
have the accuser face to face, and have licence to answer for himself concerning the crime
laid against him .' But Eusebius and his fellows both had the boldness to pervert the law,
and have proved more unjust even than those wrong-doers. For they did not, proceed
privately at the first, but when in consequence of our being present they found themselves
weak, then they straightway went out, like the Jews, and took counsel together alone, how
they might destroy us and bring in their heresy, as those others demanded Barabbas. For
this purpose it was, as they have themselves confessed, that they did all these l things.

83. Although these circumstances were amply sufficient for our vindication, yet in order
that the wickedness of these men and the freedom of the truth might be more fully
exhibited, I have not felt averse to repeat them again, in order to shew that they have
acted in a manner inconsistently with themselves, and as men scheming in the dark have
fallen foul of their own friends, and while they desired to destroy us have like insane
persons wounded themselves. For in their investigation of the subject of the Mysteries,
they questioned Jews, they examined Catechumens ; `Where were you,' they said, `when
Macarius came and overturned the Table?' They answered, `We were within;' whereas there
could be no oblation if Catechumens were present. Again, although they had written word
everywhere, that Macarius came and overthrew everything, while the Presbyter was standing
and celebrating the Mysteries, yet when they questioned whomsoever they pleased, and asked
them, `Where was Ischyras when Macarius rushed in?' those persons answered that he was
lying sick in a cell. Well, then, he that was lying was not standing, nor was he that lay
sick in his cell offering the oblation. Besides whereas Ischyras said that certain books
had been burnt by Macarius, they who were suborned to give evidence, declared that nothing
of the kind had been done, but that Ischyras spoke falsely.

And what is most remarkable, although they had again written word everywhere, that those
who were able to give evidence had been concealed by us, yet these persons made their
appearance, and they questioned them, and were not ashamed when they saw it proved on all
sides that they were slanderers, and were acting in this matter clandestinely, and
according to their pleasure. For they prompted the witnesses by signs, while the Prefect
threatened them, and the soldiers pricked them with their swords; but the Lord revealed
the truth, and shewed them to be slanderers. Therefore also they concealed the minutes of
their proceedings, which they retained themselves, and charged those who wrote them to put
out of sight, and to commit to no one whomsoever. But in this also they were disappointed;
for the person who wrote them was Rufus, who is now public executioner in the Augustallan
prefecture, and is able to testify to the truth of this; and Eusebius and his fellows sent
them to Rome by the hands of their own friends, and Julius the Bishop transmitted them to
me. And now they are mad, because we obtained and read what they wished to conceal.

84. As such was the character of their machinations, so they very soon shewed plainly the
reasons of their conduct. For when they went away, they took the Arians with them to
Jerusalem, and there admitted them to communion, having sent out a letter concerning them,
part of which, and the beginning, is as follows. The holy Council by the grace of God
assembled at Jerusalem, to the Church of God which is in Alexandria, and to the Bishops,
Presbyters, and Deacons, in all Egypt, the Thebais, Libya, Pentapolis, and throughout the
world, sends health in the Lord. Having come together out of different Provinces to a
great meeting which we have held for the consecration of the Martyry of the Saviour, which
has been appointed to the service of God the King of all and of His Christ, by the zeal of
our most God-beloved Emperor Constantine, the grace of God hath afforded us more abundant
rejoicing of heart; which our most God-beloved Emperor himself hath occasioned us by his
letters, wherein he hath stirred us up to do that which is right, putting away all envy
from the Church of God, and driving far from us all malice, by which the members of God
have been heretofore torn asunder, and that we should with simple and peaceable minds
receive Arius and his fellows, whom envy, that enemy of all goodness, has caused for a
season to be excluded from the Church. Our most religious Emperor has also in his letter
testified to the correctness of their faith, which he has ascertained from themselves,
himself receiving the profession of it from them by word of mouth, and has now made
manifest to us by subjoining to his own letters the men's orthodox opinion in writing.

85. Every one that hears of these things must see through their treachery. For they made
no concealment of what they were doing; unless perhaps they confessed the truth without
wishing it. For if I was the hindrance to the admittance of Arius and his fellows into the
Church, and if they were received while I was suffering from their plots, what other
conclusion can be arrived at, than that these things were done on their account, and that
all their proceedings against me, and the story which they fabricated about the breaking
of the cup and the murder of Arsenius, were for the sole purpose of introducing impiety
into the Church, and of preventing their being condemned as heretics? For this was what
the Emperor threatened formerly in his letters to me. And they were not ashamed to write
in the manner they did, and to affirm that those persons whom the whole Ecumenical Council
anathematized held orthodox sentiments. And as they undertook to say and do anything
without scruple, so they were not afraid to meet together `in a corner,' in order to
overthrow, as far as was in their power, the authority of so great a Council.

Moreover, the price which they paid for false testimony yet more fully manifests their
wickedness and impious intentions. The Mareotis, as I have already said, is a country
district of Alexandria, in which there has never been either a Bishop or a Chorepiscopus ;
but the Churches of the whole district are subject to the Bishop of Alexandria, and each
Presbyter has under his charge one of the largest villages, which are about ten or more in
number . Now the village in which Ischyras lives is a very small one, and possesses so few
inhabitants, that there has never been a church built there, but only in the adjoining
village. Nevertheless, they determined, contrary to ancient usage , to nominate a Bishop
for this place, and not only so, but even to appoint one, who was not so much as a
Presbyter. Knowing as they did the unusual nature of such a proceeding, yet being
constrained by the promises they had given in return for his false impeachment of me, they
submitted even to this, lest that abandoned person, if he were ungratefully treated by
them, should disclose the truth, and thereby shew the wickedness of Eusebius and his
fellows.

Notwithstanding this he has no church, nor a people to obey him, but is scouted by them
all, like a dog , although they have even caused the Emperor to write to the Receiver-
General (for everything is in their power), commanding that a church should be built for
him, that being possessed of that, his statement may appear credible about the cup and the
table. They caused him immediately to be nominated a Bishop also, because if he were
without a church, and not even a Presbyter, he would appear to be a false accuser, and a
fabricator of the whole matter. At any rate he has no people, and even his own relations
are not obedient to him, and as the name which he retains is an empty one, so also the
following letter is ineffectual, which he keeps, making a display of it as an exposure of
the utter wickedness of himself and of Eusebius and his fellows.

The Letter of the Receiver-General Flavius Hemerius sends health to the Tax-collector of
the Mareotis. Ischyras the Presbyter having petitioned the piety of our Lords, Augusti and
Caesars, that a Church might be built in the district of Irene, belonging to Secontarurus
, their divinity has commanded that this should be done as soon as possible. Take care
therefore, as soon as you receive the copy of the sacred Edict, which with all due
veneration is placed above, and the Reports which have been formed before my devotion,
that you quickly make an abstract of them, and transfer them to the Order book, so that
the sacred command may be put in execution. 86. While they were thus plotting and
scheming, I went up and represented to the Emperor the unjust conduct of Eusebius and his
fellows, for he it was who had commanded the Council to be held, and his Count presided at
it. When he heard my report, he was greatly moved, and wrote to them as follows.

Constantine, Victor , Maximus, Augustus, to the Bishops assembled at Tyre. I know not what
the decisions are which you have arrived at in your Council amidst noise and tumult: but
somehow the truth seems to have been perverted in consequence of certain confusions and
disorders, in that you, through your mutual contentiousness, which you are resolved should
prevail, have failed to perceive what is pleasing to God. However, it will rest with
Divine Providence to disperse the mischiefs which manifestly are found to arise from this
contentious spirit, and to shew plainly to us, whether you, while assembled in that place,
have had any regard for the truth, and whether you have made your decisions uninfluenced
by either favour or enmity. Wherefore I wish you all to assemble with all speed before my
piety in order that you may render in person a true account of your proceedings. The
reason why I have thought good to write thus to you, and why I summon you before me by
letter, you will learn from what I am going to say. As I was entering on a late occasion
our all-happy home of Constantinople, which bears our name (I chanced at the time to be on
horseback), on a sudden the Bishop Athanasius, with certain others whom he had with him,
approached me in the middle of the road, so unexpectedly, as to occasion me much
amazement. God, who knoweth all things, is my witness, that I should have been unable at
first sight even to recognise him, had not some of my attendants, on my naturally
inquiring of them, informed me both who it was, and under what injustice he was suffering.
I did not however enter into any conversation with him at that time, nor grant him an
interview; but when he requested to be heard I was refusing, and all but gave orders for
his removal; when with increasing boldness he claimed only this favour, that you should be
summoned to appear, that he might have an opportunity of complaining before me in your
presence, of the ill-treatment he has met with. As this appeared to me to be a reasonable
request, and suitable to the times, I willingly ordered this letter to be written to you,
in order that all of you, who constituted the Council which was held at Tyre, might hasten
without delay to the Court of my clemency, so as to prove by facts that you had passed an
impartial and uncorrupt judgment. This, I say, you must do before me, whom not even you
will deny to be a true servant of God.

For indeed through my devotion to God, peace is preserved everywhere, and the Name of God
is truly worshipped even by the barbarians, who have hitherto been ignorant of the truth.
And it is manifest, that he who is ignorant of the truth, does not know God either.
Nevertheless, as I said before, even the barbarians have now come to the knowledge of God,
by means of me, His true servant , and have learned to fear Him Whom they perceive from
actual facts to be my shield and protector everywhere. And from this chiefly they have
come to know God, Whom they fear through the dread which they have of me. But we, who are
supposed to set forth (for I will not say to guard) the holy mysteries of His Goodness,
we, I say, engage in nothing but what tends to dissension and hatred, and, in short,
whatever contributes to the destruction of mankind. But hasten, as I said before, and all
of you with all speed come to us, being persuaded that I shall endeavour with all my might
to amend what is amiss, so that those things specially may be preserved and firmly
established in the law of God, to which no blame nor dishonour may attach; while the
enemies of the law, who under pretence of His holy Name bring in manifold and divers
blasphemies, shall be scattered abroad, and entirely crushed, and utterly destroyed.

87. When Eusebius and his fellows read this letter, being conscious of what they had done,
they prevented the rest of the Bishops from going up, and only themselves went, viz.
Eusebius, Theognius, Patrophilus, the other Eusebius, Ursacius, and Valens. And they no
longer said anything about the cup and Arsenius (for they had not the boldness to do so),
but inventing another accusation which concerned the Emperor himself, they declared before
him, that Athanasius had threatened that he would cause the corn to be withheld which was
sent from Alexandria to his own home . The Bishops Adamantius, Anubion Agathammon,
Arbethion, and Peter, were present and heard this. It was proved also by the anger of the
Emperor; for although he had written the preceding letter, and had condemned their
injustice, as soon as he heard such a charge as this, he was immediately incensed, and
instead of granting me a hearing, he sent me away into Gaul. And this again shews their
wickedness further; for when the younger Constantine, of blessed memory, sent me back
home, remembering what his father had written , he also wrote as follows.

Constantine Caesar, to the people of the Catholic Church of the city of Alexandria. I
suppose that it has not escaped the knowledge of your pious minds, that Athanasius, the
interpreter of the adorable Law, was sent away into Gaul for a time, with the intent that,
as the savageness of his bloodthirsty and inveterate enemies persecuted him to the hazard
of his sacred life, he might thus escape suffering some irremediable calamity, through the
perverse dealing of those evil men. In order therefore to escape this, he was snatched out
of the jaws of his assailants, and was ordered to pass some time under my government, and
so was supplied abundantly with all necessaries in this city, where he lived, although
indeed his celebrated virtue, relying entirely on divine assistance, sets at nought the
sufferings of adverse fortune. Now seeing that it was the fixed intention of our master
Constantine Augustus, my Father, to restore the said Bishop to his own place, andto your
most beloved piety, but he was takenaway by that fate which is common to all men,and went
to his rest before he could accomplish his wish; I have thought proper to fulfil that
intention of the Emperor of sacred memory which I have inherited from him. When he comes
to present himself before you, you will learn with what reverence he has been treated.
Indeed it is not wonderful, whatever I have done on his behalf; for the thoughts of your
longing desire for him, and the appearance of so great a man, moved my soul, and urged me
thereto. May Divine Providence continually preserve you, beloved brethren.

Dated from Treveri the 15th before the Calends of July . 88. This being the reason why I
was sent away into Gaul, who, I ask again, does not plainly perceive the intention of the
Emperor, and the murderous spirit of Eusebius and his fellows, and that the Emperor had
done this in order to prevent their forming some more desperate scheme? for he listened to
them in simplicity . Such were the practices of Eusebius and his fellows, and such their
machinations against me. Who that has witnessed them will deny that nothing has been done
in my favour out of partiality, but that that great number of Bishops both individually
and collectively wrote as they did in my behalf and condemned the falsehood of my enemies
justly, and in accordance with the truth? Who that has observed such proceedings as these
will deny that Valens and Ursacius had good reason to condemn themselves, and to write as
they did, to accuse themselves when they repented, choosing rather to suffer shame for a
short time, than to undergo the punishment of false accusers for ever and ever ?

89. Wherefore also my blessed fellow-ministers, acting justly and according to the laws of
the Church, while certain affirmed that my case was doubtful, and endeavoured to compel
them to annul the sentence which was passed in my favour, have now endured all manner of
sufferings, and have chosen rather to be banished than to see the judgment of so many
Bishops reversed. Now if those genuine Bishops had withstood by words only those who
plotted against me, and wished to undo all that had been done in my behalf; or if they had
been ordinary men, and not the Bishops of illustrious cities, and the heads of great
Churches, there would have been room to suspect that in this instance they too had acted
contentiously and in order to gratify me. But when they not only endeavoured to convince
by argument, but also endured banishment, and one of them is Liberius, Bishop of Rome,
(for although he did not endure to the end the sufferings of banishment, yet he remained
in his exile for two years, being aware of conspiracy formed against us), and since there
is also the great Hosius, together with the Bishops of Italy, and of Gaul, and others from
Spain, and from Egypt, and Libya, and all those from Pentapolis (for although for a little
while, through fear of the threats of Constantius, he seemed not to resist them yet the
great violence and tyrannical power exercised by Constantius, and the many insults and
stripes inflicted upon him, proved that it was not because he gave up my cause, but
through the weakness of old age, being unable to bear the stripes, that he yielded to them
for a season), therefore I say, it is altogether right that all, as being fully convinced,
should hate and abominate the injustice and the violence which they have used towards me;
especially as it is well known that I have suffered these things on account of nothing
else but the Arian impiety.

90. Now if anyone wishes to become acquainted with my case, and the falsehood of Eusebius
and his fellows, let him read what has been written in my behalf, and let him hear the
witnesses, not one, or two, or three, but that great number of Bishops; and again let him
attend to the witnesses of these proceedings, Liberius and Hosius, and their fellows, who
when they saw the attempts made against us, chose rather to endure all manner of
sufferings than to give up the truth, and the judgment which had been pronounced in our
favour. And this they did with an honourable and righteous intention, for what they
suffered proves to what straits the other Bishops were reduced. And they are memorials and
records against the Arian heresy, and the wickedness of false accusers, and afford a
pattern and model for those who come after, to contend for the truth unto death , and to
abominate the Arian heresy which fights against Christ, and is a forerunner of Antichrist,
and not to believe those who attempt to speak against me. For the defence put forth, and
the sentence given, by so many Bishops of high character, are a trustworthy and sufficient
testimony in our behalf.


DEFENCE BEFORE CONSTANTIUS
==========================

DEFENCE BEFORE CONSTANTIUS Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

DEFENCE BEFORE CONSTANTIUS

1. Introduction.

1 Knowing that you have been a Christian for many years , most religious Augustus, and
that you are godly by descent, I cheerfully undertake to answer for myself at this
time;-for I will use the language of the blessed Paul, and make him my advocate before
you, considering that he was a preacher of the truth, and that you are an attentive hearer
of his words. With respect to those ecclesiastical matters, which have been made the
ground of a conspiracy against me, it is sufficient to refer your Piety to the testimony
of the many Bishops who have written in my behalf ; enough too is the recantation of
Ursacius and Valens to prove to all men, that none of the charges which they set up
against me had any truth in them. For what evidence can others produce so strong, as what
they declared in writing? `We lied, we invented these things; all the accusations against
Athanasius are full of falsehood.' To this clear proof may be added, if you will vouchsafe
to hear it, this circumstance that the accusers brought no evidence against Macarius the
presbyter while we were present; but in our absence , when they were by themselves, they
managed the matter as they pleased. Now, the Divine Law first of all, and next our own
Laws , have expressly declared, that such proceedings are of no force whatsoever. From
these things your piety, as a lover of God and of the truth, will, I am sure, perceive
that we are free from all suspicion, and will pronounce our opponents to be false
accusers.

2. The First Charge, of Setting Constans Against Constantius.

2 But as to the slanderous charge which has been preferred against me before your Grace,
respecting correspondence with the most pious Augustus, your brother Constans , of blessed
and everlasting memory (for my enemies report this of me, and have ventured to assert it
in writing), the former events are sufficient to prove this also to be untrue. Had it been
alleged by another set of persons, the matter would indeed have been a fit subject of
enquiry, but it would have required strong evidence, and open proof in presence of both
parties: but when the same persons who invented the former charge, are the authors also of
this, is it not reasonable to conclude from the issue of the one, the falsehood of the
other? For this cause they again conferred together in private, thinking to be able to
deceive your Piety before I was aware. But in this they failed: you would not listen to
them as they desired, but patiently gave me an opportunity to make my defence. And, in
that you were not immediately moved to demand vengeance, you acted only as was righteous
in a Prince, whose duty it is to wait for the defence of the injured party. Which if you
will vouchsafe to hear, I am confident that in this matter also you will condemn those
reckless men, who have no fear of that God, who has commanded us not to speak falsely
before the king .

3. He Never Saw Constans Alone.

3 But in truth I am ashamed even to have to defend myself against charges such as these,
which I do not suppose that even the accuser himself would venture to make mention of in
my presence. For he knows full well that he speaks untruly, and that I was never so mad,
so reft of my senses, as even to be open to the suspicion of having conceived any such
thing. So that had I been questioned by any other on this subject, I would not even have
answered, lest, while I was making my defence, my hearers should for a time have suspended
their judgment concerning me. But to your Piety I answer with a loud and clear voice, and
stretching forth my hand, as I have learned from the Apostle, `I call God for a record
upon my soul ,' and as it is written in the histories of the Kings (let me be allowed to
say the same), `The Lord is witness, and His Anointed is witness ,' I have never spoken
evil of your Piety before your brother Constans, the most religious Augustus of blessed
memory. I did not exasperate him against you, as these have falsely accused me.

4 But whenever in my interviews with him he has mentioned your Grace (and he did mention
you at the time that Thalassus came to Pitybion, and I was staying at Aquileia), the Lord
is witness, how I spoke of your Piety in terms which I would that God would reveal unto
your soul, that you might condemn the falsehood of these my calumniators. Bear with me,
most gracious Augustus, and freely grant me your indulgence while I speak of this matter.
Your most Christian brother was not a man of so light a temper, nor was I a person of such
a character, that we should communicate together on a subject like this, or that I should
slander a brother to a brother, or speak evil of an emperor before an emperor. I am not so
mad, Sire, nor have I forgotten that divine utterance which says, `Curse not the king, no,
not in thy thought; and curse not the rich in thy bedchamber: for a bird of the air shall
carry the voice, and that which hath wings shall tell the matter .' If then those things,
which are spoken in secret against you that are kings, are not hidden it is not incredible
that I should have spoken against you in the presence of a king, and of so many
bystanders?

5 For I never saw your brother by myself, nor did he ever converse with me in private, but
I was always introduced in company with the Bishop of the city where I happened to be, and
with others that chanced to be there. We entered the presence together, and together we
retired. Fortunatian , Bishop of Aquileia, can testify this, the father Hosius is able to
say the same, as also are Crispinus, Bishop of Padua, Lucillus of a Verona, Dionysius of
Lëis, and Vincentius of Campania. And although Maximinus of Treveri, and Protasius of
Milan, are dead, yet Eugenius, who was Master of the Palace , can bear witness for me; for
he stood before the veil , and heard what we requested of the Emperor, and what he
vouchsafed to reply to us.

4. The Movements of Athanasius Refute This Charge.

6 This certainly is sufficient for proof, yet suffer me nevertheless to lay before you an
account of my travels, which will further lead you to condemn the unfounded calumnies of
my opponents. When I left Alexandria , I did not go to your brother's head-quarters, or to
any other persons, but only to Rome; and having laid my case before the Church (for this
was my only concern), I spent my time in the public worship. I did not write to your
brother, except when Eusebius and his fellows had written to him to accuse me, and I was
compelled while yet at Alexandria to defend myself; and again when I sent to him volumes
containing the holy Scriptures, which he had ordered me to prepare for him. It behoves me,
while I defend my conduct, to tell the truth to your Piety. When however three years had
passed away, he wrote to me in the fourth year , commanding me to meet him (he was then at
Milan); and upon enquiring the cause (for I was ignorant of it, the Lord is my witness), I
learnt that certain Bishops had gone up and requested him to write to your Piety, desiring
that a Council might be called. Believe me, Sire, this is the truth of the matter; I lie
not. Accordingly I went down to Milan, and met with great kindness from him; for he
condescended to see me, and to say that he had despatched letters to you, requesting that
a Council might be called.

7 And while I remained in that city, he sent for me again into Gaul (for the father Hosius
was going thither), that we might travel from thence to Sardica. And after the Council, he
wrote to me while I continued at Naissus , and I went up, and abode afterwards at
Aquileia; where the letters of your Piety found me. And again, being invited thence by
your departed brother, I returned into Gaul, and so came at length to your Piety.

5. No Possible Time or Place for the Alleged Offence.

8 Now what place and time does my accuser specify, at which I made use of these
expressions according to his slanderous imputation? In whose presence was I so mad as to
give utterance to the words which he has falsely charged me with speaking? Who is there
ready to support the charge, and to testify to the fact? What his own eyes have seen that
ought he to speak , as holy Scripture enjoins. But no; he will find no witnesses of that
which never took place. But I take your Piety to witness, together with the Truth, that I
lie not. I request you, for I know you to be a person of excellent memory, to call to mind
the conversation I had with you, when you condescended to see me, first at Viminacium , a
second time at Caesarea in Cappadocia, and a third time at Antioch. Did I speak evil
before you even of Eusebius and his fellows who had persecuted me? Did I cast imputations
upon any of those that have done me wrong? If then I imputed nothing to any of those
against whom I had a fight to speak, how could I be so possessed with madness as to
slander an Emperor before an Emperor, and to set a brother at variance with a brother?

9 I beseech you, either cause me to appear before you that the thing may be proved, or
else condemn these calumnies, and follow the example of David, who says, `Whoso privily
slandereth his neighbour, him will I destroy .' As much as in them lies, they have slain
me; for `the mouth that belieth, slayeth the soul .' But your long-suffering has prevailed
against them, and given me confidence to defend myself, that they may suffer condemnation,
as contentious and slanderous persons. Concerning your most religious brother, of blessed
memory, this may suffice: for you will be able, according to the wisdom which God has
given you, to gather much from the little I have said, and to recognise the fictitious
charge.

6. The Second Charge, of Corresponding with Magnentius.

10 With regard to the second calumny, that I have written letters to the tyrant (his name
I am unwilling to pronounce), I beseech you investigate and try the matter, in whatever
way you please, and by whomsoever you may approve of. The extravagance of the charge so
confounds me, that I am in utter uncertainty how to act. Believe me, most religious
Prince, many times did I weigh the matter in my mind, but was unable to believe that any
one could be so mad as to utter such a falsehood. But when this charge was published
abroad by the Arians, as well as the former, and they boasted that they had delivered to
you a copy of the letter, I was the more amazed, and I used to pass sleepless nights
contending against the charge, as if in the presence of my accusers; and suddenly breaking
forth into a loud cry, I would immediately fall to my prayers, desiring with groans and
tears that I might obtain a favourable hearing from you. And now that by the grace of the
Lord, I have obtained such a hearing, I am again at a loss how I shall begin my defence;
for as often as I make an attempt to speak, I am prevented by my horror at the deed. In
the case of your departed brother, the slanderers had indeed a plausible pretence for what
they alleged; because I had been admitted to see him, and he had condescended to write to
your brotherly affection concerning me;

11 and he had often sent for me to come to him, and had honoured me when I came. But for
the traitor Magnentius, `the Lord is witness, and His Anointed is witness ,' I know him
not, nor was ever acquainted with him. What correspondence then could there be between
persons so entirely unacquainted with each other? What reason was there to induce me to
write to such a man? How could I have commenced my letter, had I written to him? Could I
have said, `You have done well to murder the man who honoured me, whose kindness I shall
never forget?' Or, `I approve of your conduct in destroying our Christian friends, and
most faithful brethren?' or, `I approve of your proceedings in butchering those who so
kindly entertained me at Rome; for instance, your departed Aunt Eutropia , whose
disposition answered to her name, that worthy man, Abuterius, the most faithful
Spirantius, and many other excellent persons?'

7. This Charge Utterly Incredible and Absurd.

12 Is it not mere madness in my accuser even to suspect me of such a thing? What, I ask
again, could induce me to place confidence in this man? What trait did I perceive in his
character on which I could rely? He had murdered his own master; he had proved faithless
to his friends; he had violated his oath; he had blasphemed God, by consulting poisoners
and sorcerers contrary to his Law. And with what conscience could I send greeting to such
a man, whose madness and cruelty had afflicted not me only, but all the world around me?
To be sure, I was very greatly indebted to him for his conduct, that when your departed
brother had filled our churches with sacred offerings, he murdered him. For the wretch was
not moved by the sight of these his gifts, nor did he stand in awe of the divine grace
which had been given to him in baptism: but like au accursed and devilish spirit, he raged
against him, till your blessed brother suffered martyrdom at his hands; while he,
henceforth a criminal like Cain, was driven from place to place, `groaning and trembling
,' to the end that he might follow the example of Judas in his death, by becoming his own
executioner, and so bring upon himself a double weight of punishment in the judgment to
come.

8. Disproof of It.

13 With such a man the slanderer thought that I had been on terms of friendship, or rather
he did not think so, but like an enemy invented an incredible fiction: for he knows full
well that he has lied. I would that, whoever he is, he were present here, that I might put
the question to him on the word of Truth itself (for whatever we speak as in the presence
of God, we Christians consider as an oath ); I say, that I might ask him this question,
which of us rejoiced most in the well-being of the departed Constans? who prayed for him
most earnestly? The facts of the foregoing charge prove this; indeed it is plain to every
one how the case stands. But although he himself knows full well, that no one who was so
disposed towards the departed Constans, and who truly loved him, could be a friend to his
enemy, I fear that being possessed with other feelings towards him than I was, he has
falsely attributed to me those sentiments of hatred which were entertained by himself.

9. Athanasius Could Not Write to One Who Did Not Even Know Him.

14 For myself, I am so surprised at the enormity of the thing, that I am quite uncertain
what I ought to say in my defence. I can only declare, that I condemn myself to die ten
thousand deaths, if even the least suspicion attaches to me in this matter. And to you,
Sire, as a lover of the truth, I confidently make my appeal. I beseech you, as I said
before, investigate this affair, and especially with the testimony of those who were once
sent by him as ambassadors to you. These are the Bishops Sarvatius and Maximus and the
rest, with Clementius and Valens. Enquire of them, I beseech you, whether they brought
letters to me. If they did, this would give me occasion to write to him. But if he did not
write to me, if he did not even know me, how could I write to one with whom I had no
acquaintance? Ask them whether, when I saw Clementius and his fellows, and spoke of your
brother of blessed memory, I did not, in the language of Scripture, wet my garments with
tears , when I remembered his kindness of disposition and his Christian spirit. Learn of
them how anxious I was, on hearing of the cruelty of the beast, and finding that Valens
and his company had come by way of Libya, lest he should attempt a passage also, and like
a robber murder those who held in love and memory the departed Prince, among whom I
account myself second to none.

10. His Loyalty Towards Constantius and His Brother.

15 How with this apprehension of such a design on their part, was there not an additional
probability of my praying for your Grace? Should I feel affection for his murderer, and
entertain dislike towards you his brother who avenged his death? Should I remember his
crime, and forget that kindness of yours which you vouchsafed to assure me by letter
should remain the same towards me after your brother's death of happy memory, as it had
been during his lifetime? How could I have borne to look upon the murderer? Must I not
have thought that the blessed Prince beheld me, when I prayed for your safety? For
brothers are by nature mirrors of each other. Wherefore as seeing you in him, I never
should have slandered you before him; and as seeing him in you, never should I have
written to his enemy, instead of praying for your safety. Of this my witnesses are, first
of aIl, the Lord who has heard and has given to you entire the kingdom of your
forefathers: and next those persons who were present at the time, Felicissimus, who was
Duke of Egypt, Rufinus, and Stephanus, the former of whom was Receiver-general, the
latter, Master there; Count Asterius, and Palladius Master of the palace, Antiochus and
Evagrius Official Agents . I had only to say, `Let us pray for the safety of the most
religious Emperor, Constantius Augustus,' and all the people immediately cried out with
one voice, `O Christ send help to Constantius;' and they continued praying thus for some
time .

11. Challenge to the Accusers as to the Alleged Letter.

16 Now I have already called upon God, and His Word, the Only-begotten Son our Lord Jesus
Christ, to witness for me, that I have never written to that man, nor received letters
from him. And as to my accuser, give me leave to ask him a few short questions concerning
this charge also. How did he come to the knowledge of this matter? Will he say that he has
got copies of the letter? for this is what the Arians laboured to prove. Now in the first
place, even if he can shew writing resembling mine, the thing is not yet certain; for
there are forgers, who have often imitated the hand even of you who are Emperors. And the
resemblance will not prove the genuineness of the letter, unless my customary amanuensis
shall testify in its favour. I would then again ask my accusers, Who provided you with
these copies? and whence were they obtained? I had my writers , and he his servants, who
received his letters from the bearers, and gave them into his hand. My assistants are
forthcoming; vouchsafe to summon the others (for they are most probably still living), and
enquire concerning these letters. Search into the matter, as though Truth were the partner
of your throne. She is the defence of Kings, and especially of Christian Kings; with her
you will reign most securely, for holy Scripture says, `Mercy and truth preserve the king,
and they will encircle his throne in righteousness .' And the wise Zorobabel gained a
victory over the others by setting forth the power of Truth, and all the people cried out,
`Great is the truth, and mighty above all things .'

12. Truth the Defence of Thrones.

17 Had I been accused before any other, I should have appealed to your Piety; as once the
Apostle appealed unto Caesar, and put an end to the designs of his enemies against him.
But since they have had the boldness to lay their charge before you, to whom shall I
appeal from you? to the Father of Him who says, `I am the Truth ,' that He may incline
your heart into clemency:- O Lord Almighty, and King of eternity, the Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ, who by Thy Word hast given this Kingdom to Thy servant Constantius; do Thou
shine into his heart, that he, knowing the falsehood that is set against me, may both
favourably receive this my defence; and may make known unto all men, that his ears are
firmly set to hearken unto the Truth, according as it is written, `Righteous lips alone
are acceptable unto the King .' For Thou hast caused it to be said by Solomon, that thus
the throne of the kingdom shall be established.

18 Wherefore at least enquire into this matter, and let the accusers understand that your
desire is to learn the truth; and see, whether they will not shew their falsehood by their
very looks; for the countenance is a test of the conscience as it is written, `A merry
heart maketh a cheerful countenance, but by sorrow of the heart the spirit is broken .'
Thus they who had conspired against Joseph were convicted by their own consciences; and
the craft of Laban towards Jacob was shewn in his countenance . And thus you see the
suspicious alarm of these persons, for they fly and hide themselves; but on our part
frankness in making our defence. And the question between us is not one regarding worldly
wealth, but concerning the honour of the Church. He that has been struck by a stone,
applies to a physician; but sharper than a stone are the strokes of calumny; for as
Solomon has said, `A false witness is a maul, and a sword, and a sharp arrow ,' and its
wounds Truth alone is able to cure; and if Truth be set at nought, they grow worse and
worse.

13. This Charge Rests on Forgery.

19 It is this that has thrown the Churches everywhere into such confusion; for pretences
have been devised, and Bishops of great authority, and of advanced age , have been
banished for holding communion with me. And if matters had stopped here, our prospect
would be favourable through your gracious interposition. But that the evil may not extend
itself, let Truth prevail before you; and leave not every Church under suspicion, as
though Christian men, nay even Bishops, could be guilty of plotting and writing in this
manner. Or if you are unwilling to investigate the matter, it is but right that we who
offer our defence, should be believed, rather than our calumniators. They, like enemies,
are occupied in wickedness; we, as earnestly contending for our cause, present to you our
proofs. And truly I wonder how it comes to pass, that while we address you with fear and
reverence, they are possessed of such an impudent spirit, that they dare even to lie
before the Emperor. But I pray you, for the Truth's sake, and as it is written , `search
diligently' in my presence, on what grounds they affirm these things, and whence these
letters were obtained. But neither will any of my servants be proved guilty, nor will any
of his people be able to tell whence they came; for they are forgeries. And perhaps one
had better not enquire further. They do not wish it, lest the writer of the letters should
be certain of detection. For the calumniators alone, and none besides, know who he is.

14. The Third Charge, of Using an Undedicated Church.

20 But forasmuch as they have informed against me in the matter of the great Church , that
a communion was holden there before it was completed, I will answer to your Piety on this
charge also; for the parties who are hostile towards me constrain me to do so. I confess
this did so happen; for, as in what I have hitherto said, I have spoken no lie, I will not
now deny this. But the facts are far otherwise than they have represented them. Suffer me
to declare to you, most religious Augustus, that we kept no day of dedication (it would
certainly have been unlawful to do so, before receiving orders from you), nor were we led
to act as we did through premeditation. No Bishop or other Clergyman was invited to join
in our proceedings; for much was yet wanting to complete the building. Nay the
congregation was not held on a previous notice, which might give them a reason for
informing against us. Every one knows how it happened; hear me, however, with your
accustomed equity and patience. It was the feast of Easter , and the multitude assembled
together was exceeding great, such as Christian kings would desire to see in all their
cities. Now when the Churches were found to be too few to contain them, there was no
little stir among the people, who desired that they might be allowed to meet together in
the great Church, where they could all offer up their prayers for your safety. And this
they did; for although I exhorted them to wait awhile, and to hold service in the other
Churches, with whatever inconvenience to themselves, they would not listen to me; but were
ready to go out of the city, and meet in desert places in the open air, thinking it better
to endure the fatigue of the journey, than to keep the feast in such a state of
discomfort.

15. Want of Room the Cause, Precedent the Justification.

21 Believe me, Sire, and let Truth be my witness in this also, when I declare that in the
congregations held during the season of Lent, in consequence of the narrow limits of the
places, and the vast multitude of people assembled, a great number of children, not a few
of the younger and very many of the older women, besides several young men, suffered so
much from the pressure of the crowd, that they were obliged to be carried home; though by
the Providence of God, no one is dead. All however murmured, and demanded the use of the
great Church. And if the pressure was so great during the days which preceded the feast,
what would have been the case during the feast itself? Of course matters would have been
far worse. It did not therefore become me to change the people's joy into grief, their
cheerfulness into sorrow, and to make the festival a season of lamentation.

22 And that the more, because I had a precedent in the conduct of our Fathers. For the
blessed Alexander, when the other places were too small, and he was engaged in the
erection of what was then considered a very large one, the Church of Theonas , held his
congregations there on account of the number of the people, while at the same time he
proceeded with the building. I have seen the same thing done at Treveri and at Aquileia,
in both which places, while the building was proceeding, they assembled there during the
feasts, on account of the number of the people and they never found any one to accuse them
in this manner. Nay, your brother of blessed memory was present, when a communion was held
under these circumstances at Aquileia. I also followed this course. There was no
dedication, but only a service of prayer. You, at least I am sure, as a lover of God will
approve of the people's zeal, and will pardon me for being unwilling to hinder the prayers
of so great a multitude.

16. Better to Pray Together Than Separately.

23 But here again I would ask my accuser, where was it right that the people should pray?
in the deserts, or in a place which was in course of building for the purpose of prayer?
Where was it becoming and pious that the people should answer, Amen ? in the deserts, or
in what was already called the Lord's house? Where would you, most religious Prince, have
wished your people to stretch forth their hands, and to pray for you? Where Greeks, as
they passed by, might stop and listen, or in a place named after yourself, which all men
have long called the Lord's house, even since the foundations of it were laid? I am sure
that you prefer your own place; for you smile, and that tells me so. `But,' says the
accuser, `it ought to have been in the Churches. They were all, as I said before, too
small and confined to admit the multitude. Then again, in which way was it most becoming
that their prayers should be made? Should they meet together in parts and separate
companies, with danger from the crowded state of the congregation? or, when there was now
a place that would contain them all, should they assemble in it, and speak as with one and
the same voice in perfect harmony? This was the better course, for this shewed the
unanimity of the multitude: in this way God will readily hear prayer.

24 For if, according to the promise of our Saviour Himself , where two shall agree
together as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them, how shall it
be when so great an assembly of people with one voice utter their Amen to God? Who indeed
was there that did not marvel at the sight? Who but pronounced you happy when they saw so
great a multitude met together in one place? How did the people themselves rejoice to see
each other, having been accustomed heretofore to assemble in separate places! The
circumstance was a source of pleasure to all; of vexation to the calumniator alone.

17. Better to Pray in a Building Than in the Desert.

25 Now then, I would also meet the other and only remaining objection of my accuser. He
says, the building was not completed, and prayer ought not to have been made there. But
the Lord said, `But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and shut the door .'
What then will the accuser answer? or rather what will all prudent and true Christians
say? Let your Majesty ask the opinion of such: for it is written of the other, `The
foolish person will speak foolishness ;' but of these, `Ask counsel of all that are wise
.' When the Churches were too small, and the people so numerous as they were, and desirous
to go forth into the deserts, what ought I to have done? The desert has no doors, and all
who choose may pass through it, but the Lord's house is enclosed with walls and doors, and
marks the difference between the pious and the profane. Will not every wise person then,
as well as your Piety, Sire, give the preference to the latter place? For they know that
here prayer is lawfully offered, while a suspicion of irregularity attaches to it there.
Unless indeed no place proper for it existed, and the worshippers dwelt only in the
desert, as was the case with Israel; although after the tabernacle was built, they also
had thenceforth a place set apart for prayer.

26 O Christ, Lord and true King of kings, Only-begotten Son of God, Word and Wisdom of the
Father, I am accused because the people prayed Thy gracious favour, and through Thee
besought Thy Father, who is God over all, to save Thy servant, the most religious
Constantius. But thanks be to Thy goodness, that it is for this that I am blamed, and for
the keeping of Thy laws. Heavier had been the blame, and more true had been the charge,
had we passed by the place which the Emperor was building, and gone forth into the desert
to pray. How would the accuser then have vented his folly ! With what apparent reason
would he have said, `He despised the place which you are building; he does not approve of
your undertaking; he passed it by in derision; he pointed to the desert to supply the want
of room; he prevented the people when they wished to offer up their prayers.' This is what
he wished to say, and sought an occasion of saying it; and finding none he is vexed, and
so forthwith invents a charge against me. Had he been able to say this, he would have
confounded me with shame; as now he injures me, copying the accuser's ways, and watching
for an occasion against those that pray. Thus has he perverted to a wicked purpose his
knowledge of Daniel's history. But he has been deceived;

27 for he ignorantly imagined, that Babylonian practices were in fashion with you, and
knew not that you are a friend of the blessed Daniel, and worship the same God, and do not
forbid, but wish all men to pray, knowing that the prayer of all is, that you may continue
to reign in perpetual peace and safety.

18. Prayers First Do Not Interfere with Dedication Afterwards.

28 This is what I have to complain of on the part of my accuser. But may you, most
religious Augustus, live through the course of many years to come, and celebrate the
dedication of the Church. Surely the prayers which have been offered for your safety by
all men, are no hindrance to this celebration. Let these unlearned persons cease such
misrepresentations, but let them learn from the example of the Fathers; and let them read
the Scriptures. Or rather let them learn of you, who are so well instructed in such
histories, how that Joshua the son of Josedek the priest, and his brethren, and Zorobabel
the wise, the son of Salathiel, and Ezra the priest and scribe of the law, when the temple
was in course of building after the captivity, the feast of tabernacles being at hand
(which was a great feast and time of assembly and prayer in Israel), gathered the people
together with one accord in the great court within the first gate, which is toward the
East, and prepared the altar to God, and there offered their gifts, and kept the feast.
And so afterwards they brought hither their sacrifices, on the sabbaths and the new moons,
and the people offered up their prayers. And yet the Scripture says expressly, that when
these things were done, the temple of God was not yet built; but rather while they thus
prayed, the building of the house was advancing.

29 So that neither were their prayers deferred in expectation of the dedication, nor was
the dedication prevented by the assemblies held for the sake of prayer. But the people
thus continued to pray; and when the house was entirely finished, they celebrated the
dedication, and brought their gifts for that purpose, and all kept the feast for the
completion of the work. And thus also have the blessed Alexander, and the other Fathers
done. They continued to assemble their people, and when they had completed the work they
gave thanks unto the Lord, and celebrated the dedication. This also it befits you to do, O
Prince, most careful in your inquiries. The place is ready, having been already sanctified
by the prayers which have been offered in it, and requires only the presence of your
Piety. This only is wanting to its perfect beauty. Do you then supply this deficiency, and
there make your prayers unto the Lord, for whom you have built this house. That you may do
so is the prayer of all men.

19. Fourth Charge, of Having Disobeyed an Imperial Order.

30 And now, if it please you, let us consider the remaining accusation, and permit me to
answer it likewise. They have dared to charge me with resisting your commands, and
refusing to leave my Church. Truly I wonder they are not weary of uttering their
calumnies; I however am not yet weary of answering them, I rather rejoice to do so; for
the more abundant my defence is, the more entirely must they be condemned. I did not
resist the commands of your Piety, God forbid; I am not a man that would resist even the
Quaestor of the city, much less so great a Prince. On this matter I need not many words,
for the whole city will bear witness for me. Nevertheless, permit me again to relate the
circumstances from the beginning; for when you hear them, I am sure you will be astonished
at the presumption of my enemies. Montanus, the officer of the Palace , came and brought
me a letter, which purported to be an answer to one from me, requesting that I might go
into Italy, for the purpose of obtaining a supply of the deficiencies which I thought
existed in the condition of our Churches. Now I desire to thank your Piety, which
condescended to assent to my request, on the supposition that I had written to you, and
has made provision for me to undertake the journey, and to accomplish it without trouble.

31 But here again I am astonished at those who have spoken falsehood in your ears, that
they were not afraid, seeing that lying belongs to the Devil, and that liars are alien
from Him who says, `I am the Truth .' For I never wrote to you, nor will my accuser be
able to find any such letter; and though I ought to have written every day, if I might
thereby behold your gracious countenance, yet it would neither have been pious to desert
the Churches, nor right to be troublesome to your Piety, especially since you are willing
to grant our requests in behalf of the Church, although we are not present to make them.
Now may it please you to order me to read what Montanus commanded me to do. This is as
follows .***

20. History of His Disobeying It.

32 Now I ask again, whence have my accusers obtained this letter also? I would learn of
them who it was that put it into their hands? Do you cause them to answer. By this you may
perceive that they have forged this, as they spread abroad also the former letter, which
they published against me, with reference to the ill-named Magnentius. And being convicted
in this instance also, on what pretence next will they bring me to make my defence? Their
only concern is, to throw everything into disorder and confusion; and for this end I
perceive they exercise their zeal. Perhaps they think that by frequent repetition of their
charges, they will at last exasperate you against me. But you ought to turn away from such
persons, and to hate them; for such as themselves are, such also they imagine those to be
who listen to them; and they think that their calumnies will prevail even before you. The
accusation of Doeg prevailed of old against the priests of God: but it was the unrighteous
Saul, who hearkened unto him. And Jezebel was able to injure the most religious Naboth by
her false accusations; but then it was the wicked and apostate Ahab who hearkened unto
her. But the most holy David, whose example it becomes you to follow, as all pray that you
may, favours not such men, but was wont to turn away from them and avoid them, as raging
dogs. He says, `Whoso privily slandereth his neighbour, him will I destroy .' For he kept
the commandment which says, `Thou shall not receive a false report .' And false are the
reports of these men in your sight. You, like Solomon, have required of the Lord (and you
ought to believe yourself to have obtained your desire), that it would seem good unto Him
to remove far from you vain and lying words .

33 21. Forasmuch then as the letter owed its origin to a false story, and contained no
order that I should come to you, I concluded that it was not the wish of your Piety that I
should come. For in that you gave me no absolute command, but merely wrote as in answer to
a letter from me, requesting that I might be permitted to set in order the things which
seemed to be wanting, it was manifest to me (although no one told me this) that the letter
which I had received did not express the sentiments of your Clemency. All knew, and I also
stated in writing, as Montanus is aware, that I did not refuse to come, but only that I
thought it unbecoming to take advantage of the supposition that I had written to you to
request this favour, fearing also lest the false accusers should find in this a pretence
for saying that I made myself troublesome to your Piety. Nevertheless, I made
preparations, as Montanus also knows, in order that, should you condescend to write to me,
I might immediately leave home, and readily answer your commands; for I was not so mad as
to resist such an order from you. When then in fact your Piety did not write to me, how
could I resist a command which I never received? or how can they say that I refused to
obey, when no orders were given me? Is not this again the mere fabrication of enemies,
pretending that which never took place? I fear that even now, while I am engaged in this
defence of myself, they may allege against me that I am doing that which I have never
obtained your permission to do. So easily is my conduct made matter of accusation by them,
and so ready are they to vent their calumnies in despite of that Scripture, which says,
`Love not to slander another, lest thou be cut off .'

22. Arrivals of Diogenes and of Syrianus.

34 After a period of six and twenty months, when Montanus had gone away, there came
Diogenes the Notary ; but he brought me no letter, nor did we see each other, nor did he
charge me with any commands as from you. Moreover when the General Syrianus entered
Alexandria , seeing that certain reports were spread abroad by the Arians, who declared
that matters would now be as they wished, I enquired whether he had brought any letters on
the subject of these statements of theirs. I confess that I asked for letters containing
your commands. And when he said that he had brought none, I requested that Syrianus
himself, or Maximus the Prefect of Egypt, would write to me concerning this matter. Which
request I made, because your Grace has written to me, desiring that I would not suffer
myself to be alarmed by any one, nor attend to those who wished to frighten me, but that I
would continue to reside in the Churches without fear. It was Palladius, the Master of the
Palace, and Asterius, formerly Duke of Armenia, who brought me this letter. Permit me to
read a copy of it. It is as follows:

23. A Copy Of the Letter as Follows:

35 Constantius Victor Augustus to Athanasius . It is not unknown to your Prudence, how
constantly I prayed that success might attend my late brother Constans in all his
undertakings, and your wisdom will easily judge how greatly I was afflicted, when I learnt
that he had been cut off by the treachery of villains. Now forasmuch as certain persons
are endeavouring at this time to alarm you, by setting before your eyes that lamentable
tragedy, I have thought good to address to your Reverence this present letter, to exhort
you, that, as becomes a Bishop, you would teach the people to conform to the established
religion, and, according to your custom, give yourself up to prayer together with them.
For this is agreeable to our wishes; and our desire is, that you should at every season be
a Bishop in your own place. And in another hand:-May divine Providence preserve you,
beloved Father, many years.

24. Why Athanasius Did Not Obey the Imperial Order.

36 On the subject of this letter, my opponents conferred with the magistrates. And was it
not reasonable that I, having received it, should demand their letters, and refuse to give
heed to mere pretences? And were they not acting in direct contradiction to the tenor of
your instructions to me, while they failed to shew me the commands of your Piety? I
therefore, seeing they produced no letters from you, considered it improbable that a mere
verbal communication should be made to them, especially as the letter of your Grace had
charged me not to give ear to such persons. I acted rightly then, most religious Augustus,
that as I had returned to my country under the authority of your letters, so I should only
leave it by your command; and might not render myself liable hereafter to a charge of
having deserted the Church, but as receiving your order might have a reason for my
retiring. This was demanded for me by all my people, who went to Syrianus together with
the Presbyters, and the greatest part, to say the least, of the city with them. Maximus,
the Prefect of Egypt, was also there: and their request was that either he would send me a
declaration of your wishes in writing, or would forbear to disturb the Churches, while the
people themselves were sending a deputation to you respecting the matter. When they
persisted in their demand, Syrianus at last perceived the reasonableness of it, and
consented, protesting by your safety (Hilary was present and witnessed this) that he would
put an end to the disturbance, and refer the case to your Piety. The guards of the Duke,
as well as those of the Prefect of Egypt, know that this is true; the Prytanis of the city
also remembers the words; so that you will perceive that neither I, nor any one else,
resisted your commands.

25. The Irruption of Syrianus.

37 All demanded that the letters of your Piety should be exhibited. For although the bare
word of a King is of equal weight and authority with his written command, especially if he
who reports it, boldly affirms in writing that it has been given him; yet when they
neither openly declared that they had received any command, nor, as they were requested to
do, gave me assurance of it in writing, but acted altogether as by their own authority; I
confess, I say it boldly, I was suspicious of them. For there were many Arians about them,
who were their companions at table, and their counsellors; and while they attempted
nothing openly, they were preparing to assail me by stratagem and treachery. Nor did they
act at all as under the authority of a royal command, but, as their conduct betrayed, at
the solicitation of enemies. This made me demand more urgently that they should produce
letters from you, seeing that all their undertakings and designs were of a suspicious
nature; and because it was unseemly that after I had entered the Church, under the
authority of so many letters from you, I should retire from it without such a sanction.
When however Syrianus gave his promise, all the people assembled together in the Churches
with feelings of joyfulness and security. But three and twenty days after , he burst into
the Church with his soldiers, while we were engaged in our usual services, as those who
entered in there witnessed;

38 for it was a vigil, preparatory to a communion on the morrow. And such things were done
that night as the Arians desired and had before hand denounced against us. For the General
brought them with him; and they were the instigators and advisers of the attack. This is
no incredible story of mine, most religious Augustus; for it was not done in secret, but
was noised abroad everywhere. When therefore I saw the assault begun, I first exhorted the
people to retire, and then withdrew myself after them, God hiding and guiding me, as those
who were with me at the time witness. Since then, I have remained by myself, though I have
all confidence to answer for my conduct, in the first place before God, and also before
your Piety, for that I did not flee and desert my people, but can point to the attack of
the General upon us, as a proof of persecution. His proceedings have caused the greatest
astonishment among all men; for either he ought not to have made a promise, or not to have
broken it after he had made it.

26. How Athanasius Acted When This Took Place.

39 Now why did they form this plot against me, and treacherously lay an ambush to take me,
when it was in their power to enforce the order by a written declaration? The command of
an Emperor is wont to give great boldness to those entrusted with it; but their desire to
act secretly made the suspicion stronger that they had received no command. And did I
require anything so very absurd? Let your Majesty's candour decide. Will not every one
say, that such a demand was reasonable for a Bishop to make? You know, for you have read
the Scriptures, how great an offence it is for a Bishop to desert his Church, and to
neglect the flocks of God. For the absence of the Shepherd gives the wolves an opportunity
to attack the sheep. And this was what the Arians and all the other heretics desired, that
during my absence they might find an opportunity to entrap the people into impiety. If
then I had fled, what defence could I have made before the true Bishops? or rather before
Him Who has committed to me His flock? He it is Who judges the whole earth, the true King
of all, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Would not every one have rightly charged me
with neglect of my people?

40 Would not your Piety have blamed me, and have justly asked, `After you had returned
under the authority of our letters, why did you withdraw without such authority, and
desert your people?' Would not the people themselves at the day of judgment have
reasonably imputed to me this neglect of them, and have said, `He that had the oversight
of us fled, and we were neglected, there being no one to put us in mind of our duty?' When
they said this, what could I have answered? Such a complaint was made by Ezekiel against
the Pastors of old ; and the blessed Apostle Paul, knowing this, has charged every one of
us through his disciple, saying, `Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given
thee, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery .' Fearing this, I wished not to
flee, but to receive your commands, if indeed such was the will of your Piety. But I never
obtained what I so reasonably requested, and now I am falsely accused before you; for I
resisted no commands of your Piety; nor will I now attempt to return to Alexandria, until
your Grace shall desire it. This I say beforehand, lest the slanderers should again make
this a pretence for accusing me.

27. Athanasius Leaves Alexandria to Go to Constantius, But is Stopped by the News for the
Banishment of the Bishops.

41 Observing these things, I did not give sentence against myself, but hastened to come to
your Piety, with this my defence, knowing your goodness, and remembering your faithful
promises, and being confident that, as it is written in the divine Proverbs, `Just
speeches are acceptable to a gracious king .' But when I had already entered upon my
journey, and had passed through the desert , a report suddenly reached me , which at first
I thought to be incredible, but which afterwards proved to be true. It was rumoured
everywhere that Liberius, Bishop of Rome, the great Hosius of Spain, Paulinus of Gaul,
Dionysius and Eusebius of Italy, Lucifer of Sardinia, and certain other Bishops and
Presbyters and Deacons, had been banished because they refused to subscribe to my
condemnation. These had been banished: and Vincentius of Capua, Fortunatian of Aquileia,
Heremius of Thessalonica, and all the Bishops of the West, were treated with no ordinary
force, nay were suffering extreme violence and grievous injuries, until they could be
induced to promise that they would not communicate with me. While I was astonished and
perplexed at these tidings, behold another report overtook me, respecting them of Egypt
and Libya, that nearly ninety Bishops had been under persecution, and that their Churches
were given up to the professors of Arianism; that sixteen had been banished, and of the
rest, some had fled, and others were constrained to dissemble.

42 For the persecution was said to be so violent in those parts, that at Alexandria, while
the brethren were praying during Easter and on the Lord's days in a desert place near the
cemetery, the General came upon them with a force of soldiery, more than three thousand in
number, with arms, drawn swords, and spears; whereupon outrages, such as might be expected
to follow so unprovoked an attack, were committed against women and children, who were
doing nothing more than praying to God. It would perhaps be unseasonable to give an
account of them now, lest the mere mention of such enormities should move us all to tears.
But such was their cruelty, that virgins were stripped, and even the bodies of those who
died from the blows they received were not immediately given up for burial, but were cast
out to the dogs, until their relatives, with great risk to themselves, came secretly and
stole them away, and much effort was necessary, that no one might know it.

28. The News of the Intrusion of George.

43 The rest of their proceedings will perhaps be thought incredible, and will fill all men
with astonishment, by reason of their extreme atrocity. It is necessary however to speak
of them, in order that your Christian zeal and piety may perceive that their slanders and
calumnies against us are framed for no other end, than that they may drive us out of the
Churches, and introduce their own impiety in our place. For when the lawful Bishops, men
of advanced age, had some of them been banished, and others forced to fly, heathens and
catechumens, those who hold the first places in the senate and men who are notorious for
their wealth, were straightway commissioned by the Arians to preach the holy faith instead
of Christians . And enquiry was no longer made, as the Apostle enjoined, `if any be
blameless :' but according to the practice of the impious Jeroboam, he who could give most
money was named Bishop; and it made no difference to them, even if the man happened to be
a heathen, so long as he furnished them with money. Those who had been Bishops from the
time of Alexander monks and ascetics, were banished: and men practised only in calumny
corrupted, as far as in them lay, the Apostolic rule, and polluted the Churches. Truly
their false accusations against us have gained them much, that they should be able to
commit iniquity, and to do such things as these in your time; so that the words of
Scripture may be applied to them, `Woe unto those through whom My name is blasphemed among
the Gentiles .'

29. Athanasius Has Heard of His Own Proscription.

44 Such were the rumours that were noised abroad; and although everything was thus turned
upside down, I still did not relinquish my earnest desire of coming to your Piety, but was
again setting forward on my journey. And I did so the more eagerly, being confident that
these proceedings were contrary to your wishes, and that if your Grace should be informed
of what was done, you would prevent it for the time to come. For I could not think that a
righteous king could wish Bishops to be banished, and virgins to be stripped, or the
Churches to be in any way disturbed. While I thus reasoned and hastened on my journey,
behold a third report reached me, to the effect that letters had been written to the
Princes of Auxumis, desiring that Frumentius , Bishop of Auxumis, should be brought from
thence, and that search should be made for me even as far as the country of the
Barbarians, that I might be handed over to the Commentaries (as they are called) of the
Prefects, and that all the laity and clergy should be compelled to communicate with the
Arian heresy, and that such as would not comply with this order should be put to death. To
shew that these were not merely idle rumours, but that they were confirmed by facts, since
your Grace has given me leave, I produce the letter. My enemies were constantly reading
it, and threatening each one with death.

30. A Copy of the Letter of Constantius Against Athanasius.

45 Victor Constantius Maximus Augustus to the Alexandrians. 46 Your city, preserving its
national character, and remembering the virtue of its founders, has habitually shewn
itself obedient unto us, as it does at this day; and we on our part should consider
ourselves greatly wanting in our duty, did not our good will eclipse even that of
Alexander himself. For as it belongs to a temperate mind, to behave itself orderly in all
respects, so it is the part of royalty, on account of virtue, permit me to say, such as
yours, to embrace you above all others; you, who rose up as the first teachers of wisdom
who were the first to acknowledge God; who moreover have chosen for yourselves the most
consummate masters; and have cordially acquiesced in our opinion, justly abominating that
impostor and cheat, and dutifully uniting yourselves to those venerable men who are beyond
all admiration. And yet, who is ignorant, even among those who live in the ends of the
earth, what violent party spirit was displayed in the late proceedings? with which we know
not anything that has ever happened, worthy to be compared. The majority of the citizens
had their eyes blinded, and a man who had come forth from the lowest dens of infamy
obtained authority among them, entrapping into falsehood, as under cover of darkness,
those who were desirous to know the truth;-one who never provided for them any fruitful
and edifying discourse, but corrupted their minds with unprofitable subtleties. His
flatterers shouted and applauded him; they were astonished at his powers, and they still
probably murmur secretly;

47 while the majority of the more simple sort took their cue from them. And thus all went
with the stream, as if a flood had broken in, while everything was entirely neglected. One
of the multitude was in power;-how can I describe him more truly than by saying, that he
was superior in nothing to the meanest of the people, and that the only kindness which he
shewed to the city was, that he did not thrust her citizens down into the pit. This noble-
minded and illustrious person did not wait for judgment to proceed against him, but
sentenced himself to banishment, as he deserved. So that now it is for the interest of the
Barbarians to remove him out of the way, lest he lead some of them into impiety, for he
will make his complaint, like distressed characters in a play, to those who first fall in
with him. To him however we will now bid a long farewell. For yourselves there are few
with whom I can compare you: I am bound rather to honour you separately above all others,
for the great virtue and wisdom which your actions, that are celebrated almost through the
whole world, proclaim you to possess. Go on in this sober course. I would gladly have
repeated to me a description of your conduct in such terms of praise as it deserves;

48 O you who have eclipsed your predecessors in the race of glory, and will be a noble
example both to those who are now alive, and to all who shall come after, and alone have
chosen for yourselves the most perfect of beings as guide for your conduct, both in word
and deed, and hesitated not a moment, but manfully transferred your affections, and gave
yourselves up to the other side, leaving those grovelling and earthly teachers, and
stretching forth towards heavenly things, under the guidance of the most venerable Georges
, than whom no man is more perfectly instructed therein. Under him you will continue to
have a good hope respecting the future life, and will pass your time in this present
world, in rest and quietness. Would that all the citizens together would lay hold on his
words, as a sacred anchor, so that we might need neither knife nor cautery for those whose
souls are diseased! Such persons we most earnestly advise to renounce their zeal in favour
of Athanasius, and not even to remember the foolish things which he spoke so plentifully
among them. Otherwise they will bring themselves before they are aware into extreme peril,
from which we know not any one who will be skilful enough to deliver such factious
persons.

49 For while that pestilent fellow Athanasius is driven from place to place, being
convicted of the basest crimes, for which he would only suffer the punishment he deserves,
if one were to kill him ten times over, it would be inconsistent in us to suffer those
flatterers and juggling ministers of his to exult against us; men of such a character as
it is a shame even to speak of, respecting whom orders have long ago been given to the
magistrates, that they should be put to death. But even now perhaps they shall not die, if
they desist from their former offences, and repent at last. For that most pestilent fellow
Athanasius led them on, and corrupted the whole state, and laid his impious and polluted
hands upon the most holy things.

31. Letter of Constantius to the Ethiopians Against Frumentius.

50 The following is the letter which was written to the Princes of Auxumis respecting
Frumentius, Bishop of that place. Constantius Victor Maximus Augustus, to Aezanes and
Sazanes. 51 It is altogether a matter of the greatest care and concern to us, to extend
the knowledge of the supreme God ; and I think that the whole race of mankind claims from
us equal regard in this respect, in order that they may pass their lives in hope, being
brought to a proper knowledge of God, and having no differences with each other in their
enquiries concerning justice and truth. Wherefore considering that you are deserving of
the same provident care as the Romans, and desiring to shew equal regard for your welfare,
we command that the same doctrine be professed in your Churches as in theirs. Send
therefore speedily into Egypt the Bishop Frumentius to the most venerable Bishop George,
and the rest who are there, who have especial authority to appoint to these offices, and
to decide questions concerning them. For of course you know and remember (unless you alone
pretend to be ignorant of that which all men are well aware of) that this Frumentius was
advanced to his present rank by Athanasius, a man who is guilty of ten thousand crimes;
for he has not been able fairly to clear himself of any of the charges brought against
him, but was at once deprived of his see, and now wanders about destitute of any fixed
abode, and passes from one country to another, as if by this means he could escape his own
wickedness.

52 Now if Frumentius shall readily obey our commands, and shall submit to an enquiry into
all the circumstances of his appointment, he will shew plainly to all men, that he is in
no respect opposed to the laws of the Church and the established faith. And being brought
to trial, when he shall have given proof of his general good conduct, and submitted an
account of his life to those who are to judge of these things, he shall receive his
appointment from them, if it shall indeed appear that he has any right to be a Bishop. But
if he shall delay and avoid the trial, it will surely be very evident, that he has been
induced by the persuasions of the wicked Athanasius, thus to indulge impiety against God,
choosing to follow the course of him whose wickedness has been made manifest. And our fear
is lest he should pass over into Auxumis and corrupt your people, by setting before them
accursed and impious statements, and not only unsettle and disturb the Churches, and
blaspheme the supreme God, but also thereby cause utter overthrow and destruction to the
several nations whom he visits. But I am sure that Frumentius will return home, perfectly
acquainted with all matters that concern the Church, having derived much instruction,
which will be of great and general utility, from the conversation of the most venerable
George, and such other of the Bishops, as are excellently qualified to communicate such
knowledge. May God continually preserve you, most honoured brethren.

32. He Defends His Flight.

53 Hearing, nay almost seeing, these things, through the mournful representations of the
messengers, I confess I turned back again into the desert, justly concluding, as your
Piety will perceive, that if I was sought after, that I might be sent as soon as I was
discovered to the Prefects , I should be prevented from ever coming to your Grace; and
that if those who would not subscribe against me, suffered so severely as they did, and
the laity who refused to communicate with the Arians were ordered for death, there was no
doubt at all but that ten thousand new modes of destruction would be devised by the
calumniators against me; and that after my death, they would employ against whomsoever
they wished to injure, whatever means they chose, venting their lies against us the more
boldly, for that then there would no longer be any one left who could expose them. I fled,
not because I feared your Piety (for I know your long-suffering and goodness), but because
from what had taken place, I perceived the spirit of my enemies, and considered that they
would make use of all possible means to accomplish my destruction, from fear that they
would be brought to answer for what they had done contrary to the intentions of your
Excellency. For observe, your Grace commanded that the Bishops should be expelled only out
of the cities and the province.

54 But these worthy persons presumed to exceed your commands, and banished aged men and
Bishops venerable for their years into desert and unfrequented and frightful places,
beyond the boundaries of three provinces . Some of them were sent off from Libya to the
great Oasis; others from the Thebais to Ammoniaca in Libya . Neither was it from fear of
death that I fled; let none of them condemn me as guilty of cowardice; but because it is
the injunction of our Saviour that we should flee when we are persecuted, and hide
ourselves when we are sought after, and not expose ourselves to certain dangers, nor by
appearing before our persecutors inflame still more their rage against us. For to give
one's self up to one's enemies to be murdered, is the same thing as to murder one's self;
but to flee, as our Saviour has enjoined, is to know our time, and to manifest a real
concern for our persecutors, lest if they proceed to the shedding of blood, they become
guilty of the transgression of the law, `Thou shalt not kill .' And yet these men by their
calumnies against me, earnestly wish that I should suffer death. What they have again
lately done proves that this is their desire and murderous intention. You will be
astonished, I am sure, Augustus, most beloved of God, when you hear it; it is indeed an
outrage amazement.What it is, I pray worthy of you briefly to hear.

33. Conduct of the Arians Towards the Consecrated Virgins.

55 The Son of God, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, having become man for our sakes, and
having destroyed death, and delivered our race from the bondage of corruption , in
addition to all His other benefits bestowed this also upon us, that we should possess upon
earth, in the state of virginity , a picture of the holiness of Angels. Accordingly such
as have attained this virtue, the Catholic Church has been accustomed to call the brides
of Christ. And the heathen who see them express their admiration of them as the temples of
the Word. For indeed this holy and heavenly profession is nowhere established, but only
among us Christians, and it is a very strong argument that with us is to be found the
genuine and true religion. Your most religious father Constantine Augustus, of blessed
memory, honoured the Virgins above all the rest, and your Piety in several letters has
given them the titles of the honourable and holy women. But now these worthy Arians who
have slandered me, and by whom conspiracies have been formed against most of the Bishops,
having obtained the consent and cooperation of the magistrates, first stripped them, and
then caused them to be suspended upon what are called the Hermetaries , and scourged them
on the ribs so severely three several times, that not even real malefactors have ever
suffered the like. Pilate, to gratify the Jews of old, pierced one of our Saviour's sides
with a spear.

56 These men have exceeded the madness of Pilate, for they have scourged not one but both
His sides; for the limbs of the Virgins are in an especial manner the Saviour's own. All
men shudder at hearing the bare recital of deeds like these. These men alone not only did
not fear to strip and to scourge those undefiled limbs, which the Virgins had dedicated
solely to our Saviour Christ; but, what is worse than all, when they were reproached by
every one for such extreme cruelty, instead of manifesting any shame, they pretended that
it was commanded by your Piety. So utterly presumptuous are they and full of wicked
thoughts and purposes. Such a deed as this was never heard of in past persecutions : or
supposing that it ever occurred before, yet surely it was not befitting either that
Virginity should suffer such outrage and dishonour, in the time of your Majesty, a
Christian, or that these men should impute to your Piety their own cruelty. Such
wickedness belongs only to heretics, to blaspheme the Son of God, and to do violence to
His holy Virgins.

34. He Expostulates with Constantius.

57 Now when such enormities as these were again perpetrated by the Arians, I surely was
not wrong in complying with the direction of Holy Scripture, which says, `Hide thyself for
a little moment, until the wrath of the Lord be overpast .' This was another reason for my
withdrawing myself, Augustus, most beloved of God; and I refused not, either to depart
into the desert, or, if need were, to be let down from a wall in a basket . I endured
everything, I even dwelt among wild beasts, that your favour might return to me, waiting
for an opportunityto offer to you this my defence, confident as I am that they will be
condemned, and your goodness manifested unto me. O, Augustus, blessed and most beloved of
God, what would you have had me to do? to come to you while my calumniators were inflamed
with rage against me, and were seeking to kill me; or, as it is written, to hide myself a
little, that in the mean time they might be condemned as heretics, and your goodness might
be manifested unto me? or would you have had me, Sire, to appear before your magistrates,
in order that though you had written merely in the way of threatening, they not
understanding your intention, but being exasperated against me by the Arians, might kill
me on the authority of your letters, and on that ground ascribe the murder to you? It
would neither have been becoming in me to surrender, and give myself up that my blood
might be shed, nor in you, as a Christian King, to have the murder of Christians, and
those too Bishops, imputed unto you.

58 35. It was therefore better for me to hide myself, and to wait for this opportunity.
Yes, I am sure that from your knowledge of the sacred Scriptures you will assent and
approve of my conduct in this respect. For you will perceive that, now those who
exasperated you against us have been silenced, your righteous clemency is apparent, and it
is proved to all men that you never persecuted the Christians at all, but that it was they
who made the Churches desolate, that they might sow the seeds of their own impiety
everywhere; on account of which I also, had I not fled, should long ago have suffered from
their treachery. For it is very evident that they who scrupled not to utter such calumnies
against me, before the great Augustus, and who so violently assailed Bishops and Virgins,
sought also to compass my death. But thanks be to the Lord who has given you the kingdom.
All men are confirmed in their opinion of your goodness, and of their wickedness, from
which I fled at the first, that I might now make this appeal unto you, and that you might
find some one towards whom you may shew kindness. I beseech you, therefore, forasmuch as
it written, `A soft answer turneth away wrath,' and `righteous thoughts are acceptable
unto the King ;' receive this my defence, and restore all the Bishops and the rest of the
Clergy to their countries and their Churches;

59 so that the wickedness of my accusers may be made manifest, and that you, both now and
in the day of judgment, may have boldness to say to our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, the
King of all, `" None of Thine have I lost ," but these are they who designed the ruin of
all, while I was grieved for those who perished, and for the Virgins who were scourged,
and for all other things that were committed against the Christians; and I brought back
them that were banished, and restored them to their own Churches.'


DEFENCE OF HIS FLIGHT
=====================

DEFENCE OF HIS FLIGHT Athanasius of Alexandria

c. AD 296–373

Bishop of Alexandria; champion of the Nicene faith.

DEFENCE OF HIS FLIGHT

1. Athanasius Charged with Cowardice for Escaping.

1 I Hear that Leontius , now at Antioch, and Narcissus of the city of Nero, and George ,
now at Laodicea, and the Arians who are with them, are spreading abroad many slanderous
reports concerning me, charging me with cowardice, because forsooth, when I myself was
sought by them, I did not surrender myself into their hands. Now as to their imputations
and calumnies, although there are many things that I could write, which even they are
unable to deny, and which all who have heard of their proceedings know to be true, yet I
shall not be prevailed upon to make any reply to them, except only to remind them of the
words of our Lord, and of the declaration of the Apostle, that `a lie is of the Devil,'
and that, `revilers shall not inherit the kingdom of God .' For it is sufficient thereby
to prove, that neither their thoughts nor their words are according to the Gospel, but
that after their own pleasure, whatsoever themselves desire, that they think to be good.

2. Insincerity of This Charge.

2 But forasmuch as they pretend to charge me with cowardice, it is necessary that I should
write somewhat concerning this, whereby it shall be proved that they are men of wicked
minds, who have not read the sacred Scriptures: or if they have read them, that they do
not believe the divine inspiration of the oracles they contain. For had they believed
this, they would not dare to act contrary to them, nor imitate the malice of the Jews who
slew the Lord. For God having given them a commandment, `Honour thy father and thy
mother,' and, `He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death ;' that people
established a contrary law, changing the honour into dishonour, and alienating to other
uses the money which was due from the children to their parents. And though they had read
what David did, they acted in contradiction to his example, and accused the guiltless for
plucking the ears of corn, and rubbing them in their hands on the Sabbath day . Not that
they cared either for the laws, or for the Sabbath, for they were guilty of greater
transgressions of the law on that day: but being wicked-minded, they grudged the disciples
the way of salvation, and desired that their own private notions should have the sole pre-
eminence. They however have received the reward of their iniquity, having ceased to be an
holy nation, and being counted henceforth as the rulers of Sodom, and as the people of
Gomorrah .

3 And these men likewise, not less than they, seem to me to have received their punishment
already in their ignorance of their own folly. For they understand not what they say, but
think that they know things of which they are ignorant; while the only knowledge that is
in them is to do evil, and to frame devices more and more wicked day by day. Thus they
reproach us with our present flight, not for the sake of virtue, as wishing us to shew
manliness by coming forward (how is it possible that such a wish can be entertained by
enemies in behalf of those who run not with them in the same career of madness?); but
being full of malice, they pretend this, and buzz all around that such is the case,
thinking, foolish as indeed they are, that through fear of their revilings, we shall yet
be induced to give ourselves up to them. For this is what they desire: to accomplish this
they have recourse to all kinds of schemes: they pretend themselves to be friends, while
they search as enemies, to the end that they may glut themselves with our blood, and put
us also out of the way, because we have always opposed and do still oppose their impiety,
and confute and brand their heresy.

3. Outrages of the Arians Against the Bishops.

4 For whom have they ever persecuted and taken, that they have not insulted and injured as
they pleased? Whom have they ever sought after and found, that they have not handled in
such a manner, that either he has died a miserable death, or has been ill-treated in every
way? Whatever the magistrates appear to do, it is their work; and the others are merely
the tools of their will and wickedness. In consequence, where is there a place that has
not some memorial of their malice? Who has ever opposed them, without their conspiring
against him, inventing pretexts for his ruin after the manner of Jezebel? Where is there a
Church that is not at this moment lamenting the success of their plots against her
Bishops? Antioch is mourning for the orthodox Confessor Eustathius ; laneae for the most
admirable Euphration Paltus and Antaradus for Kymatius and Carterius; Adrianople for that
lover of Christ, Eutropius, and his successor Lucius, who was often loaded with chains by
their means, and so perished; Ancyra mourns for Marcellus Berthoea for Cyrus , Gaza for
Asclepas. Of all these, after inflicting many outrages, they by their intrigues procured
the banishment; but for Theodulus and Olympius, Bishops of Thrace, and for us and our
Presbyters, they caused diligent search to be made, to the intent that if we were
discovered we should suffer capital punishment: and probably we should have so perished,
had we not fled at that very time contrary to their intentions. For letters to that effect
were delivered to the Proconsul Donatus against Olympius and his fellows, and to
Philagrius against me. And having raised a persecution against Paul, Bishop of
Constantinople, as soon as they found him, they caused him to be openly strangled at a
place called Cucusus in Cappadocia, employing as their executioner for the purpose Philip,
who was Prefect. He was a patron of their heresy, and the tool of their wicked designs.

4. Proceedings After the Council of Milan.

5 Are they then satisfied with all this, and content to be quiet for the future? By no
means; they have not given over yet, but like the horseleach in the Proverbs, they revel
more and more in their wickedness, and fix themselves upon the larger dioceses. Who can
adequately describe the enormities they have already perpetrated? who is able to recount
all the deeds that they have done? Even very lately, while the Churches were at peace, and
the people worshipping in their congregations, Liberius, Bishop of Rome, Paulinus ,
Metropolitan of Gaul, Dionysius , Metropolitan of Italy, Lucifer , Metropolitan of the
Sardinian islands, and Eusebius of Italy, all of them good Bishops and preachers of the
truth, were seized and banished , on no pretence whatever, except that they would not
unite themselves to the Arian heresy, nor subscribe to the false accusations and calumnies
which they had invented against me.

5. In Praise of Hosius.

6 Of the great Hosius , who answers to his name, that confessor of a happy old age, it is
superfluous for me to speak, for I suppose it is known unto all men that they caused him
also to be banished; for he is not an obscure person, but of all men the most illustrious,
and more than this. When was there a Council held, in which he did not take the lead , and
by right counsel convince every one? Where is there a Church that does not possess some
glorious monuments of his patronage? Who has ever come to him in sorrow, and has not gone
away rejoicing? What needy person ever asked his aid, and did not obtain what he desired?
And yet even on this man they made their assault, because knowing the calumnies which they
invent in behalf of their iniquity, he would not subscribe to their designs against us.
And if afterwards, upon the repeated stripes above measure that were inflicted upon him,
and the conspiracies that were formed against his kinsfolk, he yielded to them for a time
, as being old and infirm in body, yet at least their wickedness is shewn even in this
circumstance; so zealously did they endeavour by all means to prove that they were not
truly Christians.

6. Outrages of George Upon the Alexandrians.

7 After this they again fastened themselves upon Alexandria, seeking anew to put us to
death: and their proceedings were now worse than before. For on a sudden the Church was
surrounded by soldiers, and sounds of war took the place of prayers. Then George of
Cappadocia who was sent by them, having arrived during the season of Lent , brought an
increase of evils which they had taught him. For after Easter week, Virgins were thrown
into prison; Bishops were led away in chains by soldiers; houses of orphans and widows
were plundered, and their loaves taken away; attacks were made upon houses, and Christians
thrust forth in the night, and their dwellings sealed up: brothers of clergymen were in
danger of their lives on account of their brethren. These outrages were sufficiently
dreadful, but more dreadful than these followed. For on the week that succeeded the Holy
Pentecost [May 11], when the people after their fast had gone out to the cemetery to pray,
because that all refused communion with George, that abandoned person, on learning this,
stirred up against them the commander Sebastian, a Manichee; who straightway with a
multitude of soldiers with arms, drawn swords, bows, and spears, proceeded to attack the
people, though it was the Lord's days : and finding a few praying (for the greater part
had already retired on account of the lateness of the hour), he committed such outrages as
became a disciple of these men. Having lighted a pile, he placed certain virgins near the
fire, and endeavoured to force them to say that they were of the Arian faith: and when he
saw that they were getting the mastery, and cared not for the fire, he immediately
stripped them naked, and beat them in the face in such a manner, that for some time they
could hardly be recognised.

7. Outrages of George.

8 And having seized upon forty men, he beat them after a new fashion. Cutting some sticks
fresh from the palm tree, with the thorns still upon them , he scourged them on the back
so severely, that some of them were for a long time under surgical treatment on account of
the thorns which had broken off in their flesh, and others unable to bear up under their
sufferings died. All those whom they had taken, and the virgin, they sent away together
into banishment to the great Oasis. And the bodies of those who had perished they would
not at first suffer to be given up to their friends, but concealed them in any way they
pleased, and cast them out without burial , in order that they might not appear to have
any knowledge of these creel proceedings. But herein their deluded minds greatly misled
them. For the relatives of the dead, both rejoicing at the confession, and grieving for
the bodies of their friends, published abroad so much the more this proof of their impiety
and cruelty. Moreover they immediately banished out of Egypt and Libya the following
Bishops , Ammonius, Muius , Gaius, Philo , Hermes, Plenius, Psenosiris, Nilammon, Agathus,
Anagamphus, Marcus, Ammonius, another Marcus, Dracontius , Adelphius , Athenodorus, and
the Presbyters, Hierax , and Dioscorus; whom they drove forth under such cruel treatment,
that some of them died on the way, and others in the place of their banishment. They
caused also more than thirty Bishops to take to flight; for their desire was, after the
example of Ahab, if it were possible, utterly to root out the truth. Such are the
enormities of which these impious men have been guilty.

8. If It is Wrong to Flee, It is Worse to Persecute.

9 But although they have done all this, yet they are not ashamed of the evils they have
already contrived against me, but proceed now to accuse me, because I have been able to
escape their murderous hands. Nay, they bitterly bewail themselves, that they have not
effectually put me out of the way; and so they pretend to reproach me with cowardice, not
perceiving that by thus murmuring against me, they rather turn the blame upon themselves.
For if it be a bad thing to flee, it is much worse to persecute; for the one party hides
himself to escape death, the other persecutes with a desire to kill; and it is written in
the Scriptures that we ought to flee; but he that seeks to destroy transgresses the law,
nay, and is himself the occasion of the other's flight. If then they reproach me with my
flight, let them be more ashamed of their own persecution . Let them cease to conspire,
and they who flee will forthwith cease to do so. But they, instead of giving over their
wickedness, are employing every means to obtain possession of my person, not perceiving
that the flight of those who are persecuted is a strong argument against those who
persecute. For no man flees from the gentle and the humane, but from the cruel and the
evil-minded.

10 `Every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt ,' fled from Saul, and
took refuge with David. But this is the reason why these men desire to cut off those who
are in concealment, that there may be no evidence forthcoming of their wickedness. But
herein their minds seem to be blinded with their usual error. For the more the flight of
their enemies becomes known, so much the more notorious will be the destruction or the
banishment which their treachery has brought upon them ; so that whether they kill them
outright, their death will be the more loudly noised abroad against them, or whether they
drive them into banishment, they will but be sending forth everywhere monuments of their
own iniquity.

9. The Accusation Shews the Mind of the Accusers.

11 Now if they had been of sound mind, they would have seen that they were in this strait,
and that they were falling foul of their own arguments. But since they have lost all
judgment, they are still led on to persecute, and seek to destroy, and yet perceive not
their own impiety. It may be they even venture to accuse Providence itself (for nothing is
beyond the reach of their presumption), that it does not deliver up to them those whom
they desire; certain as it is, according to the saying of our Saviour, that not even a
sparrow can fall into the snare without our Father which is in heaven . But when these
accursed ones obtain possession of any one, they immediately forget not only all other,
but even themselves; and raising their brow in very haughtiness, they neither acknowledge
times and seasons, nor respect human nature in those whom they injure. Like the tyrant of
Babylon , they attack more furiously; they shew pity to none, but mercilessly `upon the
ancient,' as it is written, `they very heavily lay the yoke,' and `they add to the grief
of them that are wounded .' Had they not acted in this manner; had they not driven into
banishment those who spoke in my defence against their calumnies, their representations
might have appeared to some persons sufficiently plausible.

12 But since they have conspired against so many other Bishops of high character, and have
spared neither the great confessor Hosius, nor the Bishop of Rome, nor so many others from
the Spains and the Gauls, and Egypt, and Libya, and the other countries, but have
committed such cruel outrages against all who have in any way opposed them in my behalf;
is it not plain that their designs have been directed rather against me than against any
other, and that their desire is miserably to destroy me as they have done others? To
accomplish this they vigilantly watch for an opportunity, and think themselves injured,
when they see those safe, whom they wished not to live.

10. Their Real Grievance is Not that Athanasius is a Coward, But that He is Free.

13 Who then does not perceive their craftiness? Is it not very evident to every one that
they do not reproach me with cowardice from regard to virtue, but that being athirst for
blood, they employ these their base devices as nets, thinking thereby to catch those whom
they seek to destroy? That such is their character is shewn by their actions, which have
convicted them of possessing dispositions more savage than wild beasts, and more cruel
than Babylonians. But although the proof against them is sufficiently clear from all this,
yet since they still dissemble with soft words after the manner of their `father the devil
,' and pretend to charge me with cowardice, while they are themselves more cowardly than
hares; let us consider what is written in the Sacred Scriptures respecting such cases as
this. For thus they will be shewn to fight against the Scriptures no less than against me,
while they detract from the virtues of the Saints.

14 For if they reproach men for hiding themselves from those who seek to destroy them, and
accuse those who flee from their persecutors, what will they do when they see Jacob
fleeing from his brother Esau, and Moses withdrawing into Midian for fear of Pharaoh? What
excuse will they make for David, after all this idle talk, for fleeing from his house on
account of Saul, when he sent to kill him, and for hiding himself in the cave, and for
changing his appearance, until he withdrew from Abimelech , and escaped his designs
against him? What will they say, they who are ready to say anything, when they see the
great Elijah, after calling upon God and raising the dead, hiding himself for fear of
Ahab, and fleeing from the threats of Jezebel? At which time also the sons of the
prophets, when they were sought after, hid themselves with the assistance of Obadiah, and
lay concealed in caves .

11. Examples of Scripture Saints in Defence of Flight.

15 Perhaps they have not read these histories; as being out of date; yet have they no
recollection of what is written in the Gospel? For the disciples also withdrew and hid
themselves for fear of the Jews; and Paul, when he was sought after by the governor at
Damascus, was let down from the wall in a basket, and so escaped his hands. As the
Scripture then relates these things of the Saints, what excuse will they be able to invent
for their wickedness? To reproach them with cowardice would be an act of madness, and to
accuse them of acting contrary to the will of God, would be to shew themselves entirely
ignorant of the Scriptures. For there was a command under the law that cities of refuge
should be appointed, in order that they who were sought after to be put to death, might at
least have some means of saving themselves. And when He Who spake unto Moses, the Word of
the Father, appeared in the end of the world, He also gave this commandment, saying, `But
when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another:' and shortly after He says,
`When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the
prophet, stand in the holy place (whoso readeth, let him understand); then let them which
be in Judaea flee into the mountains: let him which is on the housetop not come down to
take any thing out of his house: neither let him which is in the field return back to take
his clothes .' Knowing these things, the Saints regulated their conduct accordingly. For
what our Lord has now commanded, the same also He spoke by His Saints before His coming in
the flesh: and this is the rule which is given unto men to lead them to perfection-what
God commands, that to do.

12. The Lord an Example of Timely Flight.

16 Wherefore also the Word Himself, being made man for our sakes, condescended to hide
Himself when He was sought after, as we do: and also when He was persecuted, to flee and
avoid the designs of His enemies. For it became Him, as by hunger and thirst and
suffering, so also by hiding Himself and fleeing, to shew that He had taken our flesh, and
was made man. Thus at the very first, as soon as He became man, when He was a little
child, He Himself by His Angel commanded Joseph, `Arise, and take the young Child and His
Mother, and flee into Egypt; for Herod will seek the young Child's life .' And when Herod
was dead, we find Him withdrawing to Nazareth by reason of Archelaus his son. And when
afterwards He was shewing Himself to be God, and made whole the withered hand, the
Pharisees went out, and held a council against Him, how they might destroy Him; but when
Jesus knew it, He withdrew Himself from thence . So also when He raised Lazarus from the
dead, `from that day forth,' says the Scripture, `they took counsel for to put Him to
death. Jesus therefore walked no more openly among the Jews; but went thence into the
country near to the wilderness .' Again, when our Saviour said, `Before Abraham was, I
am,' `the Jews took up stones to cast at Him; but Jesus hid Himself, and went out of the
temple .' And `going through the midst of them, He went His way,' and `so passed by .'

13. Example of Our Lord.

17 When they see these things, or rather even hear of them, for see they do not, will they
not desire, as it is written, to become `fuel of fire ,' because their counsels and their
words are contrary to what the Lord both did and taught? Also when John was martyred, and
his disciples buried his body, `when Jesus heard of it, He departed thence by ship into a
desert place apart .' Thus the Lord acted, and thus He taught. Would that these men were
even now ashamed of their conduct, and confined their rashness to man, nor proceeded to
such extreme madness as even to charge our Saviour with cowardice! for it is against Him
that they now utter their blasphemies. But no one will endure such madness; nay it will be
seen that they do not understand the Gospels. The cause must be a reasonable and just one,
which the Evangelists represent as weighing with our Saviour to withdraw and to flee; and
we ought therefore to assign the same for the conduct of all the Saints. (For whatever is
written concerning our Saviour in His human nature, ought to be considered as applying to
the whole race of mankind ; because He took our body, and exhibited in Himself human
infirmity.) Now of this cause John has written thus, `They sought to take Him: but no man
laid hands on Him, because His hour was not yet come .' And before it came, He Himself
said to His Mother, `Mine hour is not yet come :' and to them who were called His
brethren, `My time is not yet come .' And again, when His time was come, He said to the
disciples, `Sleep on now, and take your rest: for behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son
of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners .'

14. An Hour and a Time for All Men.

18 Now in so far as He was God and the Word of the Father, He had no time; for He is
Himself the Creator of times . But being made man, He shews by speaking in this manner
that there is a time allotted to every man; and that not by chance, as some of the
Gentiles imagine in their fables, but a time which He, the Creator, has appointed to every
one according to the will of the Father. This is written in the Scriptures, and is
manifest to all men. For although it be hidden and unknown to all, what period of time is
allotted to each, and how it is allotted; yet every one knows this, that as there is a
time for spring and for summer, and for autumn and for winter, so, as it is written ,
there is a time to die, and a time to live. And so the time of the generation which lived
in the days of Noah was cut short, and their years were contracted, because the time of
all things was at hand. But to Hezekiah were added fifteen years. And as God promises to
them that serve Him truly, `I will fulfil the number of thy days ,' Abraham dies `full of
days,' and David besought God, saying, `Take me not away in the midst of my days .' And
Eliphaz, one of the friends of Job, being assured of this truth, said, `Thou shall come to
thy grave like ripe corn, gathered in due time, and like as, a shock of corn cometh in in
his season .' And Solomon confirming his words, says, `The souls of the unrighteous are
taken away untimely .' And therefore he exhorts in the book of Ecclesiastes, saying, `Be
not overmuch wicked, neither be thou hard: why shouldest thou die before thy time ?'

15. The Lord's Hour and Time.

19 Now as these things are written in the Scriptures, the case is clear, that the saints
know that a certain time is measured to every man, but that no one knows the end of that
time is plainly intimated by the words of David, `Declare unto me the shortness of my days
.' What he did not know, that he desired to be informed of. Accordingly the rich man also,
while he thought that he had yet a long time to live, heard the words, `Thou fool, this
night they are requiring thy soul: then whose shall those things be which thou hast
provided ?' And the Preacher speaks confidently in the Holy Spirit, and says, `Man also
knoweth not his time .' Wherefore the Patriarch Isaac said to his son Esau, `Behold, I am
old, and I know not the day of my death .' Our Lord therefore, although as God, and the
Word of the Father, He both knew the time measured out by Him to all, and was conscious of
the time for suffering, which He Himself had appointed also to His own body; yet since He
was made man for our sakes, He hid Himself when He was sought after before that time came,
as we do; when He was persecuted, He fled;

20 and avoiding the designs of His enemies He passed by, and `so went through the midst of
them .' But when He had brought on that time which He Himself had appointed, at which He
desired to suffer in the body for all men, He announces it to the Father, saying, `Father,
the hour is come; glorify Thy Son .' And then He no longer hid Himself from those who
sought Him, but stood willing to be taken by them; for the Scripture says, He said to them
that came unto Him, `Whom seek ye ?' and when they answered, `Jesus of Nazareth,' He saith
unto them, `I am He whom ye seek.' And this He did even more than once; and so they
straightway led Him away to Pilate. He neither suffered Himself to be taken before the
time came, nor did He hide Himself when it was come; but gave Himself up to them that
conspired against Him, that He might shew to all men that the life and death of man depend
upon the divine sentence; and that without our Father which is in heaven, neither a hair
of man's head can become white or black, nor a sparrow ever fall into the snare .

16. The Lord's Example Followed by the Saints.

21 Our Lord therefore, as I said before, thus offered Himself for all; and the Saints
having received this example from their Saviour (for all of them before His coming, nay
always, were under His teaching), in their conflicts with their persecutors acted lawfully
in flying, and hiding themselves when they were sought after. And being ignorant, as men,
of the end of the time which Providence had appointed unto them, they were unwilling at
once to deliver themselves up into the power of those who conspired against them. But
knowing on the other hand what is written, that `the portions' of man `are in God's hand
,' and that `the Lord killeth ,' and the Lord `maketh alive,' they the rather endured unto
the end, `wandering about ,' as the Apostle has said, `in sheepskins, and goatskins, being
destitute, tormented, wandering in deserts,' and hiding themselves `in dens and caves of
the earth;' until either the appointed time of death arrived, or God who had appointed
their time spake unto them, and stayed the designs of their enemies, or else delivered up
the persecuted to their persecutors, according as it seemed to Him to be good. This we may
well learn respecting all men from David: for when Joab instigated him to slay Saul, he
said, `As the Lord liveth, the Lord shall smite him; or his day shall come to die; or he
shall descend into battle, and be delivered to the enemies; the Lord forbid that I should
stretch forth my hand against the Lord's anointed .'

17. A Time to Flee and a Time to Stay.

22 And if ever in their flight they came unto those that sought after them, they did not
do so without reason: but when the Spirit spoke unto them, then as righteous men they went
and met their enemies; by which they also shewed their obedience and zeal towards God.
Such was the conduct of Elijah, when, being commanded by the Spirit, he shewed himself
unto Ahab ; and of Micaiah the prophet when he came to the same Ahab; and of the prophet
who cried against the altar in Samaria, and rebuked Rehoboam ; and of Paul when he
appealed unto Caesar. It was not certainly through cowardice that they fled: God forbid.
The flight to which they submitted was rather a conflict and war against death. For with
wise caution they guarded against these two things; either that they should offer
themselves up without reason (for this would have been to kill themselves, and to become
guilty of death, and to transgress the saying of the Lord, `What God hath joined let not
man put asunder '), or that they should willingly subject themselves to the reproach of
negligence, as if they were unmoved by the tribulations which they met with in their
flight, and which brought with them sufferings greater and more terrible than death. For
he that dies, ceases to suffer; but he that flies, while he expects daily the assaults of
his enemies, esteems death lighter.

23 They therefore whose course was consummated in their flight did not perish
dishonourably, but attained as well as others the glory of martyrdom. Therefore it is that
Job was accounted a man of mighty fortitude, because he endured to live under so many and
such severe sufferings, of which he would have had no sense, had he come to his end.
Wherefore the blessed Fathers thus regulated their conduct also; they shewed no cowardice
in fleeing from the persecutor, but rather manifested their fortitude of soul in shutting
themselves up in close and dark places, and living a hard life. Yet did they not desire to
avoid the time of death when it arrived; for their concern was neither to shrink from it
when it came, nor to forestall the sentence determined by Providence, nor to resist His
dispensation, for which they knew themselves to be preserved; lest by acting hastily, they
should become to themselves the cause of terror: for thus it is written, `He that is
hasty, with his lips, shall bring terror upon himself .'

18. The Saints Who Fled Were No Cowards.

24 Of a truth no one can possibly doubt that they were well furnished with the virtue of
fortitude. For the Patriarch Jacob who had before fled from Esau, feared not death when it
came, but at that very time blessed the Patriarchs, each according to his deserts. And the
great Moses, who previously had hid himself from Pharaoh, and had withdrawn into Midian
for fear of him, when he received the commandment, `Return into Egypt ,' feared not to do
so. And again, when he was bidden to go up into the mountain Abarim and die, he delayed
not through cowardice, but even joyfully proceeded thither. And David, who had before fled
from Saul, feared not to risk his life in war in defence of his people; but having the
choice of death or of flight set before him, when he might have fled and lived, he wisely
preferred death. And the great Elijah, who had at a former time hid himself from Jezebel,
shewed no cowardice when he was commanded by the Spirit to meet Ahab, and to reprove
Ahaziah. And Peter, who had hid himself for fear of the Jews, and the Apostle Paul who was
let down in a basket, and fled, when they were told, `Ye must bear witness at Rome ,'
deferred not the journey; yea, rather, they departed rejoicing ; the one as hastening to
meet his friends, received his death with exultation; and the other shrunk not from the
time when it came, but gloried in it, saying, `For I am now ready to be offered, and the
time of my departure is at hand .'

19. The Saints Courageous in Their Flight, and Divinely Favoured.

25 These things both prove that their previous flight was not the effect of cowardice; and
testify that their after conduct also was of no ordinary character: and they loudly
proclaim that they possessed in a high degree the virtue of fortitude. For neither did
they withdraw themselves on account of a slothful timidity, on the contrary, they were at
such times under the practice of a severer discipline than at others; nor were they
condemned for their flight, or charged with cowardice, by such as are now so fond of
criminating others. Nay they were blessed through that declaration of our Lord, `Blessed
are they which are persecuted for righteousness sakes. ' Nor yet were these their
sufferings without profit to themselves; for having tried them as `gold in the furnace,'
as Wisdom has said, God found them worthy of Himself . And then they shone the more `like
sparks,' being saved from them that persecuted them, and delivered from the designs of
their enemies, and preserved to the end that they might teach the people; so that their
flight and escape from the rage of them that sought after them, was according to the
dispensation of the Lord. And so they became dear in the sight of God, and had the most
glorious testimony to their fortitude.

20. Same Subject Continued.

26 Thus, for example, the Patriarch Jacob was favoured in his flight with many, even
divine visions, and remaining quiet himself, he had the Lord on his side, rebuking Laban,
and hindering the designs of Esau; and afterwards he became the Father of Judah, of whom
sprang the Lord according to the flesh; and he dispensed the blessings to the Patriarchs.
And when Moses the beloved of God was in exile, then it was that he saw that great sight,
and being preserved from his persecutors, was sent as a prophet into Egypt, and being made
the minister of those mighty wonders and of the Law, he led that great people in the
wilderness. And David when he was persecuted wrote the Psalm, `My heart uttered a good
word ;' and, `Our God shall come even visibly, and shall not keep silence .' And again he
speaks more confidently, saying, `Mine eye hath seen his desire upon mine enemies ;' and
again, `In God have I put my trust; I will not be afraid what man can do unto me .' And
when he fled and escaped from the face of Saul `to the cave,' he said, `He hath sent from
heaven and hath saved me. He hath given them to reproach that would tread me under their
feet.

27 God hath sent His mercy and truth, and hath delivered my soul from the midst of lions
.' Thus he too was saved according to the dispensation of God, and afterwards became king,
and received the promise, that from his seed our Lord should issue. And the great Elijah,
when he withdrew to mount Carmel, called upon God, and destroyed at once more than four
hundred prophets of Baal; and when there were sent to take him two captains of fifty with
their hundred men, he said, `Let fire come down from heaven ,' and thus rebuked them. And
he too was preserved, so that he anointed Elisha in his own stead, and became a pattern of
discipline for the sons of the prophets. And the blessed Paul, after writing these words,
`what persecutions I endured; but out of them all the Lord delivered me, and will deliver
;' could speak more confidently and say, `But in all these things we are more than
conquerors, for nothing shall separate us from the love of Christ .' For then it was that
he was caught up to the third heaven, and admitted into paradise, where he heard
`unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter .' And for this end was he
then preserved, that `from Jerusalem even unto Illyricum' he might `fully preach the
Gospel .'

21. The Saints Fled for Our Sakes.

28 The flight of the saints therefore was neither blameable nor unprofitable. If they had
not avoided their persecutors, how would it have come to pass that the Lord should spring
from the seed of David? Or who would have preached the glad tidings of the word of truth?
It was for this that the persecutors sought after the saints, that there might be no one
to teach, as the Jews charged the Apostles; but for this cause they endured all things,
that the Gospel might be preached. Behold, therefore, in that they were thus engaged in
conflict with their enemies, they passed not the time of their flight unprofitably, nor
while they were persecuted, did they forget the welfare of others: but as being ministers
of the good word, they grudged not to communicate it to all men; so that even while they
fled, they preached the Gospel, and gave warning of the wickedness of those who conspired
against them, and confirmed the faithful by their exhortations.

29 Thus the blessed Paul, having found it so by experience, declared beforehand, `As many
as will live godly in Christ, shall suffer persecution .' And so he straightway prepared
them that fled for the trial, saying, `Let us run with patience the race that is set
before us ;' for although there be continual tribulations, `yet tribulation worketh
patience, and patience experience, and experience hope, and hope maketh not ashamed .' And
the Prophet Isaiah when such-like affliction was expected, exhorted and cried aloud,
`Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors; hide thyself as it
were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast .' And so also the Preacher,
who knew the conspiracies against the righteous, and said, `If thou seest the oppression
of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at
the matter: for He that is higher than the highest regardeth, and there be higher than
they:

30 moreover there is the profit of the earth .' He had his own father David for an
example, who had himself experienced the sufferings of persecution, and who supports them
that suffer by the words, `Be of good courage, and He shall strengthen your heart, all ye
that put your trust in the Lord ;' for them that so endure, not man, but the Lord Himself
(he says), `shall help them, and deliver them, because they put their trust in Him:' for I
also `waited patiently for the Lord, and He inclined unto me, and heard my calling; He
brought me up also out of the lowest pit, and out of the mire and clay .' Thus is shewn
how profitable to the people and productive of good is the flight of the Saints, howsoever
the Arians may think otherwise.

22. Same Subject Concluded.

31 Thus the Saints, as I said before, were abundantly preserved in their flight by the
Providence of God, as physicians for the sake of them that had need. And to all men
generally, even to us, is this law given, to flee when persecuted, and to hide when sought
after, and not rashly tempt the Lord, but wait, as I said above, until the appointed time
of death arrive, or the Judge determine something concerning them, according as it shall
seem to Him to be good: that men should be ready, that, when the time calls, or when they
are taken, they may contend for the truth even unto death. This rule the blessed Martyrs
observed in their several persecutions. When persecuted they fled, while concealing
themselves they shewed fortitude, and when discovered they submitted to martyrdom. And if
some of them came and presented themselves to their persecutors , they did not do so
without reason; for immediately in that case they were martyred, and thus made it evident
to all that their zeal, and this offering up of themselves to their enemies, were from the
Spirit.

23. Persecution is from the Devil.

32 Seeing therefore that such are the commands of our Saviour, and that such is the
conduct of the Saints, let these persons, to whom one cannot give a name suitable to their
character,-let them, I say, tell us, from whom they learnt to persecute? They cannot say,
from the Saints . No, but from the Devil (that is the only answer which is left to
them);-from him who says, `I will persue, I will overtake .' Our Lord commanded to flee,
and the saints fled: but persecution is a device of the Devil, and one which he desires to
exercise against all. Let them say then, to which we ought to submit ourselves; to the
words of the Lord, or to their fabrications? Whose conduct ought we to imitate, that of
the Saints, or that of those whose example these men have adopted? But since it is likely
they cannot determine this question (for, as Esaias said, their minds and their
consciences are blinded, and they think `bitter to be sweet,' and `light darkness ') let
some one come forth from among us Christians, and put them to rebuke, and cry with a loud
voice, `It is better to trust in the Lord, than to attend to the foolish sayings of these
men; for the "words" of the Lord have "eternal life ," but the things which these utter
are full of iniquity and blood.'

24. Irruption of Syrianus.

33 This were sufficient to put a stop to the madness of these impious men, and to prove
that their desire is for nothing else, but only through a love of contention to utter
revilings and insults. But forasmuch as having once dared to fight against Christ, they
have now become officious, let them enquire and learn into the manner of my withdrawal
from their own friends. For the Arians were mixed with the soldiers in order to exasperate
them against me, and, as they were unacquainted with my person, to point me out to them.
And although they are destitute of all feelings of compassion, yet when they hear the
circumstances they will surely be quiet for very shame. It was now night , and some of the
people were keeping a vigil preparatory to a communion on the morrow, when the General
Syrianus suddenly came upon us with more than five thousand soldiers, having arms and
drawn swords, bows, spears, and clubs, as I have related above. With these he surrounded
the Church, stationing his soldiers near at hand, in order that no one might be able to
leave the Church and pass by them. Now I considered that it would be unreasonable in me to
desert the people during such a disturbance, and not to endanger myself in their behalf;
therefore I sat down upon my throne, and desired the Deacon to read a Psalm, and the
people to answer, `For His mercy endureth for ever ,' and then all to withdraw and depart
home.

34 But the General having now made a forcible entry, and the soldiers having surrounded
the sanctuary for the purpose of apprehending us, the Clergy and those of the laity, who
were still there, cried out, and demanded that we too should withdraw. But I refused,
declaring that I would not do so, until they had retired one and all. Accordingly I stood
up, and having bidden prayer, I then made my request of them, that all should depart
before me, saying that it was better that my salty should be endangered, than that any of
them should receive hurt. So when the greater part had gone forth, and the rest were
following, the monks who were there with us and certain of the Clergy came up and dragged
us away. And thus (Truth is my witness), while some of the soldiers stood about the
sanctuary, and others were going round the Church, we passed through, under the Lord's
guidance, and with His protection withdrew without observation, greatly glorifying God
that we had not betrayed the people, but had first sent them away, and then had been able
to save ourselves, and to escape the hands of them which sought after us.

25. Athanasius's Wonderful Escape.

35 Now when Providence had delivered us in such an extraordinary manner, who can justly
lay any blame upon me, because we did not give ourselves up into the hands of them, that
sought after us, nor return and present ourselves before them? This would have been
plainly to shew ingratitude to the Lord, and to act against His commandment, and in
contradiction to the practice of the Saints. He who censures me in this matter must
presume also to blame the great Apostle Peter, because though he was shut up and guarded
by soldiers, he followed the angel that summoned him, and when he had gone forth from the
prison and escaped in safety, he did not return and surrender himself, although he heard
what Herod had done. Let the Arian in his madness censure the Apostle Paul, because when
he was let down from the wall and had escaped in safety, he did not change his mind, and
return and give himself up; or Moses, because he returned not out of Midian into Egypt,
that he might be taken of them that sought after him; or David, because when he was
concealed in the cave, he did not discover himself to Saul. As also the sons of the
prophets remained in their caves, and did not surrender themselves to Ahab. This would
have been to act contrary to the commandment, since the Scripture says, `Thou shalt not
tempt the Lord thy God .'

26. He Acted According to the Example of the Saints. Character of His Accusers.

36 Being careful to avoid such an offence, and instructed by these examples, I so ordered
my conduct; and I do not undervalue the favour and the help which have been shewn me of
the Lord, howsoever these in their madness may gnash their teeth against us. For since the
manner of our retreat was such as we have described, I do not think that any blame
whatever can attach to it in the minds of those who are possessed of a sound judgment:
seeing that according to holy Scripture, this pattern has been left us by the Saints for
our instruction. But there is no atrocity, it would seem. which these men neglect to
practise, nor will they leave anything undone which may shew their own wickedness and
cruelty. And indeed their lives are only in accordance with their spirit and the follies
of their doctrines; for there are no sins that one could charge them with, how heinous
soever, that they do not commit without shame. Leontius for instance being censured for
his intimacy with a certain young woman, named Eustolium, and prohibited from living with
her, mutilated himself for her sake, in order that he might be able to associate with her
freely. He did not however clear himself from suspicion, but rather on this account he was
degraded from his rank as Presbyter. [Although the heretic Constantius by violence caused
him to be named a Bishop ] Narcissus , besides being charged with many other
transgressions, was degraded three times by different Councils;

37 and now he is among them, most wicked man. And George , who was a Presbyter, was
deposed for his wickedness, and although he had nominated himself a Bishop, he was
nevertheless a second time deposed in the great Council of Sardica. And besides all this,
his dissolute life was notorious, for he is condemned even by his own friends, as making
the end of existence, and its happiness, to consist in the commission of the most
disgraceful crimes.

27. Conclusion.

38 Thus each surpasses the other in his own peculiar vices But there is a common blot that
attaches to them all, in that through their heresy they are enemies of Christ, and are no
longer called Christians , but Arians. They ought indeed to accuse each other of the sins
they are guilty of, for they are contrary to the faith of Christ; but they rather conceal
them for their own sakes. And it is no wonder, that being possessed of such a spirit, and
implicated in such vices, they persecute and seek after those who follow not the same
impious heresy as themselves; that they delight to destroy them, and are grived if they
fail of obtaining their desires, and think themselves injured, as I said before, when they
see those alive whom they wish to perish. May they continue to be injured in such sort,
that they may lose the power of inflicting injuries, and that those whom they persecute
may give thanks unto the Lord, and say in the words of the twenty-sixth Psalm, `The Lord
is my light and my salvation; whom then shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life;
of whom then shall I be afraid? When the wicked, even mine enemies and my foes, came upon
me to eat up my flesh, they stumbled and fell ;' and again the thirtieth Psalm, `Thou hast
saved my soul from adversities; thou hast not shut me up into the hands of mine enemies;
thou hast set my foot in a large room ' in Christ Jesus our Lord, through whom to the
Father in the Holy Spirit be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen.


SOURCES AND CREDITS
===================

Where each text comes from, and the licence under which it may be reused.

AGAINST THE HEATHEN English translation: an older public-domain translation as collected
in the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-Nicene, Nicene
and Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions. SermonIndex has only
divided it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the translator’s own. No Greek
or Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English version has been made.
Licence: Public domain.

ON THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD Greek text: Archibald Robertson’s edition (London, David
Nutt, 1893), digitized by the First Thousand Years of Greek project (CC BY-SA 4.0).
English (older translation): Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, vol. 4 (1892),
public domain, from the Writings-Database collection (HistoricalChristianFaith); we
matched its sentences to the Greek rows, and the translator’s chapter titles are kept.
English (older translation): Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, vol. 4 (1892),
public domain, from the Writings-Database collection (HistoricalChristianFaith); we
matched its sentences to the Greek rows, and the translator’s chapter titles are kept.
English (older translation): Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series 2, vol. 4 (1892),
public domain, from the Writings-Database collection (HistoricalChristianFaith); we
matched its sentences to the Greek rows, and the translator’s chapter titles are kept.
Modern English: prepared for SermonIndex with AI, based on that older English translation
and checked clause by clause against the Greek, then checked again in a second AI pass,
and released under CC BY-SA 4.0. Where the older translation departs from the Greek, our
wording follows the Greek and a translator’s note says so. Translator’s notes also explain
hard words and mark places where the author departs from Scripture. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0.

COUNCIL OF NICAEA English translation: an older public-domain translation as collected in
the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-Nicene, Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions. SermonIndex has only divided
it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the translator’s own. No Greek or
Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English version has been made. Licence:
Public domain.

DEPOSITION OF ARIUS English translation: an older public-domain translation as collected
in the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-Nicene, Nicene
and Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions. SermonIndex has only
divided it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the translator’s own. No Greek
or Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English version has been made.
Licence: Public domain.

DE DECRETIS OR DEFENCE OF THE NICENE DEFINITION English translation: an older public-
domain translation as collected in the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith),
mostly from the Ante-Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century
editions. SermonIndex has only divided it into chapters and short sections; the wording is
the translator’s own. No Greek or Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English
version has been made. Licence: Public domain.

FOUR DISCOURSES AGAINST THE ARIANS English translation: an older public-domain translation
as collected in the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-
Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions.
SermonIndex has only divided it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the
translator’s own. No Greek or Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English
version has been made. Licence: Public domain.

COUNCILS OF ARIMINUM AND SELEUCIA English translation: an older public-domain translation
as collected in the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-
Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions.
SermonIndex has only divided it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the
translator’s own. No Greek or Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English
version has been made. Licence: Public domain.

CIRCULAR LETTER English translation: an older public-domain translation as collected in
the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-Nicene, Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions. SermonIndex has only divided
it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the translator’s own. No Greek or
Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English version has been made. Licence:
Public domain.

DEFENCE AGAINST THE ARIANS English translation: an older public-domain translation as
collected in the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-
Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions.
SermonIndex has only divided it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the
translator’s own. No Greek or Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English
version has been made. Licence: Public domain.

DEFENCE BEFORE CONSTANTIUS English translation: an older public-domain translation as
collected in the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-
Nicene, Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions.
SermonIndex has only divided it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the
translator’s own. No Greek or Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English
version has been made. Licence: Public domain.

DEFENCE OF HIS FLIGHT English translation: an older public-domain translation as collected
in the Writings-Database (HistoricalChristianFaith), mostly from the Ante-Nicene, Nicene
and Post-Nicene Fathers and similar nineteenth-century editions. SermonIndex has only
divided it into chapters and short sections; the wording is the translator’s own. No Greek
or Latin text is shown beside it yet, and no modern English version has been made.
Licence: Public domain.