THE EARLY CHURCH FATHERS WRITINGS - VOLUME 33
Epiphanius of Salamis, Macarius Magnes, Asterius of Amasea and Other Writers of the Late Fourth Century
c. AD 374 – 410

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 thirty-third 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 Epiphanius of Salamis, Macarius Magnes, Asterius of Amasea and Other Writers
of the Late Fourth Century, from the period about AD 374 – 410.

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 The Ancoratus (The Well-Anchored Man)
(Epiphanius of Salamis); the other works are printed in older public-domain translations.

IN THIS VOLUME

Epiphanius was bishop of Salamis in Cyprus from about AD 367 until his death in AD 403. He
wrote the Panarion against the heresies, and the Ancoratus, or “Well-Anchored Man”, a
summary of the faith written in AD 374 for a church in Pamphylia.

The Apocriticus is a dialogue in which a Christian answers the objections of a pagan
critic of the Gospels. The critic’s objections are thought to come from Porphyry or from a
writer of his school. The author, Macarius Magnes, is otherwise unknown, and he wrote
about AD 400.

Asterius was bishop of Amasea in Pontus about AD 400. His sermons show the life of a city
and its church in his day, and they speak against luxury and against neglect of the poor.

Chromatius was bishop of Aquileia and a friend of Jerome and Rufinus. He died about AD
407. The short prologue printed here introduces his sermons on the Gospel of Matthew.

The Apocriticus of Macarius Magnes survives in one manuscript, found in the nineteenth
century, and the work is incomplete. Parts of the pagan objections are known only from the
replies.

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.


THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN)
=====================================

THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN) Epiphanius of Salamis

AD 374

Written in AD 374 at the request of the church of Syedra in Pamphylia, which had been
disturbed by heresies. Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis in Cyprus, sets out the faith of the
church on the Trinity, the incarnation, the resurrection and the Holy Spirit, and ends
with two creeds. It is a main source for the creed used at Constantinople in AD 381. An
English version exists in print; this is a fresh translation made for SermonIndex.

PREFACE

Pref. Our divine and great father Epiphanius came from Eleutheropolis in Palestine, where
he also became a father of monks. He first practiced the ascetic life by withdrawing to
Egypt. When he returned, in the twentieth year of his age, he came back to the district
around Eleutheropolis and built a monastery there. The work is called “The Well-Anchored
Man” because, like an anchor, it steadies the mind that is searching for life and
salvation. It gathers into one arrangement many parts of the faith. These are: the oneness
of being of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit; the complete coming of Christ in the
flesh; the resurrection of the dead, eternal life, and the judgment of flesh and soul
together; and, in part, a case against idols, heresies, Jews and others. It also contains
the names of the eighty heresies, and clear answers to other questions raised by the
divine Scripture. It was written for the people of Syedra in Pamphylia, who had asked for
it in the letters placed before this treatise. These things were done in the ninetieth
year [from ...], in the [consulship] of Valentinian [and] Valens, [the tenth and the sixth
year] [the numbers in the Greek are garbled].

2 A letter written from Syedra, a city of Pamphylia, by Tarsinus, Matidius and other
presbyters, to Epiphanius, bishop of Constantia in Cyprus. They ask for a statement of the
faith concerning the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and about other parts of the
same faith. 3 To the lord Epiphanius, bishop honored by God: Matidius, Tarsinus, Neon and
Numerian, presbyters of the catholic church in Syedra, send greetings in the Lord God. 4
The devil, the enemy of mankind, is accustomed to stir up trouble in many ways and to sow
his own seeds against the simpler people, those not yet brought to maturity and firmly
established in the faith of the holy Trinity. Yet, as it is written, “the firm foundation
of God stands, having this seal: the Lord knew those who are his.” 5 The heretics, ready
for anything, have set aside blasphemy against Jesus and now commit impiety against God in
another way. They “magnify their own tongue” against the Holy Spirit and “speak injustice
on high.”

6 Even so, although countless people have been stirred up, we ourselves by the grace of
the Lord have stood in the sound faith, not moved in any way from the right and healthy
teaching. Many who seemed to have been deceived have been strengthened again by the grace
of the Lord, through the letters of the blessed bishop Athanasius, worthy of remembrance,
and of your most God-fearing fellow minister Proclianus. 7 But remnants of the evil
teaching still remain among some. These need to be grafted by you, skilled farmers, into
the good olive tree, or else cut out altogether. For this reason we write to your
godliness and ask that your reverence would deign to send a letter to our church and set
out the right and sound faith in a fuller account. Then the simpler people, and those
still doubting about the faith, may be made firm through your holy letters, and the devil,
the enemy of the church, may be put to shame through your holy prayers. We pray that you
may be well for many years and remember us in your prayers to God.

8 A letter written by Palladius, a citizen of the same city of Syedra, and sent to the
same Epiphanius, bishop of Callantia [that is, Constantia] in the island of Cyprus. He too
was asking about the same matters. 9 To my master, beloved of my soul, Epiphanius, bishop
honored by God: Palladius, a citizen of Syedra, sends greetings in the Lord God. 10 Those
who sail across the great and open sea, as long as a calm breeze keeps the ship on course,
give little thought to the small lakes lying along the shores. They suppose they will
cross without any outcry. 11 But when a violent head wind falls on them, lifting great
waves high on every side and washing over the ship, then they long for a calm harbor. They
look all around at the land below them, and when they cannot anchor anywhere, they finally
make for whatever island happens to lie nearby, getting safety for themselves by any
means. When they come near it and slip in under the shelter of its jutting headlands, they
are at last able, with difficulty, to escape the evils that were swamping them.

12 And now, my lord, we ourselves are being instructed in the saving word of God. We are
eager to free ourselves from the tossing of the world and to bring our little boat into
the unshaken harbor of Christ. But we have learned that some people are raising empty and,
as it seems to me, senseless questions about the Holy Spirit. They say that he ought not
to share in the glory of the Godhead and Lordship, but should be ranked in the role of a
servant and messenger. Some go further and hold even lower and meaner opinions about him.
13 So we have been caught, as it were, in a violent and unsteady storm. We could find no
one among us able to resolve these questions and set out the sound faith for us. So we
hurried to bring the matter to your godliness, and we cry out, as we rightly may, with
this voice: “Master, save us.”

14 We therefore appeal to your sincere and upright faith, which a good reputation has gone
ahead of you to proclaim, and which trustworthy witnesses attest and declare. You have
been appointed by the Savior for this very purpose. Be so good as to receive our request
patiently. Be willing to set out in a written work, in a fuller and clearer account, the
faith of the holy Trinity, and to send it to us. Then we may be confirmed in it and obtain
what we are seeking. Those who already stand firm in it will be glad. Those who are
stumbling may, if possible, be healed. And “God will be glorified in all.” 15 A letter
written to Pamphylia, to those with the presbyter Matidius, and Tarantinus, Neon and
Numisianus of Syedra, and Palladius, a member of the city council. It concerns the faith
in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and other parts of the faith, namely the
resurrection of the dead and the incarnation of Christ. It was written in the ninetieth
year of Diocletian, in the month of July, concerning the matters they asked about in their
own letters, as these are contained in them and set out above.

16 To my lords, my most honored brothers and fellow presbyters, Matidius, Tarsinus, [name
missing], Numerianus, and all the rest who are with you; and to our dearly beloved
children Palladius and Severianus. You have pursued a good zeal, and you have chosen for
yourselves a blessed and much-desired life of orthodox faith and perfect condescension.
You fulfill what the Savior said: “If you want to be perfect, sell your possessions and
give to the poor,” and “they sold their possessions and laid them at the apostles’ feet.”
You are adding to your souls whatever is timely and unconquerable among us. Epiphanius,
the least of the bishops, and the brothers with me, send greetings in the Lord God.

CHAPTER 1

1 Dearly beloved, I would count myself blessed already, even though I am not adequate to
the virtuous way of life of those holy and earnest people who have been taken up by zeal
for God. Yet I am thought worthy to be pricked by them, so as to rouse my mind and set it
toward what is useful. 2 The humble outlook that is always in me tries to stay quietly
patient and not to stretch out any further. It looks closely at what the apostle said: “so
that I may not stretch myself beyond the measure of the rule which God has given us as a
measure.” Yet now it is compelled to come to this task. 3 From every side, votes have come
in, so to speak, from the zeal that God has put in you and from others of the same mind, I
mean those who are zealous for orthodoxy. Among them is our child Hypatius, who came to me
from the land of the Egyptians for this very purpose. These have moved me to put aside all
laziness and all hesitation. I can no longer keep silent or treat as secondary the writing
to you about the faith. You and our brothers are asking about the salvation that is ours,
from the divine and holy Scripture. You want the firm foundation of the faith concerning
the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and all the rest of the salvation in Christ. I
mean the resurrection of the dead and the coming of the only-begotten in the flesh. You
ask also about the holy covenant, old and new, and, in short, about the other things that
establish perfect salvation.

4 So I received this proposal, with requests that were not few. They came from those
around Conops, my fellow presbyter Conops, and his followers, and from others, and from
your honors, my dearly loved children. They also came through our child Hypatius, who has
come to me from Egypt for this very purpose. I saw many voices agreeing together, and I
was stung in mind and heart. I considered the matter, and it seemed good to me to act on
your written request without hesitation. I write this letter, small man that I am, not
only willingly but even unwillingly, because of the sheer weight of your request and of
those with you, and out of love for your longing.

CHAPTER 2

1 I am struck with great wonder at the plan of our Lord and God. In the abundance of his
goodness he was pleased to give his Holy Spirit to all who seek him in truth. For I did
not think, my dearly loved, that your letters and those of the people with you came about
without God. I judged that the impulse began in you from the grace of God. 2 For truly,
those who hold the right faith about the Son of God and the Holy Spirit, and who know how
to speak in harmony and agreement with the most blessed apostle Peter, “You are the
Christ, the Son of the living God,” will plainly be called blessed by the Lord himself. So
that holy man was called blessed when he heard, “Blessed are you, Simon bar Jonah.” That
means “son of Jonah,” for his father was called Jonah, and “bar” is translated “son” from
the Hebrew language.

3 For this was the life which the only-begotten Son of God [had in view] for his own
disciples when he said, “that they may have life in themselves.” And this is the life of
which he said, “that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you
sent.” 4 In saying “the only true God,” then, he led us to a single rule, so that we would
no longer be “enslaved under the elements of the world.” He did this so that there would
be no more belief in many gods among us, and the thoughts of men would no longer be
scattered into that kind of unfaithfulness, but turned to the unity of the only true God.
For Scripture says, “The first unfaithfulness is the devising of idols.” 5 And he says,
“and Jesus Christ whom you sent.” Who is Jesus Christ, if not God? And if Christ Jesus is
God, as John says of him, “The only-begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, he
has made him known,” then the Father is one God and the only true God, and the Only-
begotten is God.

6 So the Son is not foreign to God or to the oneness. Because he is Son from the Father,
for that reason he is the only true God. He is not like the falsely named gods, whom some
of the Greeks regarded as gods though they are not gods. He is the only true God because
the Only-begotten is alone from the One alone, and the Holy Spirit is alone as well. For
there is a Trinity in a oneness, and one God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER 3

1 But this word frightens those who have not been counted worthy of the Holy Spirit [text
uncertain]. For “no one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ except in the Holy Spirit.” 2 The Jews
also say the name Jesus, but they do not regard him as Lord. The Arians also say the name,
and they say “God” [text uncertain here], but they call him a made God and not a true one,
because they have not shared in the Holy Spirit. 3 For unless someone receives the Holy
Spirit, he does not call Jesus truly Lord, truly God, truly Son of God and truly eternal
King. 4 Let those who hold this evil opinion learn [that the only-begotten Son of God does
not bear witness about himself in all things] [text uncertain]. 5 For this is what he said
in the gospel: “If I bear witness about myself, my witness is nothing. There is another
who bears witness about me.”

6 And who is the other, if not the one who spoke from heaven: “This is my beloved Son, in
whom I was well pleased”? Yet the same one who says, “If I bear witness about myself, my
witness is nothing,” says again, “Even if I bear witness about myself, my witness is
true.” And again, “The very works which the Father gave me bear witness about me.” And
again, “Moses wrote about me,” and “Moses bears witness about me.” 7 First, “If I testify
about myself, my testimony is nothing.” Many people glorify themselves and testify about
themselves, so he cuts off the boasting of those who boast and of those who commend
themselves. 8 But when he says, “Even if I testify about myself, my testimony is true,” he
shows that the testimony is not that of a mere man. He is God, speaking truly [in] his own
[nature]. So the Father is true God, the Son is true God, and the Holy Spirit is true,
being “the Spirit of God” and “the Spirit of truth.” This is a Trinity counted under one
name.

9 Of the Father, the Son himself says, “that they may know you, the only true God.” A
trustworthy witness [concerning the Son] is the one who leaned back on his breast and
called him only-begotten. John did not add “true God” to “only-begotten God.” Instead it
is written of the Father that he is true God, and of the Son that he is only-begotten God.
In the reverse way, it is said of the Father that he is “light,” and of the Son that “the
true light was.”

CHAPTER 4

1 Notice the precision of the Scriptures. The Father is light, yet “true” is not added to
what is said of the Father, “light.” But of the Son it says “true light,” and no one dares
to say otherwise. 2 For who would be so mad, or rather would bring such derangement on
himself, as to dare to take on himself the suspicion of blasphemy? Who would say that the
Father is not true light, just because he did not find “true” attached to the statement? 3
For if the genuine Son, begotten from him, is true light, then beyond doubt the Father who
begot the Son is true light. He is the one who begot him without beginning and outside of
time. 4 We must not dare to say that the Father is not true light, even though “true” is
not attached. We know from ourselves, by thinking reverently, that he is true light even
if it is not written, and we do not doubt it, so that we may not perish. In the same way
it is written of the Son that the Son is God. Even if “true God” is not attached, we heap
madness on ourselves if we dare to blaspheme and refuse to call the Son true God, even
though the word is not attached.

5 For it is enough, in speaking of the one, to carry the whole bond of the Trinity. From
the Father we understand that the Son is true God and the Spirit is true. The terms of
equal weight in truth are set side by side with each of the names: to the Father, “true
God,” and to the Son, “God”; 6 and the other way round, to the Son, “the true light,” and
to the Father, “the light.” We join the two statements about deity: of the Father, “true
God,” and of the Son, “true light”; of the Father, “the light,” and of the Son, “God.”
From “light” and “God” we confess the one Godhead, and from “true God” and “true light” we
confess the one unity of power.

CHAPTER 5

1 It is the same with the Holy Spirit. [The text here is damaged.] He says, “that one is
coming, the Spirit of truth,” and again of himself, “I am the truth.” Of the Father he
says, “the Spirit of my Father who speaks in you,” and of the Spirit, “my Spirit stands in
your midst.” 2 The Spirit, working together with the Son in a way beyond words, “drives
him out into the wilderness” “to be tempted by the devil.” And the Lord himself says, “the
Spirit of the Lord, for whose sake he anointed me.” 3 The Holy Spirit speaks in the
prophets: “Thus says the Lord Almighty,” and, “the Lord who speaks in the prophets,” “who
establishes thunder and creates spirit.” The thunder is the sound people hear, and the
spirit he creates is for the working of the rains that God sends on the earth. 4 Of
created things he speaks like this: “establishing thunder and creating spirit,” for these
are created. But “declaring his Christ to people” is no longer creating, no longer
establishing, but “declaring him to people”:

5 the one truly begotten from the true, the uncreated, the unchangeable, the unaltering,
the one who always is from the one who always is, the one who [through Moses and] always
is. “The One who is,” Moses says, “has sent me.” And John says, “The one who is in the
bosom of the Father, that one has declared him.” 6 The Father is “He who is.” The Son is
“He who is,” the one “who is with the one who is,” begotten from him. He is not fused with
the Father. He did not begin to be. He is always the true Son, existing with the Father,
and the Father always begot the Son. 7 For there was never a time when the Father was not
Father. There was never a time when the Son did not exist with the Father alone. For if
there was a time when he was not Father, then he himself must have been the son of another
father, before he became Father of the only-begotten.

8 Those who think they honor the Father in this way are completely irreverent. For in God
no time, no season, no moment of time, no smallest part of an hour, no blink of an eye, no
passing thought is admitted. As far as your mind can rise 9 to grasp and believe in a Son,
it conceives a Father at the same time. For the name [text defective] is significant. If
you call him Son, by saying “Son” you understand “Father,” for it is from the Son that the
Father is understood to be Father. And when you call him Father, you indicate the Son, for
a father is always called the father of a son.

CHAPTER 6

1 6. When, then, can you dare to say that the Father was not Father, so that you may also
dare to say that the Son is not Son? [But if it is not right to add anything to the
Father] (for the divine remains always the same and needs no addition, whether of glory or
of advancement), learn not to blaspheme, you who make war on the faith, or rather who
drive yourself away from the faith. Instead, always believe in an eternal Father who truly
begot a Son, 2 the Son who always truly is with the Father who truly is. 3 He is begotten.
For a Son who is always [with him] is not fused with the Father. He is not a brother
alongside him. He is a true Son begotten from the Father, a Son by nature and not by
adoption, a Son of the same substance as the Father. He is not merely [existing alongside
him] but of the same substance. That is, he was not begotten from outside the Father, as
some ironically suppose, wanting the Son to be Son by appointment and not in truth.

4 The bond of the faith is to say “of the same substance.” For if you say “of the same
substance,” you have undone the power of Sabellius. For where “of the same substance” is
said, it indicates a single [reality, or hypostasis]. 5 But it also signifies the Father
as truly subsisting, the Son as truly subsisting, and the Holy Spirit as truly subsisting.
6 When someone says “of the same substance,” he does not mean something foreign to the
same Godhead. He means that the Son is God from God, and the Holy Spirit is God, [of the
Godhead, one Godhead], not three gods. 7 For even if we call both the Son and the Father
God, we are not speaking of two gods. For our God is one, as blessed Moses says: “The Lord
your God, the Lord is one.” 8 We do not speak of gods when we call the Father God, the Son
God, and the Holy Spirit God [text defective], and not gods. For there is no polytheism in
God. Through the three names the one Godhead of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit
[is signified].

9 Nor are there two sons, for the Son is one, the only-begotten. The Holy Spirit is the
Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God, always existing with the Father and the Son. He is not
foreign to God but is from God, proceeding from the Father and receiving from the Son. 10
But just as the only-begotten Son is beyond comprehension, so is the Spirit. He is from
God and is not foreign to the Father and the Son. Nor is he a fusion of Father and Son.
Rather, there is a Trinity that always exists, of the same substance. There is no
substance apart from the Godhead, and no other godhead apart from the substance. It is the
same Godhead, and the Son and the Holy Spirit are from that same Godhead.

CHAPTER 7

1 7. The Spirit is the Holy Spirit, and the Son is the Son. The Spirit proceeds from the
Father and receives from the Son. He “searches the depths of God.” He announces the things
of the Son in the world. He sanctifies the holy through the Trinity. He is third in the
naming, since the Trinity is [the Father,] the Son and the Holy Spirit. For he says, “Go
and baptize into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” The Spirit
is the seal upon grace and the bond of the Trinity. He is not outside the number, not
separated in the naming, not a stranger to the gift. But there is one God, one faith, one
Lord, one gift, one church, one baptism. 2 For the Trinity is always a Trinity and never
receives any addition. It is counted thus: Father and Son and Holy Spirit.

3 The Trinity is not a blending together, and nothing within it stands apart from its own
unity. In the subsistence of perfection the Father is perfect, the Son is perfect, the
Holy Spirit is perfect: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. 4 The Spirit, on the other hand, is
also ranked among the gifts: “There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit; and
there are different kinds of service, but the same Lord; and there are different kinds of
workings, but the same God, who works all things in all.” 5 Let us not fall away from the
subject before us, and let us not depart from the truth. We are not pleading God’s cause
for him. We think rightly about him so that we may not perish, and we speak without
claiming to have grasped him fully. We speak as human beings about what we have grasped. 6
For the honor due to God is boundless, and it extends ten thousand times beyond our
understanding. The Trinity neither takes on any addition of glory nor loses anything of
what is properly its own.

7 Nothing in the Trinity is created or made to come into being. The Father begets the Son.
There was never a time when the Son did not exist. Nor was there ever a time when the
Father was not called Father. He was always Father, and the Son was always Son. He is not
a brother, but a Son begotten in a way that cannot be told and named in a way that cannot
be grasped. He is always with the Father and never ceases to be. 8 So the Father is
unbegotten, uncreated, and beyond grasp. The Son is begotten, yet also uncreated and
beyond grasp. The Holy Spirit is eternal, not begotten and not created. He is not a
brother, not an uncle, not a grandfather, not an offspring. He is the Holy Spirit from the
same substance of the Father and the Son. For God is Spirit.

CHAPTER 8

1 Each of the names is single, and has no doubling. The Father is Father and has no
counterpart. He is not paired with another father, so that there would not be two gods. 2
The Son is only-begotten, true God from true God. He does not bear the name of Father, and
he is not a stranger to the Father, but is the Son of the Father. He is “only-begotten” so
that the Son’s name may be single, and “God from God” so that Father and Son may be called
one God. The Holy Spirit too is single in his name; he does not 3 bear the name of the
Son, nor the title of the Father, but is called Holy Spirit in just that way, and is not a
stranger to the Father. 4 For the only-begotten himself speaks of “the Spirit of the
Father,” and “the one who proceeds from the Father,” and “he will receive from what is
mine.” This is so that the Spirit would not be thought a stranger to the Father or to the
Son, but of the same substance and the same Godhead: the divine Spirit, “the Spirit of
truth,” the Spirit of God, the Spirit the Paraclete. He is called by a single name, has no
counterpart, and is not made equal to any other spirit. He is not called by the name of
the Son or named with the title of the Father, so that the single names would not become
shared names.

5 Nevertheless, “God” is in the Father, “God” is in the Son, and “God” is in the Holy
Spirit, since the Spirit is of God and is God. 6 For he is the Spirit of God, the Spirit
of the Father, and the Spirit of the Son. This is not by any kind of composition, as in us
soul and body are joined. Rather he is in the midst between the Father and the Son, from
the Father and the Son, third in name. 7 For he says, “Go and baptize into the name of the
Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” Now if the Father baptizes into his own
name, the name of God, and the seal is complete, sealed in us in the name of God, and if
Christ baptizes into his own name, the name of God, and the seal is complete, sealed in us
in the name of God, who will dare to wage war against his own soul by calling the Spirit a
stranger to the Godhead?

8 For if we are sealed into the name of the Father, into the name of the Son, and into the
name of the Holy Spirit, there is one seal of the Trinity. So there is one power of the
Godhead in the Trinity. But if the one is God, and the others are created things and not
God, on what ground are the two joined to the one in the seal of perfection? Were we then
sealed into a royal name, the one of the Father, while the others are not royal, so that
we are still enslaved to the elements and created things? Could the name of the Father
alone not save, so that he took to himself two other elements by creating them, as the
blasphemers suppose, in order that his Godhead might take on other powers as well and be
able to save the one sealed by him, and that the human being created by him might receive
redemption through the forgiveness of sins?

CHAPTER 9

1 Alas for such nonsense! Alas for such blasphemy! Where has another new unbelief crept
into life, or rather, as I would say, a bad belief? For a bad belief is worse than
unbelief. Unbelief, once it receives faith, will be set right. But a bad belief cannot be
corrected and is saved only with difficulty, unless the anointing comes upon it from
above. 2 The blessed Peter says to Ananias and those with him, “Why did Satan tempt you to
lie to the Holy Spirit?” And he says, “You have not lied to men, but to God.” 3 So the
Spirit, to whom those who held back part of the price lied, is God, from the Father and
the Son. Paul agrees with this word when he says, “You are a temple of God, and the Spirit
of God dwells in you.” So the Spirit is God, as I said before. 4 For this reason holy
people too will be called a temple of God, those who have the holiness of God dwelling in
themselves. The foremost of the apostles bears witness to this. He was counted worthy to
be pronounced blessed by the Lord, because the Father had revealed it to him.

5 So the Father reveals the true Son to him, and he is called blessed. And the same one
again reveals his Holy Spirit. 6 It was necessary [that . . . text missing] the first of
the apostles, the firm rock, “on which the church of the Lord is built, and the gates of
Hades will not prevail against it.” The gates of Hades are the heresies and the founders
of heresies. For in every way the faith was made firm in him, who received the key of the
heavens, who looses on earth and binds in heaven. 8 For in him are found all the subtle
questions of the faith that people are seeking. 9 This is the one who denied three times
and cursed three times before the cock crowed. Showing the greatness of his love for his
own Master, he said emphatically, “Even if all deny you, I will not deny you,” so far as
it depended on him. This is the one who wept at the voice of the cock,

10 so that he might truly confess that the arrest of the Son of God was real and not in
appearance. By weeping at his arrest, when he was handed over by the Pharisees, Peter
declared him to be a true man. This is the one who went off to Galatia [Galilee?] to fish,
11 the partner of the one who reclined on the Lord’s breast. For the one, learning from
the Son and receiving from the Son the power of knowledge, revealed it. The other was
helped by the Father, 12 laying down the foundation of the certainty of the faith. This is
the one who, after he had been called, was again fishing in the boat on the [lake] of
Tiberias. But the disciple whom Jesus loved heard the word the Savior spoke: “Children, do
you have any fish to eat?” And the Savior says, “Cast to the right side of the boat, and
you will find.” When Peter was astonished at what the word had brought about, John, whom
Jesus loved, says, “It is the Lord.” He is a man according to the flesh, truly born of
Mary and not in appearance, but God [according to]

13 his being, having come from the heavenly places, from the Father. This is the one who
heard from him, “Peter, shepherd my lambs.” He was entrusted with the flock and guides it
well in the power of his own Master. He confesses the truth about the flesh. He truly
proclaims what the Father said about the Son. He points to the Spirit and to his dignity
in deity. He gave the right hand of fellowship to Paul and Barnabas, along with James and
John, so that “by three witnesses every word may be established.”

CHAPTER 10

1 For nothing can stand without two or three witnesses. It was by these that the faith too
was confirmed in a riddle, through the law, among those who knew only the Father. They
could not go further unless they received the power of the Son, were strengthened through
the witness of the Father and the Son, and through the third witness received the Holy
Spirit and were filled. 2 This is plain from the voices of the Cherubim and Seraphim, who
cry out a third time, “Holy, holy, holy.” 3 For the praise in heaven is not completed with
two voices. Nor do those same holy, invisible, spiritual living creatures cry out a fourth
time, or give a fourth voice, or only a single one. They give three single voices: “Holy,
holy, holy.” 4 And they do not say “holy ones, holy ones.” They do not make the one into
something with many names, nor do they raise the number three to a peak. Three times they
give the cry of holiness, but they utter the word as one and in the singular, so that they
may not name a plurality of gods.

5 For God is one: the Father in the Son, the Son in the Father, with the Holy Spirit. For
this reason he is “the Holy One who rests among the holy ones.” There is a true Father,
truly subsisting; a true Son, truly subsisting; and a true Holy Spirit, truly subsisting.
These three are one Godhead, one being, one doxology, one God. 6 You have named the Son,
and in your mind you have taken in the Trinity. You have the Holy Spirit, and you have
been counted worthy of the power of the Father and of the Son of God. You have glorified
the Father, and you have pointed to the Son and the Holy Spirit. 7 But this is not by
blending them together. The Father is Father, the Son is Son, and the Holy Spirit is Holy
Spirit. Yet the Trinity is not estranged from unity and sameness. The Father is honored as
being Father, the Son is honored as being Son, and the Holy Spirit is honored as being the
true Spirit and the Spirit of God. So the Only-begotten says, “He who honors the Father
honors the Son.” For in calling the Father “Father” you point to the Son, and you honor
the Son. And, “He who honors the Son honors the Father.” For in naming the Son you honor
the Father, since you are not claiming that Christ is less than the Father.

CHAPTER 11

1 For if among us human beings such a way of thinking is absent, and we do not want our
sons to be lesser or diminished in comparison with the honor given to their fathers (for
dishonor shown to the sons is reckoned as dishonor to the fathers), how much more would
God and Father not wish his own Son to be made lesser? 2 So whoever supposes that the one
who is truly the Father’s Son falls short of the Father’s glory will rather dishonor the
[Father], giving him dishonor in place of honor, carried along by ignorance. 3 Just as the
Son reveals the Father when he says, “No one knows the Father except the Son, and no one
knows the Son except the Father,” so I dare to say that no one knows the Spirit except the
Father and the Son, from whom he proceeds and from whom he receives.

4 How do they dare to say that the Spirit is foreign to God? They are seized by madness
rather than truth. They do not learn the true voice of the trustworthy and holy apostle
Paul, to whom Peter, the foremost of the apostles, who was counted worthy to hold the key
of the kingdom, gave the right hand of fellowship; Paul, who heard from heaven, “Saul,
Saul, why are you persecuting me?” 5 He was counted worthy to hear “unspeakable words,
which it is not permitted for a man to utter.” He is the one who says, “No one knows the
things of a man except the spirit of the man that dwells in him.” He wanted to speak of
the things above by means of an example. He did not do it to liken the human example to
God, but to reveal, through the example, a part of the things above.

6 For the whole creation gathered together, angels and archangels, cherubim and seraphim
with the heavenly host, heaven and earth, things on earth, in heaven and under the earth,
lights and stars, dry land and sea, and absolutely everything in heaven and on earth,
cannot show, nor be compared by an example to, their own Master. 7 For it is by grace that
he gives the image to man, when he says, “God made man; he made him in the image of God.”
Every man has the image as a gift of grace. 8 But no one will be made like his own Master.
The one is invisible, the other visible; the one immortal, the other subject to death. The
one is the source of all wisdom and has everything complete in himself, while man, who has
the gift only in part, falls short of the most perfect things, unless God is willing to
grant, according to worth, the perfection that comes through the gift to those who receive
it.

CHAPTER 12

1 Nevertheless the same holy apostle used an example. “No one,” he says, “knows the things
of a man except the spirit of the man that dwells in him. So also no one has known the
things of God.” 2 And he did not say, “except the Spirit of God that dwells in him,” but
only “the Spirit of God,” so that no one would think of the divine as composite or put
together. 3 “Except,” he says, “the Spirit of God.” For the Spirit of God searches all
things, even the depths of God. 4 So the Spirit of God, who searches the depths of God, is
not a stranger to God. The divine Scripture rebukes us when it says, “Think about what has
been commanded you; you have no need of hidden things,” and, “Do not seek what is too high
for you, and do not examine what is deeper than you.” Should we then say the same of the
Spirit, that he searches the depths of God [more and more, and not rather in a ridiculous
way; the Greek here is unclear]?

5 Where does he search the depths of God? For what reason? Tell me, you fool. Does he do
it as a busybody? As one meddling in another’s affairs? As one who does not want what is
his own? Certainly not! 6 Rather, the saints are counted worthy to have the Holy Spirit
dwell in them. When the Holy Spirit comes to be in the saints, he gives them the grace to
search the depths of God, so that they may glorify him deeply. David confesses this too:
“Out of the depths I cried to you, Lord.” They glorify him [without limit] and not in a
small and cheap way, as the followers of the heresy of Arius do, and all those outside the
church. 7 [From the time] the law was given through Moses, the heresies that split off
after it before Christ’s coming in the flesh were eleven, and after his coming in the
flesh there were sixty more. This leaves aside those before the law: these five, and the
other four Greek heresies, which are the nine before the law. Altogether, all of them
together with their mothers number eighty.

8 Of these, the mothers are five: Barbarism, Scythianism, Hellenism, Judaism,
Samaritanism. From these, out of Hellenism come four heresies: the Pythagoreans,
Platonists, Stoics and Epicureans. 9 From the law, before Christ’s coming in the flesh,
come eleven. Seven are from the Jews: Scribes, Pharisees, Sadducees, Ossaeans, Nasaraeans,
Hemerobaptists and Herodians. Four are from the Samaritans: Gorothenes, Sebuaeans, Essenes
and Dositheans. Together that makes eleven springing up from the law, from the Jews and
the Samaritans.

CHAPTER 13

1 13. So all those before Christ’s coming in the flesh, beginning from Adam and down to
that coming, are twenty. After Christ’s coming in the flesh, down to the reign of
Valentinian, Valens and Gratian, all the heresies that falsely took the name of Christ for
themselves are sixty. They are numbered like this: 2 Menandrians [the name appears twice
in the Greek], Satornilians, Basilidians, Nicolaitans, Gnostics (who are also called
Stratiotics and Phibionites; by some Secundians, by others Socratites, by others
Zacchaeans, and by some Coddians and Borborites), Carpocratians, Cerinthians (also called
Merinthians), Nasoraeans, Valentinians [also twice in the Greek], Secundians (to whom
Epiphanes and Isidore are joined), Ptolemaeans, Marcosians, Colorbasians, Heracleonites,
Ophites, Cainites, Sethians, Archontics, Cerdonians, Marcionists, Lucianists, Apelleians,
Severians, Tatianists, Encratites, the Phrygian sect (who are also Montanists and
Tascodrugites), Pepuzians (who are also Priscillianists and Quintillianists, to whom the
Artotyrites are joined), Quartodecimans (who keep the Passover on one day of the year),
Alogi (who do not accept the Gospel and the Revelation of John), Sampsaeans (also called
Elkesaites), Theodotians, Melchizedekians, Bardesanists, Noetians, Valesians, Cathari (who
are also Novatians, and are called Montesians at Rome), Angelics, Apostolics (also called
Apotactics), Stablesians, Origenists (who are also called the shameless), the Origenists
of Adamantius, the sect of Paul of Samosata, Manichaeans (also called Acuanites),
Hieracites, Melitians (who are the schism in Egypt), Arians (also called Ariomanites), the
Audians (a schism, but not a heresy), Photinians, Marcellians, Semi-Arians,
Pneumatomachians (who blaspheme the Holy Spirit of God), Adrianists, Aetians (who are also
called Anomoeans, to whom Eunomius is joined, or rather “Anomos,” the lawless one),
Dimoerites (who do not confess that Christ’s becoming man was complete, and who are also
Apollinarians), those who say that holy Mary was joined to Joseph after she bore the
Savior (whom we have called Antidicomarianites), and those who offer a little cake in her
name (who are called Collyridians), Messalians (to whom the Martyrians from the Greeks are
joined), and Euphemites and Satanians.

CHAPTER 14

1 14. In short, I have grown weary, and I am weary, of listing the names of so many
heresies and going through their unlawful practices, and further of the two schisms, 2 I
mean the Melitians in Egypt mentioned above, who split themselves off because of the fall
of some during the persecution, and who were received by our people into their clergy
after repentance— 3 There were also the Audians in Mesopotamia, whom I mentioned earlier.
They are not strictly in heresy, though they too are a schism and do not hold a different
faith. They quarrel only as private persons over the question of “the image.” They did not
break away over the faith, and they cut themselves off for another reason: a self-chosen
zeal for righteousness, as they imagine it. They refuse to share communion with bishops
and presbyters who own gold and silver. They also keep the Passover at the same time the
Jews do. For these reasons they split themselves off and estrange themselves from the
unity of the orthodox church.

4 Those who have not received the Holy Spirit have not learned the depths of God. They
have been broken off into these heresies, and into the schisms that rise from pretexts for
quarreling. They abandoned the truth and walked down many paths, thinking now one thing,
now another. 5 The same holy apostle says this, showing us why he said it: “We have
received the Spirit of God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God. And
we speak of these things, not in words taught by wisdom, but in words taught by the Holy
Spirit, comparing spiritual things with spiritual,” and what follows. So the Spirit of God
is not foreign to God. If he were foreign to God, how could he search the depths of God? 6
But what will you say to me, you vain man, who fight against yourself, so as not to say
against the Holy Spirit of God? Why, vain man, do you wage war on the one who cannot be
conquered? Why do you fight the one who cannot be fought down? “It is hard for you to kick
against the goads.” You are making yourself stumble, not the Word. You are trapping
yourself, not the Spirit. You are estranging yourself from the grace of God, not the Son
from the Father, nor the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son.

CHAPTER 15

1 You will certainly speak with cleverness. For I have already heard of some, hard-hearted
people, who twist the truth of our God and Savior into blasphemies. They say, “He searches
the depths of God, but he does not comprehend them.” Their reason is that this phrase is
not added to the saying; the apostle said only, “He searches the depths of God,” and “he
comprehends” is not added. 2 What great folly! Was it really necessary, you God-struck
man, after saying “searches” to say “comprehends”? By your dullness, would the matter be
found lame if this word were not added? 3 But now you are left with no excuse. For
Scripture gathers the truth from every side for the devout man. It is written of almighty
God that “God tests the kidneys and searches the inner chambers of the belly.” If he tests
the kidneys, does he not know what he is testing?

4 Or did Scripture declare the whole of knowledge to lie in testing? And it says
“searching the inner chambers of the belly,” and again “comprehending” is not added. Then,
if “comprehends” is not added to the saying, shall I bring death on myself by weaving “he
does not comprehend” into the saying, as you reason, you fool? 5 So it is also said of the
Holy Spirit that he searches, and there was no need to add that he also comprehends. For
the saying itself shows that the knowledge of God and of the depths of God is in the Holy
Spirit. Even if it does not say “comprehends,” understand it the same way, and do not
destroy your own soul. 6 Just as we must not dare to say of the Father, “he searches but
does not comprehend” (for he himself created man with the Son and the Holy Spirit; the
Trinity is always a Trinity and never takes any addition), so too we must understand it of
the Holy Spirit.

7 For when he says, “Let us make man” (for “in the beginning God made heaven and earth”),
it signifies the voice of the Father calling to the work of creation. And in saying “let
us make,” I would say it refers not only to the Son but also to the Holy Spirit. 8 For it
says this: “By the word of the Lord the heavens were made firm, and all their power by the
breath of his mouth.” So the Word works in creation with the Father, and the Holy Spirit
works in creation with him too. 9 Then does the almighty God who made man not know the
things of man, “searching the inner chambers of the belly”? No: the Word brings in this
saying to show the fullness of God’s knowledge, so that none of us who sin may think
anything is hidden from God. For he himself knows man and the things of man.

CHAPTER 16

1 So the Father searches “the storehouses of the belly” and knows them. The Spirit
searches the depths of God and knows them. For he reveals the mysteries of God to the
saints. He teaches them to glorify God profoundly, and he shows his own people that God
cannot be comprehended. 2 So the Spirit is certainly not foreign to God. For Scripture did
not say that angels search the depths of God, or archangels either. The Son of God says:
“No one knows the day or the hour: neither the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the
Father only.” 3 But the foolish, who are not adorned with the Holy Spirit, suppose that
there is something in the Father that is not in the divinity of the Son. Yet the holy Word
of God himself says: “As the Father has life in himself, so the Son has life in himself,”
and “All that belongs to my Father is mine.”

4 What are the things of the Father, if not these? Whatever belongs to the Father as God
belongs also to the Son. If life belongs to the Father, it belongs also to the Son. If
light belongs to the Father, clearly it belongs also to the Son. If immortality belongs to
the Father, so it does to the Son. If incomprehensibility belongs to the Father, it
belongs also to the Son. 5 Everything that is the Father’s is the Son’s. So if the
Father’s things are his, then the knowledge that is in the Father is also in the Son and
in the Holy Spirit. 6 If anyone supposes that the Son does not know the day, let the
ignorant man learn, and let him stop blaspheming. I will set knowledge before him, and he
will understand. Tell me, beloved (for I call you beloved; I hate no one, except only the
devil, the works of the devil, and bad teaching that feeds on poison. For your part I pray
that you may come to the truth of God and not destroy yourself by blaspheming against
God).

7 For the words of the holy God are deep, and knowledge is given by the Holy Spirit
through his gifts. For he says, “To one is given a word of wisdom, to another a word of
teaching,” and so on, “and the same Spirit distributes to each one as he wills.” He says
this to show you the authority of the Holy Spirit as well. 8 For when the same Spirit
gives the gifts as he wills, then ask the Father to reveal the Son to you. Ask the Son to
reveal the Father to you. And ask the Father again to give you the Son, to reveal the Holy
Spirit to you, and to grant you to have him within you. Then the Holy Spirit, given to
you, will reveal to you the whole knowledge of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, so
that you may learn that in the Son there is no ignorance whatever, nor in the Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER 17

1 For even if angels fall short of the greater authority and knowledge, God forbid that
the Son of God and his Holy Spirit should fall short. The Son speaks spiritually, the holy
Word who came to us from the Father. But the natural, soul-bound men are put on trial,
because they do not understand the wisdom of the Son, or rather the word of wisdom. I ask
you, and tell me: 2 Who is greater, the Father or that day he speaks of? You will not dare
to say the Father is not greater. So if the Father is greater than the day and the hour
and everything made by him, whether already made or yet to be made, and no one knows him
except the Son, then which is greater: to know the Father, or to know that day? It is
plain that it is to know the Father. How then can the one who knows the greater things
fall short in the lesser?

3 So if he knows the Father, he certainly knows the day also, and there is nothing in
which the Son falls short in knowledge. 4 But you will say, “The Father, being greater,
has the knowledge of everything, and the Son does not at all, just as he himself says, ‘My
Father is greater than I.’” But the Son says this to honor the Father, as was fitting,
though he himself has been honored more greatly by the Father. For it was right that the
true Son should honor his own Father, in order to show that he is a true Son. 5 But in
what way do you think he is greater? In circumference, or bulk, or time, or occasion, or
rank, or deity, or immortality, or eternity? Do not think any of these. For in the deity
nothing is unequal toward the Son. Rather, because the Father is Father, and because the
Son is the true Son, he honors his own Father.

6 For [the divine nature] is not measured by bulk, so that the Father would be bulkier
than the Son. Nor is it subject to time, so that the Father would be older than the Son.
Nor is the Father set in a part of height (for he contains all things and is himself
contained by nothing), so that the Son would be thought to have gone beyond him. For the
Son sat down at the right hand of the Father. He did not say, “I went into the Father.”
This was to put an end to Sabellius and to bring Arius down from his blasphemy.

CHAPTER 18

1 So do not look into what is not to be looked into, but honor the Son, so that you may
honor the Father. And when you hear about God, “No one is good except one, God,” do not
dare to declare the Son not good on the ground that the Son honors the Father so
exceedingly. 2 For when he calls the Father good, he is not denying that he himself is
good. Rather, he reveals himself all the more by not wanting honor from men and by
referring the honor to his own Father. The purpose is that, from the goodness of the
Father, the knowledge of the goodness of the Son of God may be known, who is begotten from
the good Father, God. 3 For those who dare to say such a thing about the Son are very
feeble, even if it follows, “One is good, God.” 4 For look, in many places the divine
Scripture teaches us, calling things good. It speaks of a poor and wise child as good. It
says, “Samuel was good with God and with men.” It says, “Saul, son of Kis, of the tribe of
Benjamin, was good, taller than all Israel from the shoulder and upward.” It says, “It is
good to go to the house of drinking.” It says, “Open, Lord, heaven, your good treasure.”
It says, “A word is good above a gift.” It says, “A living dog is good above a dead lion.”
It says, “Two are good above one.” It says, “The end of words is good above the
beginning.” And it says, “If you, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your
children,” speaking about fish and bread.

5 How then do you dare to imagine that the Son is disowning his own goodness, and is not,
out of the surpassing degree of his honor, carrying the goodness over to 6 the Father? For
he saw that the one who said to him, “Good teacher,” was [speaking] with the mouth and not
with the heart. He wanted to expose him, because he was not persuaded by his lips but was
examining his heart. In the same way he says in another place, “Why do you say to me,
‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do my words?” Here too he wanted to expose him. For the man
called him a good teacher, and did not remain in his faith, in believing in his

CHAPTER 19

1 So then, he himself is the holy Word, living and subsisting, the heavenly King, the true
Son, who is always with the Father, who came forth from [the Father], the “radiance of
glory, the exact imprint of the substance,” the image of the Father in truth, enthroned
with the one who begot him, whose “kingdom will have no end,” “the judge of the living and
the dead.” 2 He is wisdom from wisdom, and fountain from fountain. For he says, “Me they
have forsaken, the fountain of living water, and they have dug for themselves broken
cisterns.” He is the ever-flowing river that “gladdens the city of God with its rushings.”
He came forth from the fountain, and from him, [as it is said], 3 “rivers will flow from
his belly.” He is the scepter of David, the root of Jesse, the flower from that root, the
lion, the king from the tribe of Judah,

4 the rational sheep, the living stone, “the angel of the great counsel.” He truly became
man and truly is God. He was not changed in his nature and did not alter his deity. He was
born in the flesh; he is the Word made flesh. 5 The Word became flesh. Between “became”
and the Word there stands the word “flesh.” He did not say “the Word, having become,” but
after saying “the Word” he sets down “flesh” with no verb, and after “flesh” he says
“became.” The purpose is that the “became” may be understood as from Mary, and that the
Word may be understood as having come down from above, from the Father. — This holy,
living Word, God from the Father, 6 He is “the angel of the great counsel,” the one who
announces the things of the Father’s counsel, “Father of the age to come.” He himself
said, “No one knows the day and the hour, not even the angels in heaven.” [For they do not
know; and the Son, he means in the sense of the mind,] except the Father alone.

7 So if the Son knows the Father, and the Father is greater even than the day and the hour
(and no one doubts this), how can the one who knows the greater be ignorant of the lesser?
For no one knows the Father except the Son, and no one knows the Son except the Father.
The Father is great because he knows the Son, and in the same way the Son is great because
he knows the Father. 8 If, then, he knows the Father, who is the greater, how is he
ignorant of the smaller thing, that is, the day and the hour? Search the Scriptures and
learn the power of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit himself, who knows the Father and the Son,
will reveal to you the knowledge of the Word, the Son of God. Then you will not wander
from the truth and destroy your own soul.

CHAPTER 20

1 20. There are two kinds of knowing in the divine Scripture, two kinds of awareness: one
by action and one by [simple awareness]. To set out like cases from [passages placed side
by side], I will give many examples. In this way your mistaken mind, and the minds of
those who think as you do, may be set straight. 2 Learn what the Scripture says about
Adam: “They were naked in the garden, and they were not ashamed.” 3 But they were not
blind, for they could see. If they could not see, how did they see the tree, that it was
good for food and pleasing to look at? It says, “The woman took and ate, and she gave also
to her husband who was with her.” 4 So they were not blind; their eyes were open. Though
naked, they were not ashamed as they looked at each other, and being naked they knew
themselves. But they knew by awareness, and not by deed.

5 After they had eaten from the tree and been cast out of the garden, after a long time it
says, “Adam knew Eve his wife.” How, then, can this be? 6 They had seen each other naked,
and they knew themselves by sight; but not by the act. Yet the Scripture called being
joined to one another “knowledge.” 7 So the Scripture knows how to use “knowing” in more
than one sense. Again it says this: “Jacob knew Leah his wife, and she conceived and bore
a child.” Now he had known her before. For [with the light of day] he had spent seven
years shepherding the sheep of Laban her father. He knew her with the awareness that comes
through sight and acquaintance, and he knew her also through the act. 8 And “he knew
Rachel his wife.” And again, in another place, it says, “David grew old, and they covered
him with clothes, and he was not warm. And they said to the king, ‘Let a beautiful virgin
be sought.’” Abishag the Shunammite was found. It says, “She was brought to the king, and
she lay with him and kept him warm; and David did not know her.” She was with him, sharing
his body and lying at his side.

9 What kind of knowing does it mean here? Knowing by sight, or knowing by act? Again: “The
Lord knew those who are his.” Does he then not know those who are not his? And: “Depart
from me, workers of lawlessness, for I never knew you.” Is there ignorance, then, in the
Son of God? 10 And again: “You I have known out of all the nations.” Is he, then, ignorant
of the rest of the nations? Never! The divine Scripture knows of knowledge in one sense as
awareness and in another sense as action.

CHAPTER 21

1 21. So the Father’s only-begotten fulfilled the Father’s will and has already shown that
all things are completed. For the Father knew the hour and the day. He knew it both by
awareness and by act. For he himself knows all things. Even when the Son says, “The Father
has given all judgment to the Son,” and the Father does not judge, yet by having given
judgment to the Son he himself judges. For God is not cut off from judging those who are
judged. And in the very fact that the Father does not judge, he has already judged. 2 The
Son, for his part, knows when he is coming. For he himself brings the day, and he himself
fixes it, [leads it on] and completes it. For it says, “That day comes like a thief in the
night.” And it says, “You do not know [that it comes] in the night, so that the day may
overtake you in darkness.”

3 If the servants of Christ are children of the day, does the Son himself, who brings the
day, not know it? Must the day overtake him, instead of his bringing the day himself?
Whoever thinks this will blaspheme, for he is reckoning things unworthy of the Father and
the Son. 4 The Father knows the day and the hour in two ways: by knowledge and by action.
He knows when it comes. He has also already decided, having appointed [the world] to be
judged, and he has known it by action. 5 The Son of God knows when it comes. He himself
brings it, and he is not ignorant of it. But he has not yet carried it out, which is to
say he has [not yet known it] by action. For still the ungodly act ungodly, the
unbelieving disbelieve, and the wickedly formed blaspheme. The devil is still at work,
sins are still committed, injustice still prevails, and judgment is still patient. This
lasts until he comes and knows the day by action, carries out vengeance, and saves those
who hope in him in truth and who do not blaspheme his divinity, nor that of the Father and
the Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER 22

1 In the case of the holy angels, such a dignity falls short in two ways. They are
honored, since they have received this from the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. But
this they lack: they do not know when the things appointed will take place. For the Father
fixed the times by his own authority. But if the Father is in the Son and the Son in the
Father, then the authority is not lacking on the Son’s side, since he is in the Father. 2
The lack comes from the angels’ side. Angels, archangels and powers are created, but the
Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, and the Spirit of God is uncreated. 3 So the
angels know the day and the hour neither by knowledge nor by action. They do not know when
the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit wish to bring the day. Nor do they know it by the
knowledge that comes from acting. For they have not yet been ordered to go out, to gather
the weeds, to bind them in [bundles], and to burn them in unquenchable fire.

4 So they have not yet acted, and they do not know. The Father knows and has acted. The
Son knows, but has not yet acted. This is what is meant by the saying, “Except the Father
alone, neither the [angels] nor the Son.” 5 Let us grasp the force of the Scripture, so
that the letter does not become death to us. For it says, “The letter kills, but the
Spirit gives life.” Let us take hold of the Spirit, so that we may be helped by the
letter. It is not the letter that kills, for life is in the letter. It kills the person
who approaches the letter without understanding and does not have the Spirit who explains,
who opens the letter and reveals what is in it. 6 This holy Father gave his only-begotten
Son, true and begotten from himself, and his Holy Spirit to his holy church. He gave them
in one knowledge of harmony and in one bond of perfection. So in the name of the perfect
Father, who is God, we receive the seal. In the name of the perfect Son, who is God, and
in the name of the divine and perfect Spirit, we receive the seal.

7 O holy Trinity, numbered as three, a Trinity numbered in one name. For we do not speak
of one and two, nor of a unit and another unit. We speak of a unity in a trinity and a
trinity in a unity: one God, single in form and single in name, the Father in the Son and
the Son in the Father, together with the Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER 23

1 Call witnesses of the truth for me. Call the boys who were saved from the Babylonian
furnace. They were counted worthy to be thrown into the fire and yet not be consumed, and
the fire was not put out. This was so that no one would suppose they had devised some new
trick. They were in the fire and were not consumed in the fire, because of their right
faith. In this God was teaching us through them which things are created and which are
uncreated, which are made and which are not made, which things always exist and which
things come from them and have come into being. 2 Those boys, once saved, wished to show a
thankful mind toward the God who had saved them. They had hoped in him from the beginning
and had not doubted. They had not bowed their necks to the image, or to the king’s
arrogance and tyranny.

3 And when they wanted to offer something to God, they searched the depths of their hearts
by the Holy Spirit, being holy men. They thought over heaven and everything in it, the
earth and everything beneath it, and everything that exists, and they judged that none of
it was worthy to be brought to God as an offering. (For they had no authority to offer to
God what lay beyond themselves.) 4 They wished, as was fitting and within their power, to
honor God with hymns alone. This is what is written: “Offer a sacrifice of praise,” and “A
sacrifice of praise will glorify me.” Already, pricked in heart by the Holy Spirit, they
had passed from the old covenant to the new. They had no need of sacrifices of animals or
of whole burnt offerings. For they say, “There is no place to bear fruit, nor sacrifice,
nor altar,” since all things were taken up in this.

5 Wishing to offer such praise, they set aside their own littleness and were carried along
in humility. (“For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles
himself will be exalted.”) Together with the grace of their deliverance they received this
gift of humility. So they wanted to offer praise to God and not grow weary. 6 Having
tested themselves against the unutterable glory of God, they judged it right to take
creation along with them into the praise. They began to speak, embracing the whole of what
God has made.

CHAPTER 24

1 24. They separated the things made from the one who made them, and the created things
from the one who created them, and said, “Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord.” They
said “all” and left nothing out. 2 The Holy Spirit wished to mark out a complete
knowledge, so that we would know what is divine and what has been made by God. We were not
to mix the things that came from nothing with the eternal one, and so lose our
understanding. So he gathered everything together under one count. 3 For the Holy Spirit
revealed to them that they had been counted worthy to stand with angels, having become
like angels. They were therefore not ignorant of the things in heaven, on the earth, and
under the earth. 4 And these same holy men, as I said before, say: “Bless the Lord, all
you works of the Lord.” They begin to number and distinguish which are the works and which
the makers, which are the things that work and which the things that have been worked
upon.

5 They count heaven, earth, the waters above the heaven, and angels (for the angels are
created), thrones and powers (for these are created too), sun and moon (for they are made,
not uncreated), clouds and showers of snow, winds, snows, lightnings, thunders, earth,
sea, springs, deeps, rivers, all humanity, mountains, birds of the sky, cattle and wild
animals, the souls of the holy, the spirits of the righteous, Ananias, Azarias, Misael,
priests and servants of God. 6 For all these are made and created, brought into being by
God through the Word and the Holy Spirit. “For by the word of the Lord the heavens were
made firm, and by the Spirit of his mouth all their power.” 7 Notice, beloved brother, how
they numbered everything, carried along by the Holy Spirit, yet did not number the Son
among the things made. Neither did they number the Holy Spirit. They knew that the Godhead
is one in a Trinity, and the Trinity one in a single Godhead. They glorified the Father in
the Son and the Son in the Father, with the Holy Spirit: one holiness, one worship, one
Godhead, one doxology.

CHAPTER 25

1 25. But the devil dares to stir up this too among people: to invent a charge of daring
unbelief against the holy young men and to say, “They did not know how to name the Holy
Spirit. They were Jews, and being Jews they did not even know the Son.” 2 But the words
themselves at once refute the unbelief of these men of wrong belief. For it says, “And the
appearance of the fourth was like the appearance of a son of God.” Here is the name of the
Son of God. So there was no ignorance about this. [Nor was there ignorance of the Spirit]
even before the time of the furnace, for Daniel was filled with the Holy Spirit and said,
“I am clean from her blood.” They turned back to the court, and he judged the elders,
being filled with the Holy Spirit. 3 So they knew the Son, and they knew the Father and
the Holy Spirit. They did not leave out the names through ignorance, but for the sake of
safety. For [he] says, “Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord.” They did not say,
“Bless the Lord, Son of God,” nor did they add, “Bless the Lord, Holy Spirit,” but, “Bless
the Lord, all you works of the Lord.”

4 Let no one who goes hunting for excuses say, “They did not mention Cherubim or Seraphim,
so these must not be works of God either.” The divine word has already taken precautions
on every side against those who devise schemes for themselves. It foresaw the harm that
would come to them and to the children. 5 The holy children raised their hymn three times
over, and they brought forward created and made things for the praise of God. First they
said, “Blessed are you, Lord God of our fathers, and praiseworthy and glorified is your
name forever.” Then, after other things, “Blessed are you who sit upon the Cherubim.” And
again, “Blessed are you who sit on the throne of the glory of your kingdom.” And, “Blessed
are you who look into the depths, sitting upon Cherubim.” 6 The aim is that when he says
“throne,” you understand Seraphim and Cherubim. From the name of the Cherubim, the depths,
the holy throne and all the other names, you should understand from the number of
everything named that these are counted among the other creatures as works. For when they
have called all these things to the hymn, they immediately add, “Bless the Lord, all you
works of the Lord,” so that Gabriel and Michael too will bless the Father and the Son and
the Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER 26

1 26. The august angels in heaven sing the hymn of victory. With the Seraphim and Cherubim
they glorify the Trinity in one mind, in one rank and of one substance, saying “Holy,
holy, holy.” They make three voices, but they speak in unity and not with many names. 2
For they do not say “holy” a fourth time, so that they do not add to the naming of the
Trinity. They do not say “holy” twice, so that the glory of perfection would not be
incomplete. They say it three times, so that they sanctify the Father, the Son and the
Holy Spirit with the same honor. 3 And they do not say “holy” and “half-holy.” They say
“holy” equally of each, glorifying the Trinity together with one voice, one word and one
perfection: unity in Trinity and Trinity in unity. 4 For it was to bring us this knowledge
that the only-begotten [Son] of God came. This understanding the Holy Spirit proclaimed to
us. This perfection the Father revealed to us. In truth the Word made flesh gave us this
life as a gift, and the Holy Spirit built for us this building.

5 “If anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay,
straw,” and so on. For there is no other foundation: “No one can lay another foundation
besides the one that is laid, which is Jesus Christ,” the Son of God, “whose building we
are, and whose field we are,” “built on the foundation of the prophets and apostles.” We
are to know that our building stands firm in truth, and that our foundation always is and
never began to be. 6 But “not in everyone is there knowledge,” as the apostolic word says.
It is in those who have been counted worthy, by the Holy Spirit, to know the mysteries of
the truth. 7 For he himself, who revealed himself and his Father and the Holy Spirit,
rebuked some who were in ignorance. He said, “You know neither the Scriptures nor their
power.” And elsewhere again, “Let the one who has ears to hear, hear.” And again, he said
to the Samaritan woman, “If you knew who it is that asks you for a drink, you would have
asked him.” And again, “You do not know what kind of spirit you are of.”

8 So knowledge is not in everyone. “Each one has different gifts from God,” and the holy
word says, “From the one to whom more is given, more will be demanded.” Some receive a
little, some nothing at all, and others receive abundantly.

CHAPTER 27

1 27. That these things are so, one can find from what is said in the divine Scriptures
themselves. Most of divine Scripture is spoken spiritually, especially about our life, I
mean the knowledge of the Lord. Whatever words are deeper and give our soul more abundant
assurance have become a stumbling block to those who have not grasped the knowledge of
God. 2 As the prophet Hosea says, “Who is wise, and will understand these things?” and
“The one to whom a word of the knowledge of the Lord is given will know them. For the ways
of the Lord are straight, but the ungodly will stumble in them.” 3 The ways are straight,
but the ungodly stumble on the ways of the Lord, though these ways are a stumbling block
to people. Those who stumble on the stone of stumbling stumble without distinction: “For
they stumbled on the stone of stumbling and were offended.”

4 At once the Jews saw the only-begotten Son of God come in the flesh, working signs from
God. They had not been counted worthy of heavenly knowledge, and they said, “Who is this
man who speaks blasphemies?” At another time they said, “If this man were from God, he
would not break the Sabbath.” So they did not know his deity, and thought he was only a
mere man. 5 Others did recognize him as God, but they did not know his perfect glory. They
heard the deep words spoken about him, and about the economy of the flesh worked out for
our salvation, and they stumbled over his deity. Their own thinking made them stumble. 6
The Jews stumbled when they heard, and these people stumble in the same way when they
hear. The Jews saw what had been foretold in the prophets, but they did not know that it
was fulfilled in the coming of Christ in the flesh, and so they were thrown into
confusion.

7 These people, in their turn, hear the things foretold about his economy, but they
understand them in a shallow way, and so they are thrown into confusion. They bring
forward, for their own ruin, what was said for our building up. They say, “He said, ‘I am
going to my God and your God, and my Father and your Father.’ Do you see? ‘Your’! He too
is one of the created things.” They dare to say this in blasphemy.

CHAPTER 28

1 You see, then, that it is the economy of his coming in the flesh that makes them
stumble. Let them go back to the beginning and ask about times or seasons. For “his goings
forth,” it says, “are from the days of eternity.” Let us look, then, at what came before
these things. The Father says, “Let us make man in our image and likeness.” He did not
say, “I will make man in my image.” 2 Be convicted, you who have a hardened heart, as it
is written, “But their heart was hardened.” Learn that the Son is always with the Father.
For the words “Let us make” do not point to one person alone, but to the Father speaking
to the Son. 3 Be convicted also, you who say the Son is unlike the Father. In saying “in
our image,” he did not separate the likeness of the Son from the Father, and he did not
divide any part of the Father’s sameness from the Son. For he did not say “in my image,”
or “in your image.” He showed instead one essence and one deity of the Father, the Son and
the Spirit. For he says, “in our image and likeness.” So the deity of the Father, the Son
and the Holy Spirit is one, and man was made in the image of the one deity of Father, Son
and Holy Spirit.

4 You too be convicted, Arius, and hear the Father saying to the Son, “Let us make,”
calling the Son a fellow-creator. I have often heard some people say that the Son made
nothing, but that what came to be “came to be through him.” But if it came to be through
him, then he also made it, as has been clearly shown. 5 For the Word, the master
craftsman, is the maker of all things, and the Father works through him. Let them hear him
plainly say, “My Father works until now, and I work.” In saying this, he here calls his
Father a fellow-worker with himself. 6 But again, do not let your reasoning deceive you,
so that you come to the Son as to a servant and not as to the true Master. If he were a
servant and not the true Master, how did he take the form of a servant when he came, he
who was in the form of God? And how did he empty himself, if he did not have fullness? So
come to the Son as to perfect God, and as to the Son who is from the Father.

CHAPTER 29

1 And do not say out of ill will, “But the Father said to the Son, ‘Let us make,’ while
the Son did not say to the Father, ‘Let us make.’ And the Son does not say, ‘I work and my
Father works,’ but puts the Father first as the one who speaks and works.” 2 You say this
foolishly, and you want to think of the divine as having many origins. But there is one
origin and one and the same deity. Nowhere here does the Son say “my God.” I do not say
this to deny the honor the Son has toward the Father, but to show how the order of the
deity stands. 3 And again it says, “Adam heard God walking in the paradise in the cool of
the evening.” Nowhere does the Son say “my God and your God.” Here he speaks of God as
complete in himself.

4 And again, “And God spoke to Noah.” Nowhere is such an expression found there. 5 “And
God appeared,” it says, “to Abraham as he sat by the oak of Mamre. And behold, three men!
And he ran to meet them and bowed down to the ground and said: If I have found favor
before you...” Scripture does this to show the one as God, and the two who accompanied him
as his angels. 6 It is about this same one that Scripture says, “God went up from
Abraham.” And he himself is the one who says to him, “Shall I hide anything from my
servant Abraham?” “The cry of Sodom and Gomorrah,” he says, “has multiplied before me,”
and so on. And nowhere in these times does the phrase “my God and your God” appear. 7 “And
the two men came into Sodom.” This is because the one who went up was above, and Abraham
was left behind by the two who went into Sodom for its destruction. Of the one who went
up, Scripture says, “And the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the
Lord.” There was no need for the phrase “my God and your God.”

8 Moses also says in the Song, “And let all the angels of God worship him.” Now he says
“angels of God” and “fire from the Lord,” and he does not say simply “angels.” He does
this to show that the Father and the Son have one kingdom. The angels are not divided
under different rulers; they belong to God, and they worship the Son, who is God. For an
angel does not worship an angel. And nowhere here is there “my God and your God.”

CHAPTER 30

1 David says, “The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a
footstool for your feet.” “The Lord,” he says, “to my Lord.” For the dispensation of the
flesh did not yet exist, and it was on its account that there was need for him to say “my
God and your God.” 2 “Behold, the virgin will conceive in the womb and bear a son, and you
shall call his name Emmanuel, which is translated, ‘God with us.’” Even then there was not
yet any need to say “my God and your God.” 3 And: “And you, Bethlehem, house of Ephrathah,
are not the least among the thousands of Judah; for out of you shall come to me a ruler in
Israel, and his goings forth are from the beginning, from the days of eternity.” Other
copies read: “And you, Bethlehem, are by no means least among the rulers of Judah; for out
of you shall come a leader, and he will shepherd my people Israel.” You see that there was
still no need to say “my God and your God.”

4 But when the prophecy of Jeremiah, and likewise of Isaiah, was being fulfilled, that the
Word would be born of a virgin and take flesh (as Jeremiah says, “And he is man, and who
will know him?”), then he shared in the flesh. Without the seed of a man he formed for
himself that same holy flesh from Mary, the God-bearer, as it is said, “born of a woman.”
Having shared in what is ours, he says “my God,” because of what is ours. 5 But because of
the eternity of his true sonship by nature, he says “my Father.” Because of his grace
toward his disciples, he says “your Father.” And because of the disciples’ own nature in
relation to his divinity and to his eternal Father, he says “your God.” 6 For he is God of
the disciples, but Father of the Lord by nature, and Father of the disciples by grace. The
Father is God of the Son because of the flesh. But he is Father because of the eternity
and incomprehensibility of his begetting and true sonship: in truth he is his Father,
having begotten him without time and without beginning according to his divinity.

7 It was necessary for the Son to call him his God because of the dispensation he carried
out for our sake. He is always with the Father, the Word begotten without beginning. But
in the flesh he was born of Mary at the end of the days, born according to the flesh from
Mary, that same holy virgin, through the Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER 31

1 31. Let them, then, understand the depths of God’s work, and not turn grace into
ingratitude by supposing that salvation for our sake is a dishonor to the unspeakable and
incomprehensible nature of God. 2 “But,” they say, “it is written about God, ‘He will not
hunger or thirst, and there is no searching out of his understanding.’ Yet about the Son
it says that he hungered in the wilderness during the temptation. It also says, ‘Our God
will not grow weary,’ yet the Lord Jesus grew weary on the road. And it says, ‘He who
keeps Israel will neither slumber nor sleep,’ yet the Lord, they say, fell asleep in the 3
boat.” What empty speculations from people who reason like this! The holy Word came and
took up our burdens for us. More than that, he became touchable, took flesh, and was found
as a man. He was seized by the scribes and [text missing], saying: “I gave my back to the
whips, and I did not turn my face away from the shame of spitting.”

4 He also “wept,” as it stands in the Gospel according to Luke in the uncorrected copies.
Holy Irenaeus used this testimony in his work Against Heresies, against those who say that
Christ appeared only in appearance. But the orthodox removed the passage. They were
afraid, and did not grasp its purpose and its great strength. 5 He also “was in agony and
sweated, and his sweat became like drops of blood, and an angel appeared to him,
strengthening him.” 6 Not only this, but as a man he asks, “Where have you laid Lazarus?”
About the woman with the flow of blood he asks, “Who touched me?” About those who were
seeking him he asks, “Whom do you seek?” He also asks the disciples, as a man, “Who do
people say that the Son of Man is?” And he asked, “How many loaves do you have with you?”
7 That is what he said. And, weary from the journey, he sat down by the well in Samaria.
Moreover, “the child grew and became strong in spirit,” and “Jesus advanced in stature and
wisdom.” And there is this: “Before the child knows how to call father or mother, he will
take the power of Damascus and the spoils of Samaria.”

8 He is wisdom itself, the one who “teaches people knowledge,” who “planted the ear in
man,” who gave articulate speech to the sons of men, and who “made the tongue of the
stammering clear.” He endured all such things for our sake. He did so in order to keep the
whole sequence of the incarnation, arranged for us, and so not destroy the stamp of the
truth.

CHAPTER 32

1 But I do not want to leave unexplained the countless passages we have brought forward.
We gathered them from the divine Scriptures, speaking as though in the person of those who
oppose the truth, though they understand these passages badly. So I will set out, for each
one, an understanding of the force in it, and the reason why it was said in terms of human
experience. 2 Again we will say, having already said much about “my God and your God,”
that anyone who has understanding can know from the very sequence that it was said with
good reason, [as it stands]. 3 “For he is a man, and who will know him?” In this one
saying the divine writing shows two things together, the visible and the invisible. On
account of the visible, “my God” is reasonably said. On account of the invisible, the word
“my” was spoken. The text contradicts neither of the two works.

4 For how could he not be known, if he was a man? But if he was not a man, how was he
called a man? 5 Surely everyone who is born from human beings is known by human beings. He
is known by the mother who bore him, by relatives, by the household, by neighbors, by
those who share his dwelling, or by fellow citizens. 6 This cannot be fulfilled in a mere
man. It is fulfilled in God the Word, the Son of God. In saying “He is a man,” and in
truth also “who will know him?”, the text shows that he is God. He shares in human life,
and yet he is God, unknown to human beings because he cannot be comprehended. 7 But he is
truly a man, born from Mary without the seed of a man. The prophet proclaimed beforehand
what was to come: “The virgin,” he says, “will conceive in the womb and will bear a son.”

8 If then she is a virgin, the arrangement of the conception was not from men. This is
because, before that time, it had been said to Ahaz, “Ask a sign for yourself, either in
the depth or in the height.” But Ahaz, humble-minded, says, “I will not ask, and I will
not test the Lord my God,” and so he declined to ask for a sign. 9 Immediately, because he
would not ask for a sign, God, who gives great gifts to human beings, granted two gifts.
From the height he sent the Word, by his own will and by the Word’s own will. From the
depth he arranged the flesh, by his own good pleasure, together with the Word himself. 10
For afterward it says, “and they will call his name Emmanuel.” It did not say “I will
call,” but “they will call.” For God, who had once been unknown among them, was being
revealed to men. Yet he does not receive the name as something new. For it did not say, “I
will call his name Emmanuel,” but “they will call.”

CHAPTER 33

1 As for the words “born of a woman,” as I showed above, the point of “of a woman” is that
“born” refers to the flesh, so that it may be plain to everyone that the Word is eternal.
And if the saying “he will not thirst” is spoken about God, while it is said of the Son
that he hungered and thirsted, then this was arranged for us out of necessity. 2 For how
could the economy of salvation be found to be real, if he did not have the ordinary needs
that belong to becoming man? In this he showed us the solutions to all the questions
raised by the heretics. 3 For at once he dissolved the suspicion of the Manichaeans: by
saying that he eats and drinks, he shows that his flesh is real. He also dissolved the
method of the Lucianists and the force of Arius. 4 For Lucian and all the Lucianists deny
that the Son of God took a soul. They say he had only flesh, so that they may attach to
God the Word human suffering: thirst, hunger, weariness, weeping, grief, distress, and
everything else found in his coming in the flesh. But it would be foolish to count these
things against the deity of the Son of God.

5 “But,” they say, “flesh by itself neither eats nor drinks nor grows weary nor does the
other things.” I agree myself that by itself it does not have these. 6 But the Word, when
he came, took on the whole economy: flesh and soul and everything that is in a man. Hunger
and weariness, thirst and grief and the rest were parts of the soul and the flesh. 7 For
he weeps, in order to refute the error of Manichaeus, and to show that he was clothed in
the body not in appearance but in truth. And he thirsts, to show that he has not only the
flesh but also the soul. For it was not his deity that thirsted anywhere; rather [it was
in the flesh] that he thirsted and grew tired from the journey, because of the union of
flesh and soul.


THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN) (CHAPTERS 34–70)
======================================================

THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN) continued

CHAPTER 34

1 That the Word came with a body and a soul, let the divine Scriptures of the old and the
new covenant convince them. For David says of him, and Peter agrees with David: “You will
not abandon my soul to Hades, nor give your holy one to see corruption.” This is so that
the composite nature of the Lord’s man may be understood, and that we may have clear
knowledge about it: to establish that a soul, together with the deity, was laid down for
the three days [text uncertain], to show that the flesh was holy, and that the deity
together with the soul, unconfined, completed the mystery in Hades. 2 Somewhere there is
also another testimony that says, “free among the dead.” The word “free” indicates that
Hades did not hold lordship over him, but that by his own will he went down to Hades with
his soul. And Peter says, “since it was not possible for him to be held by it,” that is,
by Hades.

3 And the Savior himself says, “I have authority to take my soul and authority to lay it
down.” And, “I am the good shepherd, who lays down his soul for the sheep.” And, “My soul
is troubled,” he says, “and what shall I say?” (speaking as though in doubt, “What shall I
say?”) “Father, save me from this hour.” 4 “But for this reason I came to this hour.” He
says this to show that his deity came to this willingly. And the word “troubled” was said
so that the reality of his coming in the flesh would not be dissolved. 5 For his coming in
the flesh was not mere appearance. It was like a great king who is at war with a lesser
one. He knows that his enemy, if he sees him coming with power and great strength, will
beg off and turn to flight, and many regions of his subjects will be laid waste. So by his
own wisdom he puts on a pretense, offering excuses, turning his back and running away,
until the enemy takes courage, attacks him as a cowardly and powerless king, and pursues
him. Then the king suddenly turns around with his whole force and takes the weak and
opposing enemy wholly into his hands. In the same way our Lord was not afraid of death,

6 Before he went to his passion, he had made it known on the road that the Son of Man was
about to be handed over, crucified, and raised on the third day. When Peter said, “God be
gracious to you, Lord; this shall never happen to you,” he rebuked him: “Get behind me,
Satan,” and said, “for you do not think the things of God, but the things of men.” 7 So
how could the one who foretold these things, and who had come for this very purpose, pray
later that the cup might pass so that he would not drink it? He had spoken about his death
before he died. Even if only to avoid being thought a liar, he could not have prayed that
the cup pass. 8 No, through this kind of person he draws out the adversary. The adversary
supposes that the Savior fears death, and so brings death upon him. The result is
salvation, through the plan of the incarnation, for those who die.

9 But even when you hear that the Lord died, understand where the suffering of death was
fulfilled. Peter, the foremost of the apostles, explains to you the meaning of his death
when he says, “put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit.” His divinity took
on suffering in the flesh, yet it is impassible. It was impassible, and it remained
impassible. Its freedom from suffering was not turned aside, and its eternity was not
altered.

CHAPTER 35

1 Again, the empty-minded may say: “You cannot persuade us from such words that Christ had
a soul. For we have found higher up in the divine Scriptures what Isaiah says in the
person of God the Father about the only-begotten: ‘This is my beloved Son, in whom I am
well pleased, whom my soul has loved.’” 2 What are we to understand about the Father: that
he took a soul into himself, or that he has a soul? Who but a babbler would think this of
the Father? So what do they say? Obviously that the word is spoken rather figuratively. 3
If, then, they say that it is spoken figuratively of the Father, the same must be accepted
for the Son. Even if he says, “My soul is troubled,” and “I have authority to lay down my
soul and to take it again,” they say he had no soul, and that it was said figuratively.

4 Their reasoning seems to say something, [though] the truth stands on its own through
many proofs. Each figure of speech is taken from the case in question. With the Father we
must not dare to say it, because he did not put on flesh. But the Lucianists, that is, the
Arians, agree that he had flesh, so there is no room for doubt. 5 But, they say, “The Word
became flesh,” and it does not say, “The Word became flesh and soul.” To their ignorant
objection I answer: “God formed man, taking dust from the earth.” From the one word
“formed” Scripture includes everything, and in the same way “the Word became flesh”
contains everything. 6 By the same reasoning we turn the argument back on them. Look, it
says, “God formed man,” and it did not say that he made for him a liver, or lungs, or a
heart, or veins, or sinews, or any of the other things in the body. Shall we therefore
suppose that man was [a solid lump, without parts], because Scripture did not go through
the make-up of the whole living creature in detail? Not at all. Just as Scripture includes
the whole from one part, so it is clear that from the word “flesh” the Savior also took a
soul.

CHAPTER 36

1 If, then, he took a soul and a body, as has been shown, his divinity was not made less
than the substance of the Father, as though it were shut up within passions so that it
would thirst, grow weary, hunger, and have all the needs that a human being has. 2 It is
written, “He will not grow weary, and there is no searching out of his understanding.” Yet
the Savior is found weary. That does not mean the Word did not come down from above from
the Father’s substance. He did not grow weary above, but in the flesh. The flesh had to
grow weary, so that it would not be thought an appearance only, but real. 3 The other
things of this kind, such as drowsiness and sleep, point to a man, and so does [being
open] to touch. For he took these on himself and was found as a man. “We have found,” it
says, “the Messiah, of whom Moses wrote.”

4 But those who found him [found him] through the nature that could not be grasped, that
is, the fleshly one. For he was not found in his incomprehensibility. That is why he was
seized by the scribes, gave his back to scourges, did not turn his face away from
spitting, and wept, along with everything else that is sung about him. 5 Who could have
flogged, struck, or spat upon God the Word in heaven, who is so unutterable and beyond
grasp? But if the God who cannot suffer, the Word of God, did suffer these things, then
the suffering is a bodily suffering. It lies outside his own impassibility, and yet again
it is not outside it, because he was pleased to take it on. 6 Even though he himself does
not suffer, the suffering is counted as his own. A stain on a garment does not reach the
body of the one wearing it, yet the stain on the garment is counted against the wearer. In
the same way God suffered in the flesh, while his Godhead suffered nothing. Yet the
suffering of the flesh was counted to the Godhead, since the flesh was worn by the
Godhead, so that salvation might come to us in the Godhead.

CHAPTER 37

1 37. I also remember the saying in the Gospel according to Luke, and I do not want to
leave it unexplained. It is written that “being in agony he sweated, and his sweat became
like clots of blood.” 2 “And an angel of the Lord appeared, strengthening him.” As we are
accustomed to say, those who do not grasp the force of the deeper and necessary words
overturn themselves by their own wickedness, turning good things into evil. Nothing is
more critical than this. 3 For by saying that the Lord’s man “was in agony,” the Gospel
shows him to be a true man. And to show that he was truly a man, and that the agony did
not come from the Godhead, it says: “he sweated, and his sweat became like clots of
blood.” This is a bodily appearance, not a spiritual one. 4 “And an angel of the Lord
appeared, strengthening him.” This was not because the one who is greater than angels
needed an angel’s strength. Every knee bows to him, “of those in heaven, on earth and
under the earth.” He is God, the Word forever, always with the Father and begotten from
him. Rather it happened to fulfill what is in the great Song of Moses, sung in the
wilderness, where he said: “All the sons of God will worship him, and let the angels of
God strengthen him.”

5 The words “let them strengthen him” do not mean that they give him strength. Rather, the
glorifying of God had its strength in these acts. Immediately the angels above and the
spiritual living creatures cry out and say: “Yours is the power, yours is the might, yours
is the strength.” In this the text shows what worshiping and strengthening mean: giving
him the might of strength that is properly his own. In the same way the angel was seen in
the presence of the disciples worshiping his Master. 6 He was not ignorant of the
surpassing greatness of his loving plan. He marveled at the great work of gentleness
accomplished in him, the work that defeated the devil, crushed the sting of death,
triumphed over the rulers and authorities, and broke sin. 7 And because of the
extraordinary wonder of it, the angel in his praise said as he worshiped: “Yours is the
strength, Master. For you were strong against death, against Hades and against the devil,
to crush his sting and cast it out from humanity.”

CHAPTER 38

1 38. Suppose he says again, speaking as a man would, “Where have you laid Lazarus?” Or
about the woman with the flow of blood, “Who touched me?” Or “What are you looking for?”
Or “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” Or “The child grew and became strong,” or
“He advanced in age and wisdom,” or “Before the child knows how to call father or mother.”
Do you not see from the very subject how great the knowledge is, and that these accounts
come from flesh and humanity? 2 In the Old Testament there are many things said in the
person of God the Father which stoop down to persuade human beings and which seem to imply
ignorance, though nothing is unknown to God. The Word, when he came, fulfilled these
things, to fulfill what was said: “My Father is working until now, and I am working.” So
also “Where have you laid Lazarus?”

3 He asked when he had come near the place. But before he came to the place, though he had
heard from no one, he said to his disciples, “Lazarus our friend has fallen asleep.” So
then, he who was so many days’ journey from the place knew that Lazarus had died. Was he
ignorant when he was actually there? 4 Certainly not. He wanted to show that he did all
this because no one yet believed in him fully, so that he might show his great love for
humanity in sparing us. 5 For they had to be the ones to say “He is four days dead, he
already smells,” and to go and show him. He did not have to say it himself; he could have
said: “You know everything, and if you wish, he will live.” That is also why he wept, over
the hardness of human hearts. So he did not ask because he was ignorant. He asked in order
to test and expose them, and in doing so he showed his love for humanity.

6 And he says, “Who touched me?” Not because he did not know who had touched him. He asked
so that he would not announce the miracle himself, but so that the woman, hearing it,
would come forward and tell of the grace shown to her. Then, having confessed it, she
would hear, “Your faith has saved you.” In this way he would encourage others also to
believe, so that they too might be healed. 7 “Who do they say that I, the Son of Man, am?”
he asks. In the same way, in the Old Testament, he says in the person of the Father,
“Adam, where are you?” Yet he knew where Adam was. That is why he afterward rebukes him,
saying, “You have eaten from the tree.” 8 And to Cain he says, “Where is Abel your
brother?” Again, he did not ask because he was ignorant. For he says, “You are cursed on
the earth, which opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. For see,
his blood cries out to me.” So the one who said that the blood cries out was not ignorant.
He asked in order to give Cain an occasion for repentance and for making a defense.

CHAPTER 39

1 39. But they turn again to the quarrelsomeness of their ignorance, and say that these
Old Testament voices belong to the Son himself. Their scheme is refuted at once. For the
one who said to Moses, “What is this in your hand?” was himself saying, “I am the one who
is.” 2 And the Lord, speaking to the Sadducees about the resurrection, says: “As for the
dead being raised, God said, ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God
of Jacob.’ He is therefore God of the living and not of the dead.” 3 Again, there is much
that can be shown to have been spoken in the Old Testament in the person of the Father.
But much was also spoken, many times, in the person of the Son, and again in the person of
the Holy Spirit. 4 “Where is Sarah your wife?” So the Son of God said to Abraham, who had
come from above with the two angels. For if he did not know where she was, he would not
have said “Sarah.”

5 “So Sarah laughed, being inside.” He wishes to point to her modesty as a pattern for
women who want to live in true godliness. When they receive guests, they should serve them
from their own labors, but, out of modesty, should not show their faces to the men. 6 For
that blessed woman certainly prepared the meal, and having prepared it, was not seen in
the presence of the angels. She set a pattern of modesty for the generations after her.
But also, to show who the one present was, the one who was being entertained as a guest
called the woman by name at that hour. For neither her name, nor any creature, nor any
thought of man escapes his notice. 7 “Who do people say that I, the Son of Man, am?” he
asks. He himself declares and confesses that he is the Son of Man, so that they would not
think he was asking about the invisible one. They say, “Elijah, Jeremiah, John.” “But who
do you say that I am?” “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God,” says Peter, and he
is at once pronounced blessed.

8 For he did not ask out of ignorance. He wanted to show that the teaching which proclaims
the Son to the church as true [God] is the Father’s, so that Peter would say what he had
been taught by the Father.

CHAPTER 40

1 40. And do not be amazed if he says, “Through me they enter to the Father,” and suppose
that he is different from the Father’s essence. For he himself teaches again, “No one
comes to me unless the Father draws him.” So just as the Father sends people to the Son,
the Son also brings them in to the Father. In this he shows that the Godhead is one and
the same. 2 As for “he advanced,” “he advanced also in wisdom”: if he is the wisdom of
God, he lacks no wisdom. But when he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, the
fullness was not diminished. It was to show that he had been poured over from heaven into
humanity, that is, into the workshop of Mary. 3 “For your name,” it says, “is ointment
poured out.” It did not say “poured out” as in spilled, but “emptied out” from heaven to
earth, so that from the [emptying] into Mary [text missing]. And having become flesh from
Mary, he is conceived and born in Bethlehem. From Bethlehem he goes to Nazareth, from
Nazareth to Capernaum, and from Capernaum to Jerusalem. He goes to the sea, where he walks
on the waters. He goes to the region of Tyre, to Nain, to Judea, to Jericho, to Bethphage
and Bethany. He goes to Jerusalem and the temple, the Mount of Olives and Gethsemane, the
house of Caiaphas, the praetorium and Herod. He goes to the place Golgotha and to the
tomb, even as far as Hades. After the resurrection he is on earth again, and then in the
heavens.

4 For ointment emptied from one vessel into another gives its fragrance to every vessel.
In the same way the coming of Christ from heaven made the whole earth holy, [and
especially] those who receive him in truth. 5 [He who] is, as in Daniel [text missing],
also a great mountain, and “a stone cut out without hands.” This hints at birth without
the seed of a man. What was greater is found again to be small. Then the stone takes up
its size again and becomes once more a great mountain. And because the mountain is not in
one place, it fills the whole world. 6 This is the wisdom [of wisdom?], who became man and
extended his power to the world in order to fill the whole world with grace. He “advanced
in stature and wisdom.” 7 He was the Father’s wisdom and “teaches men” to speak. He formed
the tongue for men and “planted the ear” in those who hear. How then could he not know how
to say “father” or “mother”? [For it says] “He will take the power of Damascus and the
spoils of Samaria,” and so on.

8 But suppose that, as soon as he was born from the womb, he had been shown speaking and
uttering words clearly, like a child already grown. Then his conception in the flesh would
have been thought an illusion and not real, or rather a mere appearance. For this reason
he accepts the smallness of early age, so that he would not destroy the truth of the
sequence of his life.

CHAPTER 41

1 Again they hunt for other empty notions. They twist the divine words together and think
the opposite, and they say: “How then is it written, ‘Receive the high priest of our
confession, who is faithful to the one who made him,’ and ‘Let every house of Israel know
that this Jesus whom you crucified, God made both Lord and Christ’?” 2 I am greatly amazed
that people who handle the sequence of the text do not recognize the force of what is said
in it. For the statement “Receive the high priest, who is faithful to the one who made
him” was not said about the deity. 3 For God came [text missing], and the divine
Scriptures make everything clear to us. For nothing in them is crooked or tangled. All of
it is plain to those who understand and straight to those who find knowledge. 4 “Take,” it
says, “[instruction] and not silver.” For unless someone receives instruction from God,
that is, the faith of the truth, everything is crooked and twisted to him. But to those
who understand rightly and find knowledge, everything is straight and beyond reproach.

5 To refute them, the apostle says: “For every high priest taken from among men is
appointed for men in things pertaining to God, to offer gifts and sacrifices” [text breaks
off]. 6 For this reason the only-begotten himself, since he came to be a high priest for
men, took flesh from us. He who came from us was to be an offering on our behalf to his
own Father, God, and so “call” his disciples “brothers.” Where, then, is the word “became”
fulfilled? Nowhere else than in the high priest. For it says, “Receive the high priest,
who is faithful to the one who made him.” 7 Let me use a further example. Suppose someone
asks a king about his own son and dares to say to him, “Who is this?” He hears the
father’s honest confession: “He is my son.” Then he asks again, “Your son by nature?” The
king says yes, and the questioner goes on: “Then what did you make him?” The king will
certainly say, “I made him king.” Did he, by stating the son’s rank, deny that he is a
true son?

8 If he states the second thing, has he wiped out the first? Not at all. So also God the
Father begot the Son without beginning, and “he made him high priest” is fulfilled in the
flesh.

CHAPTER 42

1 “But,” they say, “it is written, ‘The Lord created me as the beginning of his ways for
his works.’” First of all, these empty-headed people do not know the name of the book. It
is called the Proverbs of Solomon. Everything said in the form of a proverb does not mean
the same thing as the power of the Word himself. 2 Consider this: our Lord Jesus Christ
spoke in parables, and we can see that the parables do not stand in the same relation to
our subject. 3 “The kingdom of heaven,” he says, “is like a grain of mustard seed.” If we
chose to understand this in our own way, taking it part by part, it would be clear that
the kingdom of heaven is a place of wide, open space. 4 If one must speak of a place at
all, it is the kingdom in which God the Father is king, together with God the Word, the
Son of God, and the Holy Spirit of God, and the angels and archangels, the spiritual
hosts, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and all the righteous. How, then, could so many be contained
in a grain of mustard seed? The figurative language of the saying is spoken in riddles. So
what is said in a proverb is not the same as the thing in itself.

5 The same holds for the woman who had ten drachmas, lost one, lit a lamp and found it;
for the net cast into the sea; and for the seed sown upon the [earth?]. All these things
are spoken in riddles, and they are not the same as the reality itself. 6 And we do not
really know whether Solomon, the author of proverbs, spoke this saying about the Son of
God. For there is wisdom and there is wisdom. 7 The apostle knows how to say, “The world
did not know God through the wisdom of God,” and “God made foolish the wisdom of the
world,” and again he says, “not in fleshly wisdom, but in the power of God.” Solomon too
knows how to speak of wisdom, saying, “I fell in love with her beauty and took her for
myself as a bride.” Job also knows of wisdom and says, “But where was wisdom found? And
what is the place of understanding?” And there is “the wisdom of the poor man, which is
despised,” and “he himself is the corrector of wisdom,” and “the only-begotten is the
wisdom of the Father.”

CHAPTER 43

1 What then do we say? If the Father is wisdom, and the Son, according to their way of
thinking, did not come forth from him, though he is Word and God and wisdom, then the
Father is left lacking wisdom in himself. 2 How then is it said, “to God alone, wise and
invisible”? [The text seems defective here.] And all these things are beyond human grasp
and boundless to men. God gave wisdom to Solomon and filled Bezalel with wisdom, and “wise
men hide shame.” 3 There is much more that could be said about wisdom. But that wisdom of
the Father is of a single kind, having no other wisdom set beside it as a counterpart. 4
Even so, suppose the saying was indeed spoken about him. I neither agree nor reject it,
but leave the knowing of it to God. Yet I see that the words, forced into this meaning,
contradict each other. “He created,” it says, “the beginning of his ways for his works;
before the age he laid my foundation; and before all the hills he begets me.”

5 How then is what is begotten laid as a foundation? And how is what is created begotten?
For if it is created, it is not truly begotten. 6 We do not create what we beget, and we
do not beget what we create. For we are created, and what we beget is created. But in God,
who is uncreated, what he begets is not created. 7 For if he begot, he did not create. But
if after creating he begot again, how is it that what was first created is begotten
afterward? 8 If, then, these words are about him, they are fulfilled in the incarnate
dispensation. And for that reason the passage speaks first of the nearer things and tells
of the older things afterward. 9 For wishing to honor the people who are nearest, it
begins with the flesh. For the beginning of the ways of the righteousness of the gospel is
that the Word became flesh for us in Mary, and a soul was founded in her flesh. This is so
that it may show the higher things afterward.

10 We say that he came from the Father’s bosom, from the heavens, to the earth, since he
came to us later, having completed the whole dispensation. So the Word is not a created
being, God forbid. And divine Scripture has produced nothing crooked for us, not in any
respect at all.

CHAPTER 44

1 Moreover, by nature, and among the translators too, the wording has not been given in
this way. For Aquila says, “The Lord acquired me,” since in the Hebrew it says “Adonai
kanani,” which is translated as we have said. And we too, according to ordinary usage, say
of those who bear children, “she acquired children.” 2 But even so he has not captured the
full force of the translation. For the Hebrew “adonai kananī” can also be translated “the
Lord begot me.” This is why Peter speaks so plainly when he says, “This Jesus, whom you
crucified.” He did not say “the God the Word from above,” but “this Jesus.” He means the
flesh that was taken up together with the Word from above in the womb of Mary, and it is
called “this” because of the Lord’s humanity taken from Mary. 3 In this, too, the [word
“created”] is fulfilled, as Peter says, “put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the
Spirit.” And again, “Since Christ therefore suffered for us in the flesh.” And again,
“from whom is Christ according to the flesh,” as Paul says.

4 The Savior himself also said in the Gospel, “But now you seek to kill me, a man who has
spoken to you the truth which I heard from the Father.” He said this to show that the
suffering belonged to his humanity and to what is lower, and that he himself is the
Father’s Son by nature, from above. 5 The holy apostle Paul agrees with this teaching when
he says, “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,”
and “who did not consider it something to be grasped to be equal with God, but emptied
himself, taking the form of a servant.” 6 You see that he declared him a man, but not a
mere man. For “mediator between God and men” means that he mediates for both sides. Toward
his Father he is God, truly begotten by nature. Toward human beings he is a man, truly one
by nature, born of Mary without the seed of a man. In this way he is mediator between God
and men: being God and having become man, not changed in his nature, but mediating for
each side toward both.

CHAPTER 45

1 But again they say in their ignorance, “Do you see? He ‘did not consider it something to
be grasped to be equal with God.’” These quarrelsome people do not even understand the
wording. For Paul did not say, “He did not wish to become equal with God by grasping.” He
said, “He did not count it a thing to be grasped, to be equal with God”—that is, to be God
by nature, because he was. 2 For if he were not, how did he take the form of a servant?
The word also pointed to something recent, and from this Paul showed, with wonder, the
greatness of the act: though he was equal with God, he emptied himself, taking the form of
a servant. He did this not to enslave one who is free, but, in the form he took, to set
free the slaves who obey. 3 The Jews themselves bear witness that he was not ashamed to
call himself equal to God, and did not hesitate, but showed it quite boldly when he said,
“If I do not say it, I shall be a liar like you.” This is why they say to him, “We are not
killing you for a good work, but because you, being a man, make yourself equal to God.”

4 But they say, “We ought to acknowledge the figurative things said about him.” Scripture
has indeed said many figurative things about him, and we must not deny what is said of him
in riddles. He is called a door, and he is called a stone, a pillar, a cloud, a lion, a
sheep, a lamp, a torch, a sun, an angel, a worm, a rock, a cornerstone, a way, a bull, a
calf, and the like. 5 Clearly we do not deny what has been fulfilled concerning him in
riddles. But we know the reason these things were written. He is the way because through
him we walk to the kingdom, to him and to the Father. He is the door because through him
we enter. He is a pillar because he is the firm support of our faith. He is a rock because
he cannot be moved, and a stone because he is laid as a foundation. He is the sun of
righteousness because he has shone on our darkened minds.

CHAPTER 46

1 Then they say, “If it is written about him that he is a created thing, we must
acknowledge that he is a created thing.” Look, I too have set out a part of the passages
that have been fulfilled for us through his riddles. 2 But let them tell us, when he is
called a “created thing,” what use is it? He is rightly called a door in a figure, so that
there may be an entrance for us, and a benefit. He is called the way, so that walking by
him we may not go astray. But what do we gain from “created thing”? 3 What good does it do
us? “Yes,” says the vain and quarrelsome man, “for if you do not call him a created thing,
you ascribe suffering to the Father. Everyone who begets is subject to suffering: he is
either contracted or expanded, or made simple, or drained off, or swollen, or [suffers]
something of that kind.”

4 Alas, what a wicked way of thinking this is, and how far from the truth! Who will think
such things about God? What suspicion will dare such things? Clearly no one, not even the
demons, will think anything of the kind. 5 Even if someone confesses the Father, he
believes that the Father has truly begotten the Son. For the divine is not borne about in
bulk, nor is it a body with child, so that it would have to endure the things just
mentioned. 6 “For God is Spirit,” and Spirit does not undergo flowing, cutting,
contraction, diminishing, or expansion, or anything of that kind. So, in that the Father
is Spirit, he has begotten the Son, God the Word, in a spiritual way: outside of time,
beyond comprehension, and without beginning.

CHAPTER 47

1 But to persuade those who think such things, let us not claim that the cases are alike.
Let us instead turn their own bad defense back on them by means of illustrations drawn
from like things. A created thing is whatever falls short of the Master himself
infinitely, and ten thousand times over. 2 Many people in the desert who need fire fill a
glass vessel with water and bring up some quickly flammable material made of flax or tow.
They stand facing the sun, and the brilliance shining through the glass onto the material
beneath it takes fire from the sun at once and sets it alight. Has the sun been cut, then,
by sharing its substance? Has it run short? Has it been diminished? No, they say. 3 So if
a created thing was not diminished, how much more is this true of God, who is boundless,
beyond comprehension and undefiled! Being Spirit, he begot from himself the Word, God, who
is beyond description, beyond comprehension and incorruptible, and he begot him in
incorruption. He did not do it through suffering, or cutting, or lack, but as one perfect
begetting one perfect, in perfection.

4 Now it is the nature of fire to kindle many lamps from one, and the first is not
diminished. Again, the same substance can be made up of many separate parts, I mean of
lamps or torches. 5 But the divine is not like this, God forbid. The Word did not come
again and blend together with the Father. Rather, the Father is Father, the Son is Son,
and the Holy Spirit is Holy Spirit.

CHAPTER 48

1 It is foolish, then, what the Manichaeans say, that in [the mind (the text is corrupt
here)] of Mani the souls that come from the pillar of light are one body, and that when
they are released from their bodies they are formed again into the one substance, as if
gathered into the one pillar according to the pattern of their molding. 2 But the Gospel
did not show it so. He broke the bread from five loaves and filled five thousand, and he
did not let their leftovers go to waste. Instead he said, “Gather them, and let none of
the fragments be lost.” And they gathered twelve baskets. 3 They gathered the fragments
together into containers, but he did not join the pieces back into loaves as they had
been. They gathered the multitude of pieces, but as many separate fragments, and what he
showed was a single gathering into baskets.

4 We have not allegorized this as a matter of theory, nor the example of the sun just
mentioned. For we do not say that the loaves or the fragments are souls, God forbid. Nor
do we make God equal to the sun, which he created, nor the Only-begotten equal to the
radiance that the sun sends into the tow. 5 In a similar way, the souls that have been
begotten are not joined into one blended mass, God forbid. They go into the dwelling
places of God, of which it is written that “in the Father’s house are many dwelling
places.” They do not become one heap, but each is counted separately. 6 Nor, in saying
that God has begotten his only-begotten Son, do we attach suffering to him, as they do in
their wicked blasphemy. For they say that everyone who begets grows weary through passion,
and so, by their reasoning, we must call him neither a created thing nor something
begotten, lest we make God weary or suffering. Where, then, did we find the Son? Or why
does he have the name of Son?

7 These are the reasonings of men, springing from earthly ways of thinking. For it is
forbidden to apply our human sufferings to God, since God says plainly, “My thought is not
as your thoughts,” and again, “God is not like man.”

CHAPTER 49

1 So let them stop their blasphemy and learn from the Father, who says, “This is my
beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” Again he speaks as of things still to come: “You
are my beloved Son, whom I have chosen.” And then in the Songs he is “picked out from ten
thousands.” Let them tell us, then, where this choosing comes from. 2 For these babblers
suppose that by saying “I have chosen” he is called Son by grace and not by nature. Let
them show who is like him, so that he could test them all and choose that one. 3 For if he
is the only-begotten Son, there is no one equal to him, no one to set beside him, as
though he were like the Son among the sons of God. These others he knows by grace; but no
one can be made equal to him, because he is Son by nature.

4 It is plain, then, where “chosen out” and where “election” come from. There were many
tens of thousands on the earth, and Mary alone “found grace,” and in her he chose the holy
flesh. 5 This is why the Father said, “I am well pleased.” David speaks in the same way in
the person of the apostles, who believed in the Lord and with joy showed his grace to the
nations: “He subjected peoples to us and nations under our feet; he chose for us the
inheritance, the beauty of Jacob, whom he loved.” That is, the pure essence of his beauty,
6 the beauty of all Jacob, the flesh chosen from Mary through the Holy Spirit. * The
Father showed from above, at John the Baptist, what had come about through the economy of
the flesh. For the Father was well pleased in the coming of Christ in the flesh, while the
Godhead is boundless in its nature.

CHAPTER 50

1 50. The apostle also calls him “Son of love.” He says: “who rescued us from the
authority of darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of the Son of his love.” 2 Here
again those who talk nonsense do not understand the wording, and they say that the Son
exists by an advance in God’s love. These ignorant men do not know the contrast in the
statement. For in another place the apostle says that “God loved us in Christ.” 3 For the
only-begotten is truly the beloved Son, since the Father is love and the Son is love,
because love is from love. So he is Son of love for our sake and for his own, because in
him God loved us, and gave up his only-begotten Son for us. So the Father does not grow
weary in working, nor does he suffer in begetting. 4 Let them not heap up blasphemies for
themselves in vain. For if the Son is a created being, then by their own argument he is
not to be worshipped. It is foolish to worship a creature and to set aside the first
commandment, which says, “Hear, Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord.”

5 So the holy Word is not a created being, because he is to be worshipped. The disciples
worshipped him; the angels worship him in heaven. For it says, “Let all the angels of God
worship him,” and, “I will worship you, Lord, my strength.” 6 There is one thing, stated
plainly and briefly, that cannot be contradicted, and no one can speak against it. If
those who are hostile to the Son of God can produce a testimony, let them show where the
Father said, in the Old or the New Testament, “I created a son for myself,” or where the
Son said, “The Father created me.” There are four Gospels, with 1,162 chapters, and from
beginning to end the Son spoke, and the Father spoke to him, and nowhere did the Son say,
“My Father created me,” nor did the Father say, “I created a son for myself,” or “I
created my Son.”

CHAPTER 51

1 51. But the quarrelsome and glory-loving man says: “What then do you say about the
body?” That it was taken from Mary, of course. “And what of Mary?” he says. “Is she
uncreated or created?” Created, of course, and we ourselves say so, since she was born of
a man and a woman. “Then what do you mean by ‘from Mary’? Do you worship the Savior in the
body, or do you not?” How could I not worship? If I do not worship, I have no life. “See,
then: you worship a created thing, the body.” But there is great madness in those who say
such things. 2 For a king clothed in purple is worshipped by everyone. Is the purple
worshipped, or the king? Clearly the king. The purple, while it is being worn, is
worshipped along with him; but when the king takes it off and sets it aside, the purple is
no longer worshipped.

3 A king also often sits in a temple on his own throne, and those who bow down bow down to
the king in his temple and on his throne; but when the king gets up, no one worships the
temple or the throne. And no one so mad as to want to worship the king in his temple says
to the king, “Come out of your temple, so that I may worship you.” 4 In the same way,
then, no one would say to the only-begotten, “Leave the body, so that I may worship you.”
Rather he worships the only-begotten together with the body, the uncreated together with
the holy temple, which he received when he came. 5 And no one says to the king, “Get up
from your throne, so that I may worship you apart from the throne.” Rather, he worships
the king together with his throne. So too Christ is worshipped together with the body that
was buried and raised.

CHAPTER 52

1 52. But, they say, what do you mean? Did the Father beget the Son willingly, or
unwillingly? For you say that the Word was always, and that there was no time before the
Word. Yet even the Arians themselves, to deceive some, claim that the Son of God was
begotten outside of time. They refuse, however, to call him eternal, and say instead,
“There was once when he was not.” They suppose that “once” does not mean a time. 2 But
when the word is examined, you expose the ignorant. For “once,” as the dictionaries use
it, signifies time. In saying that it does not signify time, they fall into the absurdity
of their own wicked belief. They use words ironically, while in their thinking they fight
fiercely against the Son of God, shamelessly holding him to be wholly foreign to the
Godhead of the Father. So then, did he beget willingly or unwillingly?

3 If we say “unwillingly,” we put the divine nature under compulsion. If we say
“willingly,” we grant that the will existed before the Word. Even if it were an
indivisible moment, a blink of an eye, or some tiny fraction of an hour, that fraction
signifies time before the Word, and we fall back into their argument. And if we say that
he did not beget willingly, then the divine nature is driven by a necessity of nature and
not by the freedom of will. 4 But none of these things applies to God, as you suppose, you
vain man. For these things are not found with God. So he begot neither willingly nor
unwillingly, but by the surpassing excellence of his nature. For the divine nature
surpasses deliberation, does not fall under time, and is not led by necessity. 5 In us
nothing is ready-made, because there was a time when we did not exist. We first deliberate
about something, and then we do what we do; or, if we have not deliberated, what has not
yet been done by us does not exist. But with God all things are complete and smooth, and
all things are fulfilled in him. He begot, neither willingly nor unwillingly, the one who
exists eternally, the holy Word and God begotten from him, but he did so in his surpassing
and unspeakable nature.

CHAPTER 53

1 53. A very great wonder comes over me, children of the faith and of the church, at how
these quarrelsome people have twisted true things into allegory, and take what is said
figuratively as though it were literally true, and so go astray. When they speak of “being
begotten,” which belongs to him by nature, they say it is not as with any of the things
begotten. But “being created,” which is foreign to his Godhead, even if it was once said
in an allegorical sense, they call true; and the truth they do away with. 2 For when
Isaiah says, “I saw the Lord of Sabaoth,” and “the Lord appeared to Moses,” and “the Lord
appeared to Abraham,” and “Daniel saw a vision of the Ancient of Days,” and such things,
and “the Lord appeared to Ezekiel” and he said, “I saw the likeness of God,” they say that
these things are not so, falsely accusing the prophets,

3 supposedly on the basis of the saying of the Gospel, in which the Savior taught that “no
one has ever seen God.” And they say: “If the Only-begotten said that no one has seen him,
but the prophets say they have seen him, then either the Only-begotten or the prophets
must be lying.” 4 By the argument of those who speak this way, the things in the prophets
would also be false, as the Manichaeans claim. But if the prophets do not lie but speak
the truth, in line with the Savior’s word, “the one who speaks in the prophets: Behold, I
am here,” then the matter calls for understanding and there is need of allegory. 5 For
this is often fulfilled in the following way. We see the sea from some part of a mountain
or a plain, and we speak truly when we say so. Yet if someone says that he has not seen
it, he does not lie but speaks the truth. For he does not know where its depth is or where
its length is; he does not know its bulk or its vast hollow.

6 And through some opening we look at the sky, but we do not know its extent. If one
person says, “I saw it,” he saw it; and if another says, “I did not see it,” he did not
see it. For we saw truly, as far as we can take it in. But we did not see it as it is. 7
So also the prophets were counted worthy to see as though through an opening, through the
narrow passage of their own body, and in 8 They saw, but not as the boundless nature of
the vision really is. In this way the divine Scriptures are found to agree with one
another: the prophets say that they have seen (for they truly saw), and the Savior says,
“No one has ever seen God” (for they did not see him as he is). But he himself saw the
nature, unseen, and he gave to the one who could not see the power of a gracious gift, so
that he might see the power of the vision.

CHAPTER 54

1 But do not play the actor again and say: “The prophets saw, not with their eyes, but
with the mind, understanding only [in thought].” For this is exactly why Isaiah says, “Woe
is me, for I am pierced to the heart, because I am a man with unclean lips, and I live
among a people with unclean lips, and I have seen the Lord Sabaoth.” He did not say, “I
saw with my mind,” but “with my eyes.” So they saw, and they did not see: they saw as far
as they were able, and they truly saw, but they did not see as the infinity of the
incomprehensible really is. 2 In the same way many allegorize paradise. The God-driven
Origen, for example, wished to bring into life an appearance rather than the truth. He
says, “There is no paradise on earth.” 3 He supposedly bases this on the saying of the
holy apostle: “I know a man fourteen years ago (whether in the body I do not know, or
outside the body I do not know, God knows) such a man caught up as far as the third
heaven.” But do not misread this and say that it means the third part of the air. For when
he says “as far as the third heaven” he is not speaking of a third part, but of a number,
three.

4 And he says, “I know such a man caught up into paradise, and hearing words which it is
not permitted for a man to speak.” 5 Glory to God Almighty, who makes everything plain in
every way and speaks with precision, so that the true [believers] are not led astray. For
he did not join heaven and paradise in one brief phrase. He says, “I know a man caught up
as far as the third heaven,” and then again, “caught up into paradise.” The use of the
article marks off a different person and points to a different place. 6 It is as if
someone had a mountain and a plain, with the plain encircling the mountain, and he wished
to get to the far side of the mountain on that same plain. If he chooses to make the
journey across the plain to whatever place he wants beyond the mountain, that is possible
for him. But if he chooses first to climb the mountain, and then from the mountain to come
down again to the place on the plain beyond it, that too is possible for him.

7 Understand the apostle’s words in the same way: first he went up into heaven, and then
he came down into paradise, as it is said, “My beloved went down into his garden.” And the
Savior says, “Today you will be with me in paradise.”

CHAPTER 55

1 But if paradise is not on earth, and what is written in Genesis is not true but is to be
allegorized, then nothing in the sequence is true, and everything is allegorized. 2 “In
the beginning,” it says, “God made the heaven and the [earth].” These things are not
allegorized; they are visible. And it speaks of the firmament and the sea, of shoots and
trees and plants, of grass, animals, fish and birds: all the things we see came into being
in truth. And he made man, who truly exists. 3 So he placed the one whom he had formed in
paradise, having made this same man in an image, in the image of God. 4 Do not pry into
the gifts of God which were given to man by grace. For we do not deny that all human
beings are in the image of God. 5 But we do not pry into how it is “in the image.” We do
not take the image to be the molded body, nor the soul, nor the mind, nor virtue. For
there are many things that keep me from speaking in that way.

6 Yet neither do we say that the body is not in the image, or the soul. For it belongs to
believers to confess the Scripture, and to unbelievers to “set aside the grace.” So the
“in the image” is in man, but God himself knows how it is. 7 For if you say, “He made man
in the image,” and suppose that this is the body, yet God is invisible, incomprehensible
and beyond conceiving, how will what is visible, comprehensible and falls under touch be
the image of the invisible and incomprehensible? 8 And if you say that the body is not
“according to the image,” Scripture says, “He took dust from the earth and formed the
man.” It calls the earthy part “man,” and it also calls the part that has a soul “man.”
For it says, “He breathed into his face the breath of life, and the man became a living
soul.”

9 We understand both the soul and the body to be created. How is the soul created? Because
Scripture says, “He breathed.” We do not say that the soul is a part of God, and we do not
say that it is foreign to the breath he breathed into it. How exactly this is to be
understood is known to God alone.

CHAPTER 56

1 56. But we believe God, who is truthful in all things, without prying and without
trickery. And suppose you say that the soul is what is “according to the image.” Yet the
apostle says, “The word of God is living and active, and sharper than any two-edged sword,
and piercing as far as the divisions of the soul.” 2 If, then, the soul has divisions, but
God is without division, how can the soul be what is “according to the image”? Also, the
soul does not know the future, but God certainly knows it. We see what lies in front of
the body, but we do not know what is behind us. And if you say that it is not the soul,
[consider that] Scripture has certainly called the soul “man” as well, and man is both
soul and body. 3 But perhaps you will say that the mind is what is “according to the
image.” Scripture says, “I see another law at war in my members, taking me captive in my
mind to the law of sin that is in my members.” How, then, can what is taken captive be
“according to the image”? [Yet it also says,] “I will sing with the mind, I will sing with
the spirit.”

4 And if you say that virtue is what is “according to the image,” I will answer you: tell
me about Adam. What virtue had he practised before he was formed? For he did not exist in
the beginning, yet from the beginning he was formed according to the image. And if you say
that virtue does not exist, you are not speaking well. For to what does it belong to be
“according to the image” if not to virtue? But man was formed according to the image
before virtue. For Adam had not yet lived a life of virtue, since, clearly, he had not yet
even been created. 5 And if you say that baptism is what is “according to the image,” then
were the righteous who did not receive baptism not according to the image? For the type
began from Moses and the sea, grace was opened up from John, and in Christ the gift was
brought to completion.

CHAPTER 57

1 57. So all people have what is “according to the image,” but not according to nature.
For human beings do not have the “according to the image” in equality with God. God is
incomprehensible and beyond all thought, being Spirit, and Spirit above every spirit, and
light above every light. 2 But we do not deprive man of what God himself gave. For he is
truthful, who by grace gave man the “according to the image.” And this can be understood
from comparable things. 3 For we see that the Savior took [bread] into his hands, as it
stands in the Gospel, when he reclined at the supper. He took this [bread], and when he
had given thanks he said, “This is my [body],” and he gave it to his disciples and said,
“This is my [body].” 4 And we see that it is not equal or like, either to his image in the
flesh, or to his invisible divinity, or to the features of his limbs. For the one is round
in shape [text defective] and without feeling.

5 [Text defective] ... in respect of power, and he was pleased by grace to say, “This is
my [body],” and no one disbelieves the word. For whoever does not believe that he is
truthful in what he said falls away from grace and from salvation. 6 But when we hear, we
also believe. We believe that it is his [text defective]. But we know our Lord as wholly
sense, wholly perceiving, wholly God, wholly moving, wholly active, wholly light, wholly
Word, incomprehensible, yet he has given us this by grace.

CHAPTER 58

1 58. Now this Adam was placed in paradise and ate from the tree. Scripture says that
paradise was “in Eden, toward the east,” and “a spring went up out of Eden.” It did not
say “came down,” so that we would not suppose Eden to be in heaven. For if it had been in
heaven, it would have said that a spring “comes down” from above. But it says, “A river
goes out of Eden,” and it did not say that it comes down. 2 This river “is divided into
four heads. The name of the one is Pheison.” We can see the Pheison with our own eyes. The
Pheison is the Ganges, as it is called by the Indians and the Ethiopians; the Greeks call
it the river Indus. For it “encircles the whole land of Euilat,” that is, lesser and
greater Ethiopia, the regions of the Euilaeans. It crosses greater Ethiopia, falls toward
the south, and sinks in, within Gadeira, into the great Ocean.

3 The second river is “Geon.” Here too we see a river that can be perceived by the senses,
not one to be read as an allegory. It is the river that comes down through Ethiopia and
crosses lesser Ethiopia, the Anoubitis, the Blemmyan and the Axomitic lands. It floods the
regions of the Thebaid and Egypt, and empties into this sea of ours. If anyone does not
believe it, let him listen to Jeremiah, who says, “Why do you and the land of Egypt have
to drink the muddied water of Geon?” 4 “The third,” it says, “is the river Tigris, which
flows opposite the Assyrians.” It cuts through the regions of the East, goes down under
the ground, and rises again out of Armenia between the Cardyaeans and the Armenians. It
springs up again and is channeled into the land of the Assyrians. 5 The fourth river, the
Euphrates, likewise goes down under the earth in the same way and comes up out of Armenia,
and so it floods Persia. So then, if there is no paradise that can be perceived by the
senses, there is no spring. If there is no spring, there is no river. If there is no
river, there are not four heads. If there is no Pheison, there is no Geon and no Tigris.
If there is no Tigris, there is no Euphrates.

7 If there is no Euphrates, there is no fig tree, no leaves, no Adam, no [eating], no Eve.
If there is no Eve, he did not eat from the tree. If he did not eat from the tree, there
is no Adam. 8 If there is no Adam, there are no human beings, and the truth becomes a
myth, and everything is turned into allegory. But there is an Adam. For we come from him;
we are all his offspring by succession, and we see him in the multitude of those who have
followed one another in the line of descent.

CHAPTER 59

1 For Adam fathered Seth “according to his form and according to his image.” This is so
that no one would suppose that the man who was molded and those who were born were
different kinds of beings; this is why Scripture says “according to his form and according
to his image.” Seth fathered Enos, Enos fathered Cainan, Cainan fathered Maleleel,
Maleleel fathered Jared, and Jared fathered Enoch. Enoch fathered Methuselah, Methuselah
fathered Lamech, and Lamech fathered Noah. Then the flood came, not as an allegory but in
truth. Every soul perished, and “eight souls” of human beings remained. 2 If you hear
“souls” used for a city, do not think that they have no bodies. For the whole man is named
from one part of him. Scripture says, “Jacob went down into Egypt with seventy-five
souls.” It does not mean that the souls followed without bodies, but with bodies; so it
called the whole man by this word. And Luke, who wrote the Acts of the Apostles, says, “We
were in the ship about eighty souls.”

3 Common usage also tends to call slaves “bodies.” A man is said to be the master of a
hundred bodies, though they also have souls. But since mastery over people rules over
their bodies and not their souls, they reasonably called slaves “bodies,” together with
their souls, to show the use that is made of their bodies. 4 Noah came out of the ark,
having fathered Shem, Ham and Japheth. Shem fathered Arphaxad; Arphaxad fathered Kainan;
Kainan fathered Sala; Sala fathered Eber; Eber fathered Phalek; Phalek fathered Ragau;
Ragau fathered Serouch; Serouch fathered Nachor; Nachor fathered Tharra; Tharra fathered
Abraham; Abraham fathered Isaac; Isaac fathered Jacob; Jacob fathered Judah; Judah
fathered Phares; Phares fathered Hesrom; Hesrom fathered Aram; Aram fathered Aminadab;
Aminadab fathered Naasson; Naasson fathered Salmon; Salmon fathered Boaz; Boaz fathered
Iobed by Ruth; Iobed fathered Jesse; Jesse fathered David the king; David fathered Solomon
by the wife of Uriah; Solomon fathered Rehoboam; Rehoboam fathered Abia; Abia fathered
Asaph; Asaph fathered Jehoshaphat; Jehoshaphat fathered Joram; Joram fathered Ochozias;
Ochozias fathered Joas; Joas fathered Amesias; Amesias fathered Ozias, who was called
Azarias; Ozias fathered Joatham; Joatham fathered Achaz; Achaz fathered Hezekiah; Hezekiah
fathered Manasseh; Manasseh fathered Amos; Amos fathered Josiah; Josiah fathered
Jechonias; Jechonias in turn fathered Salathiel; Salathiel fathered Zerubbabel; Zerubbabel
fathered Abioud; Abioud fathered Eliakim; Eliakim fathered Asor; Asor fathered Sadok;
Sadok fathered Acheim; Acheim fathered Elioud; Elioud fathered Eleazar; Eleazar fathered
Matthias; Matthias fathered Jacob; Jacob fathered Joseph.

CHAPTER 60

1 Joseph was an old man and a widower. Earlier he had taken a first wife and had by her
four sons, James (who was called the Lord’s brother because he was brought up together
with him), Simon, Judas and Joses, and two daughters, [Anna] and Salome. 2 This Joseph,
old and a widower, was chosen by necessity when lots were cast among widowers and
unmarried men, tribe by tribe, for the virgins of the temple, since firstborn children,
male and female, were dedicated in the temple. By lot he received the holy virgin Mary,
from whom, according to the flesh, our Lord Jesus Christ was born through the Holy Spirit,
not from the seed of a man and not by union of bodies. 3 So the Lord, who is God, was born
according to the flesh from the tribe of Judah, from the seed of David and Abraham, in the
forty-second year of the reign

4 of Augustus. Augustus reigned fifty-six years and six months. After him his son Tiberius
took over the rule, for [number missing] years. After Tiberius, Gaius reigned three years,
nine months and twenty-two days. After Gaius, Claudius [number missing] years. After
Claudius, Nero [number missing] years. After Nero, Vespasian nine years. After Vespasian,
his son Titus two years. After Titus, his brother Domitian [number missing] years and
[number missing] months. After Domitian, Nerva one year and four months. After Nerva,
Trajan nineteen years. After Trajan, Hadrian [number missing]. After Hadrian, Antoninus
the Pious twenty-two years. After Antoninus, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, also called Verus,
nineteen years. Commodus [number missing] years. Pertinax [number missing] months. Severus
[number missing] years. His son Antoninus seven years. Macrinus one year. Another
Antoninus [number missing] years. Alexander (not the Macedonian) [number missing] years.
Maximinus [number missing] years. Gordian seven years. Philip seven years. Decius [number
missing] year(s). Gallus, also called Volusian, [number missing] years. [One name and
number lost in the text] years. Another Claudius, one year. Aurelian [number uncertain]
years. Tacitus seven months. Probus [number uncertain] years. Carus, Carinus and Numerian,
two years. Diocletian [number missing] years.

5 After Diocletian came Maximian, Licinius, Constantius, Constantine, Constans,
Constantius and Constantine, Julian, Jovian, Valentinian, Valens and Gratian, down to this
present year, [a number of] years after the death of Diocletian. For this year is the
ninetieth of Diocletian, the [number missing] year of Valentinian and Valens, and the
[number uncertain] year of Gratian, in the consulship of Gratian Augustus for the third
time and of the most illustrious Equitius, in the second indiction.

CHAPTER 61

1 So all of us come from the Adam mentioned earlier, in unbroken succession. The order has
not been lost, and the things God has done are not to be treated as allegory. 2 There was,
then, an Adam. There were fig leaves and a fig tree, and the tree of the knowledge of good
and evil, and the tree of life in the middle of the garden. There was a serpent,
disobedience and obedience. There are rivers, and there was an Eve, and the thing God
formed. 3 For all things are possible for God: to change what is perishable into
imperishability, and to make what is on earth continue in imperishability. 4 Let no one be
astonished at this. For he came and showed it, taking perishable flesh, clothing himself
in it with his divinity, and proving it imperishable. For “who will bring a charge”
against God? 5 Let us look at another point. Scripture says that God drove them out of
paradise, and set the Cherubim and the flaming sword to guard the entrance to the tree of
life. And Adam and those with him went out and lived opposite paradise. Let no one be
deceived by empty myths.

6 For God is able to raise up children from stones. God is also able to change what is
perishable into imperishability, and he is able to make a place of paradise-rest on earth
whenever he wishes. 7 For the earth does not belong to one god and the heaven to another.
All things belong to the same God, and he gives imperishability to each one as he wills. 8
For we know that Adam’s body was formed from the earth, the same earth from which our
bodies come, and we have the hope of eternal life and of an imperishable inheritance. For
the Savior’s body also came from Mary, and it has been united spiritually with the
imperishability of the Word in heaven. 9 We have gathered all these things and set them
down here because we do not want to throw away anything that is written. We want rather to
proceed in simplicity and be found faithful toward God in the things in which he truly
wrote for us, and gave us the way of truth for our salvation. It is fitting to leave to
him alone the knowledge of what cannot be grasped.

CHAPTER 62

1 62. Again, this Origen (may God grant him pardon for the fantasies he has put before
people by his allegorizing) has brought in another fabulous notion. The divine Scripture
says that God made tunics of skin for Adam and those with him. Origen claims that these
were not tunics of skin. 2 Rather, he says that the “tunic of skin” is the fleshly part of
the body, or the body itself. After the disobedience, he says, and after eating from the
tree, God clothed the souls with these bodies, that is, with this flesh. The whole claim
is foolish. 3 For Origen cleverly reasons, as he thinks, and says: “Was God a tanner, that
he should tan hides and work them into tunics for Adam and Eve?” But such a remark is far
more bestial. 4 Which was easier for God: to make heaven and earth out of nothing, or to
make tunics of skin? When has he ever wished to do his wonders and not done them? When has
he been unable to change lifeless things into living ones?

5 He made the rod of Moses, dry and wooden as it was, into a living serpent that pursued
Moses, so that Moses turned and fled. This was to show that it was no phantom but that
what happened was real. And how was it that for forty years the people’s garments did not
shrivel, their hair did not grow long, and their sandals did not wear out? 6 Let the fools
who follow Origen’s madness on this point tell me this. When the Savior rose from the dead
and left the linen cloths in the tomb, as it is written, did he then appear naked to the
disciples, though he had risen from the dead with body and soul? 7 But when he showed
Thomas and those with him his bones, his flesh, his hands and his side, he clearly was not
naked. So who wove him the garments he wore after the resurrection?

8 You will surely tell me they were spiritual garments, which he made for himself by his
own will. And if he could make such garments for himself, could he not make those tunics
of skin for Adam and those with him by his own will? Truly 9 Origen’s allegory falls
apart. For if Adam’s flesh was created after he ate from the tree, where did God get the
rib before Adam had eaten? When Adam was awakened from his trance, he says, “This is bone
from my bones and flesh from my flesh.”

CHAPTER 63

1 63. So from now on, let no one trouble us. For this is how the holy church of God has
believed from the beginning. Origen will not stand with us on the day of judgment. 2 I am
truly amazed that some people put up with a man who blasphemed his own Master. Let such
people read Origen’s work On First Principles, and let those who think they are sons of
the catholic church learn from it. [The text is defective here.] And let them not dare to
separate the Son from the Godhead of the Father. 3 [The text is defective here.] How is it
that Origen did not think it worthwhile to say even that the Son sees the Father? Instead
he says: “Just as the Son cannot see the Father, so the Holy Spirit cannot see the Son.”
And again: “The angels cannot see the Holy Spirit, and human beings cannot see the
angels.”

4 And he deceived himself most of all, and those whom he led astray. But he did not
deceive the man who is understanding and faithful, who believes the truth and the 5
spiritual teaching. So stop, Origen, and stop, you disciples of Origen. The apostles and
prophets [speak the truth] far more than you and your teacher do. 6 Let the Gnostics stop,
for they are condemned in their way of life. Let the Valentinians, the Manichaeans and the
Marcionites stop, who are mistaken in everything. Let the Arians, the Anomoeans, the
Sabellians, the Pneumatians (who are also called Pneumatomachians) and the Dimoirites
stop, who foolishly throw out the mind. 7 For all divine Scripture speaks the truth. But
understanding is needed, to know that God speaks the truth, to believe him and his words,
and to know the gifts God has given, is giving and will give. Understanding is also needed
to know, according to the promise, the resurrection of the dead in perfection. For every
heresy lies, because it has not received the Holy Spirit according to the tradition of the
fathers in the holy catholic church of God.

CHAPTER 64

1 64. We will speak about all these things again, as far as our weakness allows. But we
are the least and the lowly, and have been counted worthy [by God] to belong to the holy
catholic church of God. So, as far as our smallness is able, we set out in part the
foundation of this church on all these matters, for those who want to care for their own
life. 2 What has been said about the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit would have been
quite enough. But we are eager to make it clearer still, for the joy, the keeping and the
full assurance of believers. So we are gathering the testimonies of divine Scripture, to
make a wide feast and a cause of rejoicing for the faithful who read them, and we will not
hesitate to show [often] how secure and firm our hope in God is. Nothing at all is
different in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. The holy Trinity is of one rank and
of one substance.

3 We do not draw our teaching from anywhere else, nor from our own thoughts. We draw it
from our life, that is, from the prophets, and from the coming of our Savior and his love
for humankind. 4 For he came, our life came, and showed us the light again, when he found
us wandering astray. For we were, indeed we were, in pride and blasphemies, in the
likenesses of idols, in the godlessness of spirits, immersed in the commands of every
evil. 5 All these things were in me. Unwillingly I did what I did not want, and I was
driven to do what I hated, with sin thus serving me [sic]. Then the holy Father sent his
holy Son, and in his mercy he saved me and rescued me from all my corruptions.

CHAPTER 65

1 65. For the grace of our Lord and Savior appeared, teaching us to deny ungodliness and
worldly desires, and to live sensibly, godly and righteously in the present age, while we
wait for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus
Christ. He gave himself for us, to redeem us from all lawlessness, and to cleanse for
himself a people of his own, zealous for good works. 2 [Having wiped out] the handwriting
against us, with its decrees, which stood against us, he took it out of the way by nailing
it to the cross. He stripped the rulers and authorities, made a public example of them
with boldness, and triumphed over them in it. He shattered the gates and crushed the iron
bars. Again he showed the light [to the earth], stretching out his hand, making a road,
showing the steps up to the heavens, and counting us worthy to live in paradise again.

3 So he made his home in us, and he gave us the righteous requirement of the law through
the Spirit, so that we might know him and know that [what concerns him] is the beginning
and end of life. He became for us a law of righteousness, a law of faith, a law of the
Spirit, and set us free from the law of the flesh and of sin. 4 Therefore “I delight in
the law of God according to the inner man.” And our inner man is Christ, if indeed he
lives in us. 5 For he died, and became for us the way of life, so that those who live
might no longer live for themselves, but for the one who died for us and was raised, the
cause of life. He remembered the oath made many generations before, as David says. God was
in Christ, reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them.

6 Because in him all the fullness was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile all
things to himself, making peace through the blood of the cross. 7 So he arrived “for the
administration of the fullness of the times,” as was promised to Abraham and the other
saints, “to sum up all things in him, the things in the heavens and the things on the
earth.” 8 There was a separation and hostility within God’s forbearance. But he reconciled
us in the body of his flesh, “making both one through himself,” for he came as our peace.
He broke down the middle wall of the partition. In his flesh he did away with the
hostility, the law of commandments expressed in decrees, so that he might create the two
into one new man. He wanted the Gentiles to be fellow members of the body, fellow sharers
and fellow heirs of the promise. So he gave the command, saying, “Come to me, all you who
labor and are burdened, and I will give you rest.”

9 So, since I was weak through the flesh, a Savior was sent to me in the likeness of
sinful flesh. He fulfilled this plan of salvation in order to redeem me from slavery, from
corruption and from death. And he became for me righteousness, sanctification and
redemption. 10 He is righteousness, because through his faith he loosed sin. He is
sanctification, because he set me free through water and Spirit and by his word. He is
redemption, because his blood is the ransom of the true Lamb, who gave himself for me. He
is the atoning sacrifice that cleanses the world and reconciles all things in heaven and
on earth. In this he fulfilled, at the appointed times, the mystery that was hidden before
the ages and generations. 11 The same one “will transform the body of our humiliation so
that it becomes like his glorious body, according to the working of [his power] to subject
all things to himself,” “because in him all the fullness of the deity dwells bodily.”

CHAPTER 66

1 Christ, then, is the vessel of wisdom and of deity. As mediator he “reconciles all
things to God in himself, not counting their sins.” He fulfills the hidden mysteries by
faith in his covenant, which was promised beforehand by the law and the prophets. He is
proclaimed Son of God and called son of David. For he is both, God and man, “mediator
between God and men,” the true “house of God,” a “holy priesthood.” He is the giver of the
Holy Spirit, who regenerates and renews all things again for God. For “the Word became
flesh and dwelt among us,” and “we beheld his glory, glory as of an only-begotten from the
Father.” 2 Rain is joined in nature with trees and plants and forms body in them, and each
of the fruits is formed according to its own likeness. In the olive tree the rain becomes
rich oil, taking its substance from the tree. In the vine it takes on color as sweet wine.
In the fig tree the fig is made sweet. And in each of the seeds it makes growth increase
according to the seed’s own kind.

3 In the same way, I think, the Word of God became flesh in Mary and was found as a man in
the seed of Abraham, according to the promise. “For we have found the Messiah, of whom
Moses wrote.” Moses said, “Let my utterance come down like rain,” and David said, “Let him
come down like rain upon the fleece, and like drops dripping on the [earth].” So the wool,
receiving the dew, increases the growth of the fleece, 4 and the earth, receiving the
rain, increases the fruit of hope. [Being tilled] by this receiving at the command of the
Master, and readily yielding its nature, it has all the more eagerness to take from him. 5
So also with the virgin Mary. When she said, “How shall I know [this]?” and “that this
will be to me,” she heard: “The Spirit of the Lord will come upon you, and the power of
the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born from you will be holy
and will be called Son of the Most High.”

6 Christ speaks through the angel, and the Master shapes himself within his own creature,
having taken “the form of a servant.” Mary draws in the Word for conception, as the earth
draws in the rain. And the Word of God shows himself to be a holy fruit, taking on a
mortal nature. 7 He was born of her, who drew him in like the earth and the fleece. He is
the fruit of true hope for the saints who were waiting. As Elizabeth said, “Blessed are
you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb.” The Word took this fruit from
humanity, suffering though he is beyond suffering. 8 This is the living bread that came
down from heaven and gives life. This is the fruit of the true olive, the oil of anointing
and of the compounded ointment, which Moses prefigured. This is the true vine, which the
Father alone tends, having produced for us a cluster of joy.

9 This is the living water. The thirsty man who receives it will not thirst again, for it
is in his belly, “leaping up to eternal life.” The new farmers received from this and
shared it with the world. But the old farmers dried up and ruined [it] through unbelief.
10 By his own blood he sanctifies the nations, and by his own Spirit he leads the called
up into the heavens. “As many as are led by his Spirit, these” live to God. Those who are
not are still reckoned to death, and are called soulish, that is, fleshly. 11 He therefore
commands us to set aside the works of the flesh, which are strongholds of sin. He commands
us to put to death the members of death through his grace. He commands us to receive a
holy Spirit, whom we did not have before. This Spirit gives life to me, who died long ago,
and if I do not receive him I will die.

12 For apart from his Spirit everyone is dead. “If then his Spirit is in us, the one who
raised him from the dead will give life to our mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells
in us.” But I think both dwell in the righteous person, Christ and his Spirit.

CHAPTER 67

1 But Christ is believed to be God from God, from the Father, and the Spirit to be from
Christ, or from both. Christ says, “who proceeds from the Father,” and “he will receive
from what is mine.” And Christ is from the Holy Spirit. For “what is in her,” he says, “is
from the Spirit” [this is the voice of the angel]. So I understand the mystery that
redeems me. I receive it by faith, by hearing alone, by friendship toward the one who came
to me. 2 For God knows himself, Christ proclaims himself, and the Holy Spirit makes
himself known to the saints. In the holy Scriptures a Trinity is announced to us. It is
believed without prying and without quarrelling, on the basis of 3 hearing. From this
faith comes the salvation of grace: “righteousness is from faith, apart from works of
law.” For it is written that the Spirit of Christ is given to those who are being saved,
from hearing.

4 This faith is signified by the voices of heralds [text corrupt here], as I at least
think, having been taught from the Scriptures. Three holy, three together-holy; three
existing, three co-existing; three in form, three of like form; three active, three
working together; three subsisting, three co-subsisting, being with one another. This is
called the holy Trinity. Being three, they are one harmony, one Godhead, of the same
being, of the same Godhead, of the same substance, like from like, working an equality of
grace of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. 5 The “how” is left for them to teach. “For no
one knows the Father except the Son, nor the Son except the Father, and the one to whom
the Son may reveal him.” And he reveals him through the Holy Spirit. 6 So these are three,
whether from him, or from him, or toward him. Each is understood fittingly, just as they
reveal themselves: as light, fire, spirit, and, I think, in other likenesses of visions,
according to how worthy the person ministering is.

7 So it is the same God who in the beginning said, “Let there be light, and there was
light” (the visible light). It is he who enlightened us to see the true light, which
enlightens every person coming into the world. “Send out your light and your truth,” says
David. He is the Lord who said, “In the last days I will pour out from my Spirit on all
flesh, and their sons and their daughters will prophesy, and their young men will see
visions.” In this he shows us three persons of holy service, from a subsistence that is
threefold.

CHAPTER 68

1 I say, then, that Christ became a servant of the circumcision for the sake of the truth
of God, to fulfil the promises, and that the Holy Spirit serves together with him. For we
have received this from the divine Scriptures. Christ is sent from the Father; the Holy
Spirit is sent. Christ speaks in the saints; the Holy Spirit speaks. Christ heals; the
Holy Spirit heals. Christ sanctifies; the Holy Spirit sanctifies. Christ baptizes; in his
name the Holy Spirit baptizes. 2 So the Scriptures say: “You will send your Spirit and
renew the face of the [earth].” This is like saying, “You will send out your word and melt
them.” 3 “While they were ministering to the Lord and fasting,” it says, “the Holy Spirit
said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’” This
is like saying, “But the Lord said, ‘Go into the city, and there you will be told what you
must do.’”

4 “So they, sent out by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia.” It is as if Christ were
saying, “Look, I am sending you out like sheep in the midst of wolves.” 5 “For it seemed
good to the Holy Spirit to lay no greater burden on you than these necessary things.” It
is as if he were saying, “I say, not I but the Lord, that a wife should not be separated
from her husband.” 6 They went through Phrygia and the Galatian region, since they were
prevented by the Holy Spirit from speaking the word in Asia. When they came to Mysia, they
tried to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit did not allow them. This is as if Christ were
saying, “Go and baptize all the nations,” and “Carry no bag, no staff, and no sandals.” 7
“Those men,” it says, “kept telling Paul through the Spirit not to go up to Jerusalem.” Or
Agabus: “This is what the Holy Spirit says: the man whose belt this is...” This is like
what Paul said: “Are you looking for proof of Christ speaking in me?” And: “Remember the
words of the Lord, that he himself said, It is [good] to give rather than to receive.”

8 “And now, look, I am going bound in the Spirit.” This is as if Paul were saying,
“prisoner of Jesus Christ.” 9 “Except that the Spirit testifies to me in every city,
saying...” This is like saying, “The Lord bears witness to my soul that I am not lying.”
10 “In power according to the Spirit of holiness.” This is like saying, “Holy is he who
rests among the holy.” 11 “And circumcision of the heart in the Spirit.” This is like
saying, “And you were circumcised with a circumcision not made by hands, in the stripping
off of the body of sins, in the circumcision of Christ.” 12 “If indeed the Spirit of God
dwells in you.” This is like saying, “As you received Christ, walk in him.” And also: “The
Spirit of the Lord spoke in me, and his word was in my mouth.” 13 “And having the
firstfruits of the Spirit.” This is like saying, “Christ is the firstfruits.”

14 “But the Spirit himself intercedes beyond measure for us.” This is like saying, “who is
at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us.” 15 “That the offering of the
[Gentiles] may be acceptable, sanctified in the Holy Spirit.” This is like saying, “May
the Lord sanctify you, so that you may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ.” 16
“But God revealed to us through his Spirit.” This is like saying, “when he who set me
apart from my mother’s womb was pleased, through his grace, to reveal his Son in me.” 17
“We have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God.” This is
like saying, “Test yourselves, to see whether Christ is in you.” 18 “You are God’s temple,
and the Spirit of God dwells in you.” This is like saying, “I will dwell in them and walk
among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.”

CHAPTER 69

1 Scripture also speaks of justification and grace as coming from both. “But you were
justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.” This is
like saying, “Having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord
Jesus Christ.” 2 “No one can say ‘Jesus is Lord’ except in the Holy Spirit.” And no one
can [receive] the Spirit, the Holy Spirit, except from the Lord. “There are varieties of
gifts, but the same Spirit. There are varieties of service, but the same Lord. There are
varieties of workings, but the same God who works all things in all.” And: “from glory to
glory, as from the Lord, the Spirit.” 3 “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit, in whom you
were sealed for the day of redemption.” This is like saying, “Or are we provoking the Lord
to jealousy? Are we stronger than he?”

4 “But the Spirit says expressly...” This is like saying, “Thus says the Lord Almighty.” 5
And: “My Spirit stands in your midst.” And: “If anyone opens to me, I and the Father will
come in and make our dwelling with him.” 6 Isaiah says, “and upon him the Spirit of God.”
Christ says, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because of which he anointed me.” And:
“Jesus from Nazareth, whom God anointed with the Holy Spirit.” Or: “The Lord has sent me,
and his Spirit.” 7 The voice of the Seraphim is plain too, crying out, “Holy, holy, holy,
Lord Sabaoth.” 8 And if you hear that Christ, “exalted to the right hand of God, received
from the Father the promise of the Spirit”; or “wait for the promise of the Father, which
you have heard”; or that “the Spirit drives him out into the desert”; or that he himself
says, “Do not worry about what you will say, for it is the Spirit of my Father who speaks
in you”; or “if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God”; or “whoever blasphemes against
the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven,” and so on; or “Father, into your hands I commit my
spirit,” and so on; or “the child grew and became strong in the Spirit”; or “Jesus, full
of the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan”; or “Jesus returned in the power of the
Spirit”; or “what is born of the Spirit is spirit” (which is like saying, “what has come
to be in him was life”); or “I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Helper,
the Spirit of truth”; or Peter’s words to Ananias, “Why has Satan filled your heart, so
that you lie to the Holy Spirit?” and after that, “You have not lied to men but to God.”
So the Holy Spirit is God from God, and God, since those who held back part of the price
of the field lied to him; or “he who was manifested in the flesh, was vindicated in the
Spirit” — I have nothing greater than this to say.

9 The Son also is God. “From them,” it says, “is the Christ according to the flesh, who is
God over all.” “Believe,” it says, “in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.” And “he
spoke to them the word of the Lord,” and “he brought them up into his house and set a
table before them, and rejoiced with his whole household that he had come to believe in
God.” Or that “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God.” Or “that they may adorn the teaching of God our Savior.” Or “For the grace of God
and Savior has appeared to all people, training us.” Or “awaiting the blessed hope and
appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.” 10 The Spirit and the
Word share the same service. “Take heed,” it says, “to yourselves and to all the flock, in
which the Holy Spirit has appointed you overseers, to shepherd the church of God.” That is
like saying, “I give thanks to Christ Jesus our Lord, who has strengthened me, because he
considered me faithful and appointed me to his service.”

CHAPTER 70

1 70. So, as has been shown, the Son and the Holy Spirit work together with the Father.
“By the word of the Lord the heavens were made firm, and by the breath [or Spirit] of his
mouth all their power.” The Holy Spirit is also to be worshiped: “Those who worship God
must worship in spirit and in truth.” 2 But if they work together in these things, then a
creature does not work with a creature, nor does the Godhead become created, nor is God
known as having measure or limit. For he is without boundary, cannot be contained, and
cannot be grasped by thought, and he holds within himself all the works of God. 3 Nor is
the creature to be worshiped. “They worshiped the creature,” it says, “rather than the
Creator, and were [put to shame].” How foolish it is to call a creature God and to set
aside the first commandment, which says, “Hear, Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord,”
and “There shall be no new god in you.”

4 In the holy Scriptures the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are called by various
names. The Father is called Father, Almighty, Father of all, Father of Christ. The Son is
called Word, Christ, true light. The Holy Spirit is called Helper, Spirit of truth, Spirit
of God, Spirit of Christ. 5 Furthermore, God and Father is also understood as light,
though as something far brighter, as power, wisdom, [life]. And if God and Father is
light, the Son is light from light, and he is the one “who dwells in unapproachable
light.” 6 God is entirely power, and for this reason the Son is “Lord of powers.” God is
entirely wisdom; so the Son is wisdom from wisdom, “in whom are hidden all the treasures
of wisdom.” God is entirely life; so the Son is life from life: “For I am the truth and
the life.” 7 The Holy Spirit is from both, Spirit from Spirit. For God is Spirit. [The
Godhead is the giver of gifts; the Spirit is] most truly the enlightener, the Helper, and
the one who announces the Father’s purposes. [The text here is uncertain.]

8 For as the Son is “the Angel of great counsel,” so also is the Holy Spirit. And
Scripture says: “We received the Spirit of Mind, so that we might see the things freely
given to us by God. These things we also speak, not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in
demonstration of the Spirit of God, comparing spiritual things with spiritual.”


THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN) (CHAPTERS 71–109)
=======================================================

THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN) continued

CHAPTER 71

1 But someone will say, “Then are we saying there are two sons? And how can he be only-
begotten?” Not at all. Who are you, who argue back against God? For he calls the Son the
one who is from himself, and the Holy Spirit the one who is from both. These are
understood by the saints by faith alone. They are bright and give light; their working is
full of light, and they act in harmony with the “Father” himself, the Father of light. So
listen in faith, my friend, 2 that the Father is the Father of a true Son, and is wholly
light. The Son is the Son of a true Father, light from light, not a son in name only, as
created or made things are. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth, a third light, from
the Father and the Son. 3 All other things are called sons by appointment or by title, and
are not like these in working, power, light or understanding. It is as when someone says,
“I have begotten sons and raised them high”; or “I said, You are gods, and all of you are
sons of the Most High”; or the words, “he who has begotten the drops of dew”; or “from
whom every family in heaven and on earth is named”; or “I who establish thunder and create
wind.”

4 For the true Father is not like other fathers or patriarchs, as if he began at some
point to be a Father, or at some time would cease to be a Father. If he began to be a
Father, then he was once the son of another father, before he became the Father of the
only-begotten. And by that likeness, fathers would be understood as children of fathers,
and the search for the origin would go on without end before one found the one who is
truly Father. 5 Nor is the true Son like the other children, who are sons by appointment,
as one new to being a Son. For if he were new to being a Son, there was once a time when
the Father was not the Father of the only-begotten. 6 Nor is the Spirit of truth created
or made like the other spirits, nor is he called “the angel of great counsel” in the way
the other angels are.

7 For the one kind has a beginning and an end; the other has a beginning and a power
beyond thought. The one creates all things for unending ages, working together with the
Father; the other is created by them, as they wish. The one serves these; the other is
worshipped by all creatures. The one cares for what has been made; the other receives that
care from them. The one is judged according to what it deserves; the other holds the just
judgment. 8 The one exists in time; the other is not in time. The one gives light to all
things; the other is given light by them. The one calls infants up to the heights; the
other is called by the perfect one. The one gives gifts to all; the other receives gifts.
In short, the one sings praise of holiness in the heaven of heavens and the other unseen
places; the other, though praised, gives gifts worthily to those who are worthy.

CHAPTER 72

1 Scripture speaks of very many spirits: “He who makes his angels spirits and his
ministers a flame of fire,” and, “All you spirits, praise the Lord.” 2 The gift of
“discerning of spirits” is given to those who are worthy. For some spirits are heavenly,
“rejoicing in the truth.” Others are earthly, suited to deceit and error. Others are under
the earth, children of the abyss and of darkness. For the Gospel says, “They begged him
not to send them away into the abyss.” In the same way he gave orders to the spirits,
drove spirits out by a word, and “would not allow them to speak.” 3 There is also said to
be a “spirit of judgment” and a “spirit of burning.” There is a spirit of the world (“We
have not received the spirit of the world,” it says). There is also a spirit of man: “For
who among men knows the things of the man, except the spirit of the man?” And there is “a
spirit that goes and does not return”; “for a spirit passed through him, and he will not
exist”; and, “You will take away their spirit and they will fail.” And there is a spirit
of the prophets.

4 “The spirits of the prophets,” it says, “are subject to the prophets.” And: “Behold, a
lying spirit stood before the Lord and said to him, By what means will you deceive Ahab?”
And, it says, “I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of the prophets.” 5 There is also
said to be a “spirit of compunction,” a “spirit of cowardice,” a “spirit of Python,” a
“spirit of fornication,” a “spirit of storm,” a “spirit of much talking,” a “spirit of
weakness,” an “unclean spirit,” a deaf spirit, a mute spirit, a spirit that speaks with
difficulty, a “spirit exceedingly harsh” which is called Legion, and “the spiritual forces
of wickedness.” 6 The sayings about spirits are endless, for those who are wise. But just
as many are sons by appointment or by name and not in truth, because they have a beginning
and an end [text defective: sinfully], so too there are very many spirits by appointment
or by name, even if they are sinful. The Holy Spirit alone is called the Spirit of the
Father and of the Son, the “Spirit of truth,” the Spirit of the Mind, the “Spirit of
Christ,” and the “Spirit of grace.”

7 For the good is given to each person in different ways: “to one a spirit of wisdom, to
another a spirit of knowledge, to another a spirit of strength, to another a spirit of
healings, to another a spirit of prophecy, to another a spirit of discernment, to another
of tongues, to another of interpretations,” and the rest of the gifts. As he says, “but
one and the same Spirit distributes to each as he wills.” 8 David says, “Your good Spirit
will lead me, O God.” And there is the saying, “The Spirit blows where he wills,” by which
he shows us that the Holy Spirit is a real, personal being. It goes on: “and you hear his
voice, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes.” And also: “Unless you
are born of water and Spirit.” This is like what Paul said: “For in Christ Jesus I
fathered you.”

9 Concerning this, the Lord says: “When the Paraclete comes, whom I will send to you, the
Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness about me.” And: “I
still have many things to say, but you cannot bear them now. When he comes, the Spirit of
truth, he will guide you into all the truth. For he will not speak from himself, but
whatever he hears he will speak, and he will announce to you the things that are coming.
He will glorify me, because he will take from what is mine and announce everything to
you.”

CHAPTER 73

1 73. If, then, he proceeds from the Father and, as the Lord says, “will take from what is
mine,” then just as “no one knew the [Father] except the [Son], nor the Son except the
Father,” so I dare to say this: no one knows the Spirit except the Son, from whom he
receives, and the Father, from whom he proceeds. And no one knows the Son and the Father 2
except the Holy Spirit. He is the one who truly glorifies, who teaches all things, who
bears witness about the Son, who is from the Father and from the Son. He is the only guide
of truth, the interpreter of the holy laws, the guide into the spiritual law, the teacher
of the prophets, the instructor of the apostles, the light-giver of the doctrines of the
gospel, the one who chooses out the saints, true light from true light. 3 The Son is Son
by nature, true Son, genuine Son, alone from the Alone. With him is the Spirit as well,
who is not a son but is named Spirit.

4 This is the God who is glorified in the church: Father always, Son always, and Holy
Spirit always. He is exalted, from the Exalted, and he is spiritual, spiritual in mind. He
has a glory beneath which lie all created and made things, and in short everything that is
measured and each thing that is contained. 5 One Godhead is proclaimed above all in Moses.
A duality is strongly preached in the prophets. A trinity is made plain in the gospels. As
times and generations went on, this was more and more fitted to the righteous person for
knowledge and faith. The knowledge of it is immortality, and from faith in it comes
adoption as sons. 6 But first it sets out the ordinances of the flesh, building up in
Moses, as it were, the outer court around the temple. Second, it describes the ordinances
of the soul, adorning the holy place in the remaining prophecies. Third come the
ordinances of the spirit, setting in order, in the writings of the gospel, the mercy seat
and the Holy of Holies as a dwelling for itself. It is a holy tent and a holy temple,
which is

7 the righteous man, righteous only [text uncertain: the one] who is joined to these
things. In him dwells one Godhead: one Godhead without limit, one Godhead incorruptible,
one Godhead beyond all thought, beyond grasping, beyond description, invisible. It alone
knows itself, and it shows itself to those it chooses. It raises up, calls, appoints
beforehand and glorifies witnesses for itself. It lifts them out of Hades, makes them
holy, and unites them again for its own glory and faith. These three things are heavenly,
earthly and under the earth: spirit, soul and flesh; faith, hope and love; past, present
and future; age of age, ages of ages; sabbaths of sabbaths; circumcision of the flesh,
circumcision of the heart, “the circumcision of Christ in the stripping off of the body of
sins.” And in general it purifies for itself 8 all things, the invisible and the visible:
thrones, lordships, rulers, authorities, powers. In all of them there is the same holy
voice, crying from glory to glory, “Holy, holy, holy.” It glorifies the Father in the Son
and the Son in the Father, together with the Holy [Spirit]. To him be glory and power
forever and ever, amen. And the one who believes this way will say, “So be it, so be it.”

CHAPTER 74

1 74. Concerning the Trinity and the one substance of God the Father, the Son and the Holy
Spirit, we are weak and untrained men. We use no clever sophistry, and we do not stake
ourselves on the dice-play of men. Instead we have gathered testimonies from the divine
Scriptures, in part, for those who wish to use them: to help believers find the truth, and
to answer those whose faith is bad and whose pride is empty. For the power of faith in the
Holy Spirit is great, 2 and it is proclaimed in many ways throughout all the divine
Scriptures. Now the security of our salvation lies in what is certain about the
incarnation of our Savior and his coming in the flesh. It also lies in the confirmation of
our hope concerning the resurrection of the dead and our new birth. So we add a little
more to this labor of ours, for those who want to read more carefully. We stay with the
same divine Scriptures, gathering from them and adding to our discourse.

3 For, as we were already taught in what is written above, our Lord himself said in his
gospel to his disciples, “Go and baptize all the nations in the name of the Father and the
Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to keep the commandments that I commanded you.” He
is the holy Word himself, the Word with his own real existence, who came forth from the
Father, through whom the ages came to be, and through whom times and seasons came to be. 4
For there was no season and no time before the Son. If there were time before the Son,
then time would be greater than the Son. And how then could it be that “all things came to
be through him, and without him not one thing came to be that has come to be”? For if
anything has come to be, it has come to be through him. But he himself is uncreated and
always existing, because the Father always was, and his Holy Spirit always was.

5 For if there were time before the Son, we would then have to look for yet another
through whom the time before the Son came to be. And countless further questions would
turn our reasoning toward an imagination lurking in human supposition, or rather toward a
fornication of thoughts, and not toward [sound-mindedness] [text corrupt]. 6 So there was
no time before the Son. The Son did not come to be through times; rather, through the Son
came times, [the ages] and all the other created things. There was never a time when the
Son was not, and never a time when the Spirit was not.

CHAPTER 75

1 75. Some, reading wrongly and not understanding, think they can divide the passage where
it says, “All things came to be through him, and without him not one thing came to be.”
They put a stop at this point, and so take the saying to carry a suspicion of blasphemy
against the Holy Spirit. But they are mistaken in the reading, and from the mistake in
their reading they limp along, turning aside into blasphemy. 2 The reading is this: “All
things came to be through him, and without him not one thing came to be. What has come to
be in him...” That is to say, if anything has come to be, it came to be through him. 3
Therefore the Father always was, and the Son always was, and the Spirit breathes out from
the Father and the Son. Neither the Son nor the Spirit is created. But everything that
comes after the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit is created and made. These things did
not exist and then came to be, from the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, through the
ever-existing Word together with the ever-existing Spirit.

4 So all created things came to be through the Word himself, the heavenly King, the Word
with his own real existence, our Savior and benefactor. 5 For the Savior himself, the holy
one, came down from the heaven of heavens. In the virgin’s workshop he deigned to work out
our salvation. He was born again from Mary, conceived through the Holy Spirit. He took
flesh; he is the Word who became flesh, not changed in his nature. Together with the deity
he took humanity. He is perfect from the Father, and he fulfilled the perfect plan of
salvation. He came into the world for us and for our [text corrupt]. He took human flesh
and a human soul, 6 being perfect from the Father. He became man among us, not in
appearance but in truth, forming for himself a perfect man from Mary, the God-bearer,
through the Holy Spirit. 7 He did not simply live in a man, as he used to speak in the
prophets and dwell and work in them by power. Rather, the Word himself became flesh. He
did not cease to be God, and he did not change his deity into humanity. With the full
measure of his own deity, and with the very own subsistence of God the Word, a subsistence
that is real in itself, he took into himself being man, and whatever belongs to being a
man.

8 He took a perfect man, having all that is in a man and everything that belongs to a man.
The only-begotten came and took this man so that, being God, he might work the whole of
salvation perfectly in a perfect man. He left nothing of the man out, so that the part
left out would not, in its turn, become food for the devil.

CHAPTER 76

1 76. Some may say that he took flesh only and not a soul. They twist things into fables
and turn Scripture aside into myths, appealing to the saying, “We have the mind of
Christ.” But from that very saying they should understand that those who said “We have the
mind of Christ” had their own mind and had not spat it out. And if they had their own mind
together with the mind of Christ, then the mind of Christ was able to improve both, while
their own mind was thinking rightly. 2 Let them understand the same about Christ himself.
Being God, and having mind in himself, he also had the mind of a man, and together with
the flesh he took a soul. 3 So he did not turn the mind aside, as a man might. Rather, he
himself became the mind’s adorner, straightener and improver. For just as he took flesh
without being overcome by the flesh, so also, having taken a mind, he was not overcome by
the mind.

4 On the contrary, and more seriously, such people fall into self-contradiction. For the
divine Scriptures cry out plainly, here and there, and speak their harsh words not against
the mind but against the flesh. 5 For he says, “The fruits of the flesh are fornication,
adultery, licentiousness, and things like these.” And, “Those who are in the flesh cannot
please God.” And, “The flesh desires against the Spirit.” But concerning the mind he says,
“I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the mind also.” And, “My mind is
unfruitful,” or fruitful. For God established the mind, which Scripture usually calls the
heart, as the leader, so to speak, and the charioteer of the whole vessel. It is the judge
of good and bad, and the examiner of what arises within us. “For the mind distinguishes
words, as the throat tastes food.” The mind in man is able to discern, but it does not yet
give consent, unless it hands itself over to a turning aside.

CHAPTER 77

1 77. Why then did it seem right to some to throw the mind out of the Lord’s becoming man?
What good have they done, when they have turned life toward disorder rather than order? Or
what harm or good, if I may put it so, has this done to us, that they should be helping
Christ? Or is it to do him a great favor, and to say of him that he did not take a mind? 2
“Galatians are senseless,” and “Cretans are always liars,” and “Ephraim is a dove without
sense.” But our Lord, when he became man in this life, took up everything perfectly. Or
rather, he took it himself, having become the maker of his own body, and having taken a
soul for himself, or rather having put it in. 3 Some, wishing to make the coming of Christ
in the flesh defective, and the economy of salvation in him incomplete, said, I do not
know with what thought, and wrongly, that Christ did not take a mind.

4 But [it does not appear that they say this because of the mind]. For these people
suppose the mind to be a subsistence, and they dare to say that by nature it is what
Scripture usually calls the spirit in man, as the apostle says: “that your spirit and soul
and body may be kept whole at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 5 So they are
mistaken. For if the mind is the spirit and the spirit is the mind, as they themselves
think, and the soul is another [subsistence] apart from the mind and the spirit, then
there are no longer two things in man joined together in one subsistence, no longer a soul
alone with its own subsistence and a body with its own subsistence. Instead we have found
four: mind as one subsistence, soul as another, spirit as another, and body as another. 6
If we search again, there is still more. Man has many names, such as “the inner man” and
“the outer man.” Scripture says all of this in terms of thought, binding our understanding
tightly, so that we leave out nothing that concerns salvation and have no excuse to wander
from the subject before us. These things are all in man, but we should not pry into them
further.

7 Even so, by their own argument, if the mind is the spirit and the spirit is the mind,
and these are something apart from the soul [text uncertain], then why does the apostle
say, “I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the mind also”? By saying this he
showed that the spirit is not the mind, and the mind is not the spirit.

CHAPTER 78

1 Then again, “the soul that sins shall die” was not said of a soul apart from the body.
Or take “there were seventy souls.” Surely those were not souls without bodies, but bodies
with souls. Custom also calls a man by a single name, as when he is master of eighty
bodies [that is, eighty persons]. Surely these were not without souls either. 2 So the
Word who became flesh was not without a soul, just as he was not without anything else
that belongs to the whole reality of man. When Scripture says “soul,” it does not mean a
soul without a body. And when we say “body,” we do not think of it as being without a
soul. 3 What, then, did those people have in mind who want to say that the mind was cast
aside? What good has this done the church? Or rather, how has it not troubled the church?
And how does the man who thinks such things not make our salvation incomplete?

4 We cannot conceive of the mind as something different from the man, and we cannot speak
of it as a separate substance on its own. Rather, in each one of those who are [not] led
astray [text uncertain], it is the composite, rational and thinking part. As the eyes are
in the body, so the mind is in the soul. Again, we do not say this to quarrel, but simply
to name the thinking faculty of human beings. 5 What, then, is a man? Soul, body, mind,
and whatever else there may be. What then did the Lord come to save? Plainly, the complete
man. Therefore he took on everything in man completely. 6 Otherwise, how could these
things be fulfilled in him, which were both prophesied and reckoned to belong to man, out
of mind, body, soul and the whole of becoming man, without sin? 7 The divine word plainly
sets this before us, saying, “Behold, my beloved servant will understand, whom I have
chosen, in whom my soul is well pleased; I will put my Spirit upon him,” and so on. Now,
where does this “will understand” apply? If it applies to the deity, is the deity then in
need of understanding? God forbid. This is fulfilled in the Lord’s man. But if it is
fulfilled in the Lord’s man, how will an incarnation that exists without a mind
“understand”? That is impossible.

8 If “will understand” refers to Christ at all, and Christ is the Word from above, who
became flesh from Mary, and who “became man and lived among us,” as it is written, then
without any doubt he received the whole dispensation together with a mind, since
understanding belongs to it. 9 This is why the Gospel says of him, “he advanced in wisdom
and in stature.” The deity does not admit growth in stature, nor is it lacking in wisdom,
since it is wisdom itself [text uncertain]. It was the Savior’s incarnation that advanced
in wisdom. It could not have done so if it had been without a mind. And it advanced in
stature as the child grew strong, as is true.

CHAPTER 79

1 But suppose this is thought to be sin because he took a mind [text uncertain]. Then it
would be much more so if we grant that he took flesh, since sin is not carried out apart
from flesh: “for the works of the flesh are plain.” On that reasoning we would have to
grant that he also sinned in the flesh, since he took the flesh. The apostle says, “For I
know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh.” 2 But who will dare to say
that, because the Savior took flesh, he was carried off along with the flesh, and carried
out the works of the flesh, following the course of his whole vessel [text uncertain]? His
flesh was indeed human flesh, but it failed in nothing. 3 For God the Word came forth from
above, from the Father, and was pleased to become [incarnate] in flesh. He held the vessel
in check with a bridle. If he wished to restrain it from every useless fleshly action, he
was able to. And if he wished, he gave it rein. He gave it rein for the reasonable bodily
needs that were fitting to his deity.

4 For the mind was not stretched out toward irrational desires, since he had a mind in
truth, just as he had the whole incarnation in truth. Nor did he do or reason the things
of the flesh just as we do. He was God, become true flesh from the virgin Mary, and he
acted [. . .] with flesh and soul and mind and the whole vessel. He is God the Word,
subsisting in himself, who came from above from the Father and took up residence among the
human race. 5 But let no one twist this by saying it was spoken loosely, like the words
“give heed to my cry.” That was spoken loosely, for the sake of prayer, and it is clear
that its use was prophesied [as] a pattern of his coming in the flesh. But the words “and
he advanced in [stature/age]” are true.

CHAPTER 80

1 80. But what do such people think we are saying, if we say that Christ became a perfect
man from Mary, or that he had a [mind]? Do they think we suppose he fell into sins? Never!
“He committed no sin, nor was deceit found in his mouth.” 2 He breathed his power into the
saints, and those into whom he breathed are attested to have been holy and righteous, and
to have advanced blameless in their days. How much more, then, is this true of the Word
himself, in whom “all the fullness of deity was pleased to dwell bodily”! Suppose he took
true flesh from Mary the ever-virgin, and a truly human soul and mind, and whatever else
is in a human being. Being God, he held all of it within himself. None of it was divided
toward evil, none of it was crumbled by the evil one, none of it was caught in pleasure,
and none of it fell under the transgression of Adam.

3 This is why the apostle says, “born of a woman, born under the law,” and again, “found
in form as a man.” The words “in form,” “as a man,” “born,” and “under the law,” taken
together, point to perfection and freedom from passion. “Born” shows that he was perfect.
“Under the law” shows that it was not mere appearance. “In form,” as to his outward look,
shows that it was firm. “As a man” shows that he was without sin. 4 So, with all this
being so, let no one be deceived by empty myths. If he was truly begotten from above by
the Father, and was truly born of Mary also, then he is true above and true below. If he
is imperfect below, he is imperfect above. But if he is perfect above, he is perfect
below. He did not dwell in some other perfect man; he brought all things to perfection in
himself.

5 And he rose from the dead. He was no longer divided in the tomb, with the body in one
place, the deity in another, and the soul in the underworld. He was no longer subject to
touch and no longer held. He entered through closed doors, and yet he was handled by
Thomas, so that he might be represented not by appearance but in truth. 6 He was believed
by Thomas after what was foretold was fulfilled: “With my hands I sought God, and I was
not deceived.” He is the same God and the same man. He produced no confusion, but blended
the two into one. 7 He did not pass into non-existence. Rather, he joined the earthly body
in power with the deity, united it into one power, and brought it together into one deity.
He is one Lord and one Christ, not two Christs, nor two [Lords]. 8 In him is a spiritual
body, and in him is incomprehensible deity. What suffered was not corrupted, and the one
who cannot suffer is incorruptible; the whole is incorruption. He is God the Lord, seated
at the right hand of the Father. He has not left the flesh behind. He has united it in
one, the whole in one deity, and he is seated at the right hand of the Father.

CHAPTER 81

1 81. This, then, is the only-begotten: perfect, uncreated, unchangeable, unalterable,
beyond understanding, invisible. He became man and rose spiritually, and he “dies no
more.” He is no longer poor, he who “for our sake became poor, though he was rich.” He is
wholly spirit, uniting the fleshly and the divine. He is one Lord, King Christ, the Son of
God, seated in heaven at the right hand of the Father “far above all rule and authority,
power, and every name that is named.” He says in the gospel, “Go and baptize all the
nations in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.” 2 And this [. .
.] in the midst [of the text] did not signify that the Son is blended with the Father, nor
that the Holy Spirit is blended with the Father and the Son. Rather, he knows a true
Father, and he showed himself to be the true Word, subsisting in himself, and his Holy
Spirit to be a Spirit subsisting in himself, and “Spirit of truth,” uncreated,
unchangeable, unalterable. Not

3 This is not said so that anyone might suppose a man is moving deceitfully toward the
faith, hiding his tracks and playing false with the truth, “for God examines hearts and
kidneys.” 4 The heretic says, “Of course I believe that the Father is Father, the Son is
Son, and the Holy Spirit is Holy Spirit, and I confess three subsistences in one essence.
I do not speak of an essence other than the Godhead, nor of a Godhead other than the
essence. We call it one essence for the sake of precision, so that we do not speak of some
other kind or form of the Godhead of the Trinity.” 5 A man like this, as I said, keeps his
real view hidden and speaks cunningly and deceitfully again: “I believe that the Father is
Father, the Son is Son, the Holy Spirit is Holy Spirit.” But he holds a hidden notion of
this kind. He has pictured the divine on the model of ourselves, and says within himself:
“As I have a human body, soul and spirit, so also the Godhead.”

6 The Father is, so to speak, the outward form; the Son is like the soul in a man; and the
Spirit is like what breathes through the man. 7 Some people practice deceit in this way
and think of the Godhead like this. But we have not learned it so. Look: the Father bears
witness in heaven by a voice; look, the Son is at the Jordan; look, the Spirit came down
and took shape in the form of a dove. But he took shape in himself, being a subsistence in
himself, not different from that of the Father and the Son, but of the same essence: a
subsistence from the same subsistence of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. 8 And
again: look, the Father sits in heaven. [text defective here] But do not take “sits” in a
human way. Hold it as beyond description and beyond grasp. And Scripture did not say, “The
Son went up to the Father,” but, “he sat down at the right hand of the Father.”

9 Again, speaking about the Holy Spirit, the Only-begotten taught: “I am going away, and
that one will come, the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth. If I do not go away, that one
does not come.” But if the Spirit were fused together with the Son himself, he would not
have said, “I am going away and that one is coming.” He said it to show one subsistence
and another subsistence. Yet there is one Godhead, one God, one truth.

CHAPTER 82

1 So I have written, for anyone who wishes it, the order of our life and our firm
confession. It comes from the law, the prophets, the gospels and the apostles. From the
time of the apostles down to our own time it has been kept unstained in the catholic
church. 2 But out of envy at the peace of the one true faith, again and again, time after
time, this same faith, hope and salvation of ours has been persecuted through the
heresies. It has endured in its own truth, while the heresies in every age defile
themselves and are cut off from the church. 3 So it is again just now. We hear of some who
are thought to hold first rank among certain ascetics in Egypt, in the Thebaid, and in
other regions elsewhere. They think like the Hieracites. They speak of a resurrection of
our flesh, but not of this flesh; they say it is some other flesh in its place. They are
men who have turned aside, and they have turned the truth of God and our firm hope aside
into myths. So we are compelled to speak about this again.

CHAPTER 83

1 Unbelievers deny the resurrection altogether. But those of corrupt faith, in a confused
and senseless way, have fallen away from the true hope by thinking this way about the
resurrection. 2 The Greeks deny the resurrection completely because of the ungodliness of
the many lawless deeds among them. They hate the resurrection because of the shame they
will have to face in it. They do not know God or his commandments. Yet they will rise,
even if they do not want to. 3 For creation itself plainly refutes them, showing every day
the pattern of resurrection. The day sets, and we picture the way of the dead, since the
night suggests sleep. The day rises and wakes us, and points out the sign of resurrection.
4 Fruits are gathered, and the standing crop is cut down, which marks out our own
departure from here. The earth is sown and sprouts, [text defective here] because what has
been buried will rise after the cutting. The locust dies after burying in the earth the
offspring she has laid, and after a time the earth gives up what was buried. The seeds of
crops are sown; first they die, and then they come to full fruit.

5 “For unless it dies, it is not made alive.” God has made seals of the resurrection in
us, in the ten nails on our hands and the ten on our feet, bearing witness to our hope. He
has also proclaimed our resurrection through the hair on our head, as though through a
crown. For what seems to be dead matter in us, that is, hair and nails, is cut every day,
and yet it grows again, pointing to the hope of the resurrection.

CHAPTER 84

1 84. There are countless examples that could be given to convince unbelievers. But
neither the wood pigeon, that bird, nor the shrew-mouse, that animal, has persuaded them.
For such a creature dies for six months, and the wood pigeon for forty days, and then,
when their times are over, they come to life again. 2 Dung beetles, when they are about to
die, hide themselves in a ball of dung. They bury the ball in the ground and cover it
over, and so, from its moisture, they are found again, coming back to life out of their
own remains. 3 About the phoenix, the Arabian bird, it is needless for me to say much, for
the account has already reached the ears of many, both believers and unbelievers. The
story about it appears to be this. When it has lived five hundred years and knows that the
time of its death has come, it makes a nest of spices and carries it to the city of the
Egyptians called Heliopolis. The name means “On” in the Egyptian and Hebrew language.
There it beats its own breast many times with its feet.

4 It brings fire out of its own body and sets alight the material laid in the place, and
so it burns itself up completely, and all of its flesh, along with its bones, is reduced
to ashes. 5 Then, by God’s arrangement, a cloud is sent, and it rains and puts out the
flame that consumed the bird’s body. By then the bird is dead and thoroughly burnt. 6 When
the flame is put out, some remains of its flesh are left, still raw. Within one day they
disappear, and it produces a worm. The worm grows feathers and becomes a young bird. On
the third day it is full grown, and it shows itself to those who serve at that place. Then
it flies back to its own homeland and rests.

CHAPTER 85

1 85. I am astonished at the mind of the unbelieving Greeks and other barbarians, so
deceived in every way. In their own myths they are not ashamed to point to resurrection
everywhere, and they often sing about resurrection. 2 Their myths record that Alcestis,
the daughter of Pelias, died on behalf of her husband Admetus and after three days was
raised by Heracles and brought up from the inner chambers of the dead. They tell also of
Pelops, the son of Tantalus, after he was served up as meat by his own father to their
falsely named gods. 3 Amphiaraus, the son of Oicles, was brought back to life by
Asclepius. Glaucus, the son of Minos, was brought back to life by Polyidus, son of
Coeranus, with a certain herb. Castor was restored through his brother Polydeuces, who
chose of his own will to exchange life with him every other day. And Protesilaus was
restored through Laodameia.

4 They also say that Sisyphus and Tantalus, and the daughters of Caucasus whom they call
the Erinyes, and Tiresias along with them, are cast into Tartarus to pay the penalty
there: one by a rock, another by a wheel, and others punished in other ways, and that they
are still in punishment. So they have not passed into nonexistence, but exist in bodies. 5
For if they did not have bodies, how could they be handed over to punishments by a rock
and a wheel? There is much more to say about these things, to establish the faith that is
in us, and as a refutation of them.

CHAPTER 86

1 86. But those who come from the heresies sing songs akin to these, in harmony with their
unbelief. Some of the heretics, I mean the Manichaeans, say that there will be a
resurrection not of the body but of the soul. The Greeks I mentioned before hold and share
the same opinion. Their argument is more like nonsense than something put forward with
understanding. 2 For if the heresies speak of a resurrection, and truly regard it as a
resurrection, but define it as being about souls, that is foolish. How can a soul rise
that has not fallen? For we do not bury souls in tombs, but bodies. 3 For souls do not
fall; flesh does. Even common usage is accustomed to call dead bodies “fallen” bodies. So
if a resurrection is agreed on among them, it is plain to anyone that 4 It is the body
that has fallen, not the soul. Again, the Greeks who deny the resurrection are refuted. On
their public festival days they carry food and drink to the tombs. They burn the foods
whole and pour out wine as an offering. This does the dead no good at all, and it does the
offerers more harm.

5 Yet their own custom forces them to confess the resurrection of the dead. They come to
the place where the bodies of the departed were laid, and they call out to the buried dead
by name. 6 “Rise up, so-and-so,” they say, “eat and drink and be glad.” Suppose they think
the souls stay there, where the remains of the departed are buried. Then there is some
good hope in this for them. For the souls would be waiting for the coming day and the
resurrection of the new birth, until they receive back the bodies that were composed with
them and yoked to them. This would be so even though the sons of the Greeks loathe the
flesh as worthless, as something wholly destroyed, with no hope of coming back to life. 7
But if they do not do this in that way, what is their reason? They bind souls, which are
better than the substance of bodies, to tombs, and by this assumption they bring them
under a kind of sentence, since they declare that the souls wait beside the dead remains.
Or let them say what expectation of hope brings them there.

8 No. The truth is that they do not think the souls are in tombs. They think the souls are
in certain storehouses assigned by God to each soul, according to what each did and how
each lived in this life. But each man laid the bodies of his neighbor, that is, the bones,
in the burial places with his own hands. It would be foolish if this one view and its
consequence were agreed everywhere, and yet among unbelievers the opposite happened: that
they deny the true things, and the things that are possible with God are not held firm
among them as grounds for hope.

CHAPTER 87

1 87. I think enough has been said about these matters, since from the many examples we
have set out only a few. 2 Now consider those who seem to be Christians but are persuaded
by Origen. They confess the resurrection of the dead, of our flesh and of the body of that
holy Lord taken from Mary. But they say that this flesh is not raised, and that another is
given by God in its place. Should we not say that they hold a more impious view than the
others, and a more foolish one than the notions of the Greeks and the other heresies? 3
First, if another flesh is raised in place of this one, as they say, then God’s judgment
is not just, according to their own story. It would be judging one flesh in place of the
one that sinned. Or it would be bringing a different body into the glory of the
inheritance of the kingdom of heaven, in place of the body that grew weary with fasting,
sleepless nights and persecutions for the name of God.

4 And how will the soul be judged alone, as the heresies say, when the body that sinned
together with it is not present? Such a soul would speak against God’s judgment, saying
that the sins belonged to the body. 5 For it has a proof too, according to the argument of
people driven by love of quarrelling and not by truth. It can say, “I did not sin; the
body did. From the time I left the body, I have not committed fornication or adultery. I
have not stolen, murdered or worshipped idols, or done any evil or incurable thing.” 6 And
its defense will be found reasonable. If it defends itself reasonably, what shall we say?
Is God’s judgment then idle? Or does God unjustly bring wrath on human beings? “May it
never be.”

CHAPTER 88

1 But we know that “all things are possible with God.” He can raise a body without a soul.
He can make bodies that have vanished live again and move of themselves, without a soul,
if he wishes. He has in fact already carried out such a plan through the most holy
Ezekiel. 2 For he said to the holy prophet, “Say, son of man, that bone be gathered to
bone and joint to joint.” It was a marvel to see God’s power. The souls had not yet been
put in, and the bones were dry. Yet at God’s command they not only gained the power to
move, but the bones were also filled with understanding, and with no ordinary knowledge. 3
For the bones that belonged near the parts of the head did not forget and wander off. The
vertebrae of the neck did not go astray, looking for their place among the joints of the
ankle bones. Each bone moved and went its way with understanding, and was joined to its
own joint.

4 So then, if God wishes, he is able to raise even a body without a soul. In this very
thing he showed his power: he first made what men had given up as hopeless come to life
again, by giving his command to Ezekiel. 5 He did not say, “Say, son of man, let the
spirit come first.” Rather, after the difficulty had been made easy for faith, I mean
after the bodies had been gathered together, then he commanded the souls to enter those
same bodies. “And a great multitude,” he says, “stood up.” 6 So I have said that God is
able to make even a body live again apart from the soul, as was shown above. But the body
cannot be judged by itself alone, for it has a just defense against God’s judgment. 7 For
the body would say for itself: “The sin came from the soul; I was not the cause. From the
moment I was loosed and the soul departed from me, did I commit adultery? Did I fornicate,
steal, worship idols, or do any such wrongdoing?” And so, according to the argument of the
quarrelsome, God’s judgment would accomplish nothing.

8 For this reason, since the body and the soul together were one composite man made by
God, the just Judge raises the body again and gives its soul back to it. In this way God’s
judgment will be just, since both share together either the punishment due for sin, or the
godliness shown through virtue and the reward that is to be given to the saints.

CHAPTER 89

1 89. I think these things are enough to establish the truth of our hope, and I have set
out a few testimonies in place of many. But because of those who say that a different body
is raised in place of the one that falls, I am taking up the labor again. I want to help
those who wish to understand, and I do not want those who refuse to try to lose their own
life. 2 May it be that we, the least and the nothing, take pains, and that we ourselves
and everyone are helped, and that no one denies the resurrection of our flesh. In it lies
the whole treasure, the foundation of every sound way of thinking, and the hope of every
good work, according to what is said: “having this treasure in earthen vessels,” and so
on. 3 For we who are weak practice self-control, and we who are lowly keep ourselves pure.
We who are powerless long to give alms, because of what we expect to receive: the
resurrection of the dead.

4 And so the rule of faith is founded, and the hope, the love of God, and the witness
given for the name of God in persecutions, with tortures and other inhuman punishments. It
is founded among those who do not deny the resurrection of our flesh, but believe that the
very thing that is sown in the 5 earth will be raised. The divine Scriptures have given us
two clear and true testimonies, by which we can know the hope of our resurrection and not
stumble through the myths of vain men who have been deceived and who have written
deception into life. So that I need not use many testimonies (for there are not few, in
the New Testament and the Old, about our hope and resurrection), I will say this briefly:

CHAPTER 90

1 90. If what is raised were something else, as some claim, the apostle would not have
spoken so firmly when he said, “For this perishable must put on imperishability, and this
mortal must put on immortality.” 2 And since we must also be made firm in hope concerning
the saints, that after the resurrection they will be made radiant and changed (as he says,
“It is raised in glory”), Holy Scripture says: “Fool, what you sow is not made alive
unless it dies. And you do not sow the body that will be, but a bare grain, perhaps of
wheat or of some other seed. And God gives it a body as he wished.” He said this for the
glory of those who are raised, in radiance. 3 And to show that the grain itself receives
the glory, the one who also “spoke in Paul” about the resurrection said it through himself
in the Gospel: “Unless the grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies,” he says, it
remains alone.

4 “But if it dies, it bears many grains.” So the apostle said “grain,” and the Savior by
his own words showed it to be the same grain of the body. What then shall we say? Was it
not the very body sown, his own, that is, the grain, that rose? Or was what rose from the
tomb after the three days something different from it? 5 As the angels say, “He has risen;
he is not here.” And as he says to Mary, “Do not touch me; for I have ascended to my
Father.” And as he shows his hands and his side to Thomas, saying, “Do not be unbelieving,
but believing.” 6 It is the mark of unbelievers to say that he did not rise at all. It is
also the mark of those with a bad faith to say that the very body that existed and fell
asleep did not rise. It is the mark of believers to say that the very body rose, and that
it was established as the hope of truth from the same body by which he raised ours.

CHAPTER 91

1 For this reason he left the marks of the nails and did not wipe them away, and the mark
of the spear as well, even though he had come in through closed doors. His flesh rose
spiritual, but it was not something other than what it was. It was the very same body,
united to the Godhead and adorned with the fineness of spirit. 2 If it had not been the
fineness of spirit, what kind of opening could have received a bulky body? But he did it
to show that this very perishable body of ours puts on imperishability in truth, and that
though it is mortal, it puts on immortality. So he came in through closed doors to show
that what is coarse becomes fine, what is mortal becomes immortal, and what is perishable
becomes imperishable. 3 He also meant to refute all who disbelieve in our resurrection. He
changed the body into fineness and blended the flesh with spirit. Yet after the
resurrection he did not wipe away the scars of the nails or the mark of the spear.

4 Instead he showed that the very body which had suffered on the cross was the one that
rose, that what rose was not something else, and that nothing different had grown out of
it. The very body that had suffered rose free from suffering. The very grain that fell
rose again, and it rose imperishable. 5 And so that we might not suppose again that only
some part of it was raised, [the Scripture says that] the whole of it saw no corruption,
for it says, “You will not give your Holy One to see corruption.” The whole of it also
rose, for it says, “He has risen, he is not here.” 6 If he was raised and is not here, he
truly rose. The Scriptures, which are our life, do not fail. And so that those who have
been deceived might find no excuse, he showed bones and flesh to Thomas and to his
disciples. He said, “Look at me, for it is I. A spirit does not have bones and flesh, as
you see that I have.”

CHAPTER 92

1 Suppose someone argues cleverly: “The body of our Saviour was exceptional, because it
was conceived only from Mary and without the seed of a man.” Then Adam’s body would also
have been different from ours, because it was taken only from the earth, without the seed
of a man. But no one can say this or prove it. 2 Suppose someone argues cleverly again:
“Only Christ’s body rose as a whole, but ours is not itself raised. Something else is
raised in its place.” Then how does Scripture say, “Christ has risen, the firstfruits of
those who have fallen asleep”? The body is one and the same, the firstfruits of those who
are raised. Let them learn how Christ became the firstfruits of those who have fallen
asleep, so that they do not turn again to another error and suppose that the other
Scriptures lie. 4 For before him, he raised Lazarus and the son of the widow in Nain.
Elijah also raised a dead man, and Elisha raised two dead men, one of them still alive in
the body and one already buried.

5 But those men, after they rose, died again, and they await the one universal
resurrection. Christ, however, is “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep,”
because having risen he “no longer dies, death no longer rules over him,” as it is
written. 6 For he died once, enduring the suffering for us because of our sufferings. He
tasted death once, “even death on a cross.” The Word came willingly to death for our sake,
so that by death he might put death to death. 7 The Word became flesh. In his deity he did
not suffer, but he suffered with the humanity. Suffering was reckoned to him, while he
himself remained beyond suffering. Death was reckoned to him, while he himself remained 8
in immortality, or rather, being wholly immortality. For he himself said, “I am the life.”
Our hope is not in flesh. For it says, “Cursed is the one who hopes in man, and he will be
like the wild tamarisk.”

CHAPTER 93

1 What shall we say? Is Christ not man? From what has been said before, it is clear to
everyone that we confess without doubt that the Lord, God the Word, became man, not in
appearance but in truth. 2 But he did not come as a man who advanced into deity. Our hope
of salvation is not in a man. None of all the men descended from Adam was able to work
salvation. It was God the Word who became man, so that our hope would not be in a man but
in the living and true God who became man. 3 Scripture says, “Every priest is taken from
among men and appointed on behalf of men.” For this reason, when the Lord came, he took
flesh from our flesh. God the Word became a man like us, so that in his divinity he might
give us salvation, and in his humanity he might receive it on behalf of us men. By his
suffering he undid suffering, and by his own death he put death to death.

4 The suffering was counted as belonging to the divinity, even though the divinity cannot
suffer. [The suffering was counted to the divinity] because the holy Word, God who cannot
suffer, was pleased to come in this way. 5 Here is an illustration of it. Suppose someone
is wearing a garment, and blood is sprinkled on the garment, but it does not reach the
body of the one wearing it. The stain from the blood is still counted against the wearer
of the garment. In the same way, in the 6 flesh Christ suffered. I mean in the Lord’s man
himself, whom the holy Word, coming from heaven, formed for himself. As the holy Peter
says, “put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the Spirit.” And again: “Since Christ
has suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves also with the same way of thinking.” 7
Just as blood on a garment is counted against the one who wears it, so the suffering of
the flesh was counted to the divinity, though the divinity suffered nothing. The purpose
was that the world should not place its hope in a man, but in the Lord’s man,

8 since the divinity consented to have the suffering counted to itself. In this way
salvation for the world would come from a divinity that cannot suffer. The suffering that
took place in the flesh was counted to the divinity, although the divinity suffered
nothing, so that the Scripture might be fulfilled which says, “For if they had known, they
would not have crucified the Lord of glory,” and what follows.

CHAPTER 94

1 94. So he was crucified. The Lord was crucified, and we worship the crucified one, who
was buried, rose on the third day, and went up into the heavens. As it is written: “O the
depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God!” 2 “For we know in part, and we
prophesy in part.” We are like people drawing a single drop from the sea of the knowledge
of God, and grasping only a sample of this plan of salvation, the grace of our hope. It
came by the good pleasure of the Father, by the will of the Son, together with the will of
the Holy Spirit, [. . .] of the same plan of God. 3 All the Scriptures contained the
proclamation of the resurrection, scattered here and there. But its completion was kept
back until the coming of the Word himself, who exists in his own person.

4 “For Christ is the fulfillment of the law,” as it is written. Where does the divine
Scripture not speak about the resurrection? First, Abel’s blood proclaims it. After he
died, it “still speaks,” as Scripture says. “Enoch was taken up and was not found, and he
did not see death, for he pleased God.” Noah built an ark at God’s command, working a new
birth for his own household. 5 Abraham in old age receives a child when “his body was
already as good as dead.” God gave hope out of the dead, especially since “Sarah’s womb”
was dead. What was “worn out and close to vanishing” was the dried-up spring of the
ordinary course of womanhood. Yet it receives power again to receive seed, and the aged
woman conceives like a younger one. 6 Isaac, too, was handed back to his father alive from
death. For when God gave the boy back to his father from the dead, alive, he was
proclaiming the hope of the resurrection.

7 Jacob shows the matter in action, for he did not treat the hope for his bones as a
secondary thing. He cared for such remains not as things that perish, but as things that
will live again. And he gave orders, not casually, that they be carried back from the land
of the Egyptians. 8 Joseph also made this clear when he said, “You shall carry up my bones
with you,” for “the Lord will surely visit you.” If there were no hope of resurrection,
why would righteous men care about bones, giving commands about bones that decay? 9 The
first voice to Moses is God’s own testimony: “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of
Isaac, and the God of Jacob,” who are asleep in the world but alive with me. It is one and
the same Spirit who spoke in the law and teaches in the gospel. For this is what the
Savior, who spoke in the prophets, was pointing out to the Sadducees: “Behold,

CHAPTER 95

1 He also showed this through Aaron’s rod, which was dry, perhaps for many years, and was
left in the tent from evening until dawn. Living trees, for their part, produce fruit only
with labor, by the round of twelve months as the year runs its course. The sun warms them,
the rains water them, the dews spread over them, and night and day nourish them. 2 But in
a single night God made the hard thing easy. The dry rod budded, put out leaves, and bore
ripe fruit. In this God showed a likeness of the resurrection that he will bring about. 3
Children are conceived through the honorable marriage which the Lord pointed out. First
the seed of succession is sown, as the Lord showed, in the womb that bears children. As
time rolls on, what was sown in the belly is brought to completion over a period of nine
months. I mean that what is conceived is perfected by the count of nine months, and is
then born.

4 In the resurrection it is not so. There the work is done in an instant. For “he will
sound the trumpet, and the dead will be raised incorruptible.” So the Lord showed in the
tent of testimony that the nuts which on living trees are carried through twelve months
are packed into the dry wood and become buds in a single night. Not only that: 5 the thing
which, as I said, takes twelve months was brought to completion in the space of one hour.
In the same way the infant formed in the womb over nine months is perfected only after a
long time has gathered it together, but in the resurrection it is completed in an instant
and rises.

CHAPTER 96

1 Let the power of the Lord persuade the unbelievers, since no one “resists his will.” Let
them listen to Moses, and let him show them. “What is in your hand?” says the Lord. He
said, “A rod.” The rod was of wood, and certainly dry. The Lord says, “Throw it on the
ground.” And he threw down the dry rod. 2 God made the dry thing moist, and not only moist
but alive. Its nature was changed, and its substance took on another form. 3 The work was
no illusion. It is truth that works by God’s command, not appearance. In everything,
through Moses, he set before us the truth, to correct our thinking. 4 The prophet knew
that what happened was no mere seeming but real, from the fact that he ran away. If he had
known it was an illusion, he would not have fled from the face of the serpent.

5 But let this not become a stumbling block again to the quarrelsome, who may say that the
rod was one thing and “God gave” it another “body, as he willed.” First, then, let them
learn that he did not give life to one thing in place of another. 6 He gave life to that
very rod which had been dry. The body that was given to the rod, and the kind or form
moved by it, God did not call into judgment; he did not want the serpent to be tried in
place of the rod. 7 Rather, through the rod he gave full assurance of the resurrection,
and God showed what was possible for him, so that no one would disbelieve his power in
anything. He did it with complete certainty. He did not raise some part of the rod; he
changed the whole rod as he willed.

CHAPTER 97

That these things are so, that the dead have hope of eternal life, and that they “will
rise in the tombs,” call again on Moses as a witness worthy of trust. When Reuben sinned,
his father, the holy patriarch Jacob, laid a curse on him and said: “Reuben, my firstborn
and the beginning of my children, you have run wild like water; do not boil over. For you
went up onto your father’s bed and uncovered it,” he says. In the Hebrew the word is
[elothar], which, when interpreted, means “do not turn back,” or “do not be added to,” or
“do not overflow.” Put simply, it is “do not boil over.” The translators rendered it that
way. If you want to learn that these things are so, and that his father fixed death as the
penalty for this sin, Moses will make it plain. When Moses in turn was blessing the twelve
tribes, he came to Reuben. He knew that Levi was the priest, since sins were loosed and
bound by the hand of the priesthood. And he says: “Let Reuben live and not die.” But how
could Reuben live, when he had been buried a hundred and twenty-six years? Moses knew that
the resurrection was going to come for everyone in every way. He also knew a second death,
the death of condemnation on the day of judgment. He wanted to spare Reuben, in place of
the one punishment, [the punishment] of the things to come. So he says “let him live” in
the resurrection, meaning this: he knew that all will live. And “let him not die” means:
let him not be clothed with the second death of condemnation and eternal torment. For if
Moses had been concerned only about the loss of Reuben’s life, it would have been enough
to say, “Let Reuben live.” But because he is pointing to the things to come, he says, “Let
Reuben live and not die.”

CHAPTER 98

1 Where, then, could anyone fail to gather so many testimonies about our hope and
expectation of the resurrection, which is a resurrection in truth and not in appearance? 2
Let those who are vain and argue for nothing tell us this. Is only a part of the bodies
raised, and each person only in part? Or is the whole raised for some, and only a part for
others, while for others still it is the whole body? What kind of partiality is that? Is
there “partiality with God”? Certainly not. 3 Let us search out where or when the saints
raised a dead person in part and not the whole body. The son of the widow in Sarepta rose
whole, and no part was left behind. The son of the Shunammite woman rose whole, and not
one limb of his was left unraised. 4 The Lord also raised Lazarus and left no remnant in
the tomb. He came out with the linen strips and the other wrappings [text defective], and
surely there is no need of garments on the day of judgment.

5 He raised whole the son of the widow in Nain, the daughter of the ruler of the
synagogue, and the daughter of the centurion. How empty is the notion of those who reckon
such things, that he raises one part and leaves another behind! 6 Let us look at the cases
before us, which have already become equal grounds of hope for us. Enoch was taken up
whole, and to this day has not seen death. Elijah was taken up whole in the body, and to
this day has not seen death. In these two living bodies God has set before us the
resurrection in its fullness. 7 So that no one may doubt, here are two patterns [text
defective] of the two firstfruits of our resurrection. Enoch lived in uncircumcision, and
uncircumcision did not hinder the resurrection, nor the receiving of the body through the
life he lived. Elijah lived in circumcision. So the resurrection is not to be thought of
as for some and not others, but as universal and whole.

8 Elijah lived in virginity, so that the pre-eminence of virginity might proclaim
immortality to the world, and incorruption together with the body. But so that the
resurrection and the remaining of the body might not be thought to belong to virginity
alone, because of its distinction, Enoch was not a virgin. He was self-controlled, and he
fathered children. These two are alive, remaining in body and soul because of [our] hope.

CHAPTER 99

1 So that again no one may doubt, God also brought others down to Hades together with
their bodies. The earth opened its mouth and swallowed Dathan and Abiram, the sons of
Korah and Aunan. They went down into Hades alive, [with] body and soul. From that very
hour they were handed over to judgment. Their bodies were not dissolved, and no remnant or
part was given up, but they went down whole, with body and soul. 2 They were handed over
to punishment as whole persons, body and soul together. Job says, “until I come to be
again,” and “may you raise up this body that endures these things,” and “you will renew
me.” And again: “Your youth will be renewed like the eagle’s.” Isaiah says, “The dead will
rise, and those in the tombs will be raised.” For he is the one “who looses those bound in
strength, and likewise the rebellious, who dwell in tombs.”

3 Job also says, “A man who has fallen asleep will not rise again, nor will he know his
own place any more.” This is true: the resurrection does not happen day by day, but is
fixed for one day. And to show that he knew what appointed time he was waiting for, Job at
once resolved the difficulty: “until the heaven is no more stitched together.” 4 For as
long as heaven and earth exist, the bodies also remain in the earth. But when the one
comes who rolls up heaven like a scroll and shakes the earth, then “those in the dust of
the earth will also be raised.” 5 For this reason he says to Ezekiel, “Son of man, tell
bone to be joined to bone and joint to joint,” and it happened so. And, “let sinews and
veins come upon them, flesh, hair and nails.” And again: “Say, son of man, ‘Spirit, come
from the four corners of the earth’” — that is, from the places stored up for souls.

6 Why does the Lord himself not speak, but order the man to speak? Because whatever the
Lord says, he does at once, and it is never undone. But he commanded the man to speak, so
that after the rising, at that hour, the hope of salvation might be shown to us, while it
was the man’s word that was undone, not the Lord’s. For those bones were going to die
again. But when the Lord says, “Rise,” they are raised and do not die. For the word of God
will not be undone.

CHAPTER 100

1 This is why the Lord, when he came in the flesh, raised the dead: so that what had
fallen asleep through the flesh might fall asleep again only until that same flesh rose
and died no more. In the meantime he stopped saying to only one person, “Come out here,”
until he should come and no longer say “Rise” to one at a time, but “Rise, all of you,”
bringing about the resurrection of all. For he himself is the resurrection of the dead. 2
For here, after he rose from the dead, he raised none of those who had recently died. But
many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep rose with him and were seen by many,
“going in with him into the bridal chamber,” according to what is written in the gospel. 3
And it does not say that part of the bodies of the saints rose, but the bodies of the
saints. And “they appeared to many.” They were not different people from those who had
died, but were recognized by their own relatives, because they had not died long before.

4 Our Lord also wanted to show the wonder to others, and he carried out those difficult
things by showing them to be easy. When he came to the girl who had just died, the
daughter of the synagogue ruler, since she had died at that very hour, he saw fit to say
to her, “Rise, child.” By this “Rise” he strengthened what had already been loosened,
since she was still on the 5 bed. But the son of the widow at Nain, since he was already
being carried out on the bier, he raised more easily: “for he touched the bier,” and said
nothing to the boy. He only touched the bier, and the young man rose. 6 What went deeper
still, and far beyond human hope, was when he came to Lazarus, dead four days. He did not
say “Rise,” nor did he touch the tomb with his hand. Instead he calls, so readily, by his
own

7 authority, “Lazarus, come out here.” Now “Come out here” is much easier and readier than
touching, and touching is much easier than calling, “Child, rise.” In all this the holy
Word of God acts so as to show us the hope of the resurrection.

CHAPTER 101

1 If I wished to select as many testimonies as there are from all the Scriptures, my mind
is small, limited and unskilled, and because of their number I fear I would stretch my
discourse out to great length. So I will say it briefly: our salvation is concise, and in
all of them one hope, the resurrection, is proclaimed to us. 2 Unbelievers do not believe
these things, the wrongly minded corrupt them, the contentious do not accept them, and the
vainglorious push them away. But may God grant mercy to all, and make bright the darkened
places of their thoughts. 3 The Greeks, since they have [not] received the Holy Spirit,
will be refuted by the truth and by all the testimonies already given. They will be
refuted most of all by you, the sons of the holy church of God and of the orthodox faith.
4 For you teach, having received the Holy Spirit and having been counted worthy of fitting
speech “at the opening of the mouth.” First, you are disciples of Christ, counted worthy
to belong to the “chief shepherd” and guardian of our souls. So you gather food for the
flocks of Christ, your own peoples. You take thought how to feed both yourselves and God’s
own people (I mean everyone who wishes to be helped) from the holy land that is hinted at
in Moses. [The text here is disordered.]

5 Who of those with sound minds, looking to you, the devout and faithful, O orthodox, sons
of the church, would doubt these things? [I mean some; or by “all” I mean those who belong
to the truth, according to what is written. The text here is uncertain.] 6 For you are
sons of a wise and most courageous woman. Her fame is with Solomon, who says, “Who will
find a courageous woman?” as though she were rare, or rather, only one. You will choose
the better thing and love what is profitable. 7 By the courageous woman, understand for me
the church of God, your mother. Nothing is more courageous than she is. She dies at every
persecution that is stirred up, for the sake of the name of her own husband.

CHAPTER 102

1 This most gentle woman asks her own bridegroom with care in the book of Songs, “Where do
you shepherd? Where do you rest at midday?” Christ shepherds in the holy land spoken of
before. And he does not only shepherd. He also commands the shepherds to loosen the sandal
from their feet, as he first said to Moses. 2 You have received this tradition from him,
and you yourselves safely lead by the hand those who are being brought into holy
knowledge. First you take care that each person’s sandals are untied. The sandals of each
of us are different. 3 Each person has shod himself by his own practice. Then each one
listens to you, his teachers and good shepherds. One who had put on idolatry takes it off
through your warning. Another takes off adultery, another fornication, another theft,
another greed. 4 And not only that, but they also renounce hateful speech and shameful
words, with blessed hopes. Each of the disciples hands himself over, “under the mighty
hand” of the good shepherd, to be tended through you, the good shepherds. For each one
will keep away from error altogether.

5 And you set the truth before their eyes. You deface the idols and openly proclaim the
error about them. (For you do not count them as dead, since they never lived.) And you
reasonably teach everyone, always, that they are empty and vain and do not exist. 6 For
they never existed, so that they could be anything. They are wretched demons, a
construction of the human mind that gave strength to the occasions for pleasure. From
this, each person has dared to make his own passion into an object of worship and to
confirm it there. 7 For at the very first, when this was newly introduced among men
through the wickedness of demons, this was the “first fornication,” as it was called, and
idols were sketched in shadow-paintings. Then each person handed over to his own children,
to be worshiped, the very craft he had in his hands and by which he made his living. Out
of the material of their own workmanship they fashioned gods. The potter made them from
clay, the carpenter from wood, the goldsmith from gold, and the silversmith likewise from
silver.

CHAPTER 103

1 Moreover, each one sketched his own passion in shapes resembling it, for his own eyes to
see. A bloodthirsty man called it Ares. An adulterer, man or woman, called it the much-
shared Aphrodite. A tyrant gave wings to Victory. 2 The squalid man, gaping after the
things of this life, drew the likeness of Kronos. The effeminate drew Cybele and Rhea,
because of the fluidity, I think, of the mingling of bodies with many partners. 3 Another,
a drifter, man or woman, sketched Artemis the huntress, and drunken Dionysus, and much-
toiling Herakles. A person of many partners sketched Zeus and Apollo. 4 Why should I list
the multitudes, when the passions in men are countless? The Egyptians went astray more
than all. They worshiped not only their own passions but also winged creatures and four-
footed ones, creatures of land and of water, and some wild beasts. They “exchanged” the
order of the animals that the holy God had handed over to them as servants.

5 Being beastly in mind, they are exceedingly impious. They make gods of the animals among
them and are not ashamed. They worship the dog for its barking, the cat for eating
reptiles, the goat for its lack of restraint, and the sheep for its bleating. They worship
the crocodile for being many-cleft and most grim, the ibis for feeding on venom, and the
kite, the hawk and the raven for being the most slavish. They worship the snake for being
crooked and most unpleasant. 6 And in short, what great shame belongs to those who neither
see their own refutation with their eyes, nor take it in with their senses, nor [grasp]
with their minds the things that are done among them in vain. 7 They are struck with an
evil fate. They are not enlightened even by their own philosophers, and they do not join
in seeing with those who go around the circle [of learning?] of the truth.

8 For they do not listen to Diagoras. His own Heracles was made of wood, and for lack of
firewood he set it under the pot. He mocked it and said, “Come now, Heracles, complete
your thirteenth labor. Step forward and cook our meal for us.” Diagoras took the statue,
split it into pieces, laughed at his own god as one who did not exist, and made merry as
he ate the meal that had been set before him.

CHAPTER 104

1 Another man, Heraclitus, says to the Egyptians: “If they are gods, why do you mourn
them?” For they sing shrill laments for Typhon, Osiris and other gods of the underworld,
and grieve for them as for the buried. So this man says, “If they are gods, why do you
mourn them? But if they have died, you mourn them in vain.” 2 Another, a comic poet named
Eudaimon, says, “If there are gods, I cannot speak about them, nor can I make plain what
kind of form they have. For many things stand in my way.” And Homer says, “Rule by many is
not good.” 3 Philemon, another comic poet, says, “Those who worship one God have good
hopes of salvation.” 4 For Apis, the chaff-eating calf, was at once struck in the thigh
with a sword by Cambyses, king of the Assyrians. The point was that if blood flowed, it
would be proved that Apis was not a god.

5 The followers of Cronus do not deny that their own god was shut up in iron chains. That
is what they believe. But if someone is in confinement, it is not simply that he is
subject to one who is greater. Such a person is confined as a criminal. 6 If I must also
speak about Isis, who is also called Atthis and Io, the daughter of Apis the Cappadocian
(who is also called Inachus), I am perhaps ashamed to proclaim their deeds. 7 Still, I
will not be ashamed to tell what they themselves are not ashamed to worship. Let the
worshippers of this goddess be ashamed, and [the bearded men?] as well, who urge their own
daughters, wives and sisters to imitate the deeds of the gods. 8 At once the women, in
love with Osiris, their own brother, and with Typhon, [their] brother, send their own
brothers to war against each other. Great is the shame of a goddess who felt no respect
for her own brother. She was in love and was not content with outside men, but reached
even as far as her own brother.

9 And not only that: because her desire could never be satisfied, she even showed the way
to killing a brother, and did it to those dearest to her. 10 And as for Horus, so that she
might bear a child, she could not establish who his true father really is. For if she
names Typhon, there is doubt whether he is not his father. If she names Osiris, who could
establish that with certainty? 11 Such a mother taught that it was a fine thing for him
[to become] a god, since she took him and prostituted herself in Tyre for ten years. 12
The sons of the Sinopeans made Serapis, [called] Apis the king, into a god. In doing so
they were slaves more to tyranny than to truth.

CHAPTER 105

1 These are the wages of the gods honored among the Egyptians. To tell them one by one
would take a long time. The Greeks, who think they are something in themselves,
philosophize only in words and with a sharp tongue, and not in deeds. They have run
aground worse than all. 2 They bring Cronus down from Uranus. They say that he was born
from Uranus and [cut off] the parts of his own father. What an evil deed, and what a
shameful thought! If he had not been cut, there would have been many sons of Cronus. And
this noble fellow, who reached even his own father, 3 was not satisfied with his first
impiety. As a young man he wronged his father, and when he grew old he wronged his own
children, 4 swallowing Poseidon and Pluto. He searched for Zeus and was tricked by Rhea,
and he swallowed a great stone wrapped in swaddling clothes instead of a baby,

5 as if he were a god, perhaps [text missing]. But his child, if I may put it so, came
from noble parents (Zeus is his name), and he ran the risk of becoming the husband of all
women, and so did his son Hermes. And [text unclear] according to the laws he would have
become [a household dependent?], and not always a secret seducer of wives and a wrongdoer.
6 For he seduces Penelope after becoming a goat for pleasure. He became a goat, I suppose,
because of the thick tangle of his beard. 7 To Danae, [Zeus, the one we first called by
that name,] became gold, in order to seduce a chaste virgin kept in her chamber. But that
gold could never really have come to be. Being a sorcerer, he deceived the virgin by
bribing her with gold. 8 And with Leda he again becomes a swan, which signals the wing-
beating excitement of his burning desire.

9 Having once spread his wings as an eagle, he presides as teacher of those who corrupt
boys. But he never became an eagle. He sailed past Troy in a ship with an eagle for its
emblem, named “Eagle” for its speed. There he seized Ganymede, the son of the king of the
Trojans, and carried out his corruption. 10 And for Pasiphae he became a bull, and
likewise for Europa.

CHAPTER 106

1 106. Why should I list the many corruptions of this noble corrupter of virgins and
teacher of corrupters? That is plain to not a few. In Crete, on the mountain called
Lasios, [his tomb] is pointed out to this day. 2 There was not one Zeus, or two, but three
and four of them. One is the son of Kronos mentioned before, who cast his own father into
Tartarus on the Caucasus mountain. Another is called Latiarius, from whom the gladiators
came. Another is the tragic one, who also burned his own hand. 3 Perhaps, being a god, he
forgot that fire bites. He lacked the foresight of the one who spoke to the satyr, the
goat, who had found fire first and came to kiss it: “Don’t touch it, goat. If you touch
it, you will set your beard on fire.” 4 There have been not one Athena but many. One
roamed and wandered around Lake Tritonis. Another was the daughter of Oceanus, another of
Kronos, and there are many others.

5 There are many Artemises. One is the Ephesian, another is the one of Zeus, and there are
quite a few others besides. So too the Dionysuses: the Theban, another the son of Semele,
the one among the Corybantes, the one torn apart by the Titans, and the one of the
Kouretes who [introduced the distribution of meat; the text is uncertain]. 6 Then there is
the one they call Herakles, the averter of evil. How many of his deeds shall I pass over
in silence? I will point out just one out of them all, the one perhaps most praised among
them. It will be enough for him to have undergone this labor, so that salvation might come
to life. For if he had not corrupted fifty virgins in a single night, how would the world
have been saved? Rather, it would have perished. 7 And to be plain with you, I find it
distasteful to write out their evil deeds in prose.

8 Furthermore, kings and tyrants, utterly harsh men, had certain favorites. They buried
them in [a place missing from the text], having nothing more to give them, since they
themselves were as perishable as those they honored. Out of goodwill toward their
favorites they handed over their tombs to their own subjects, to be worshiped as gods.
This was a deception for people’s lives, set up on an evil pretext. Such is Antinous, who
was buried in Antinoou, 9 and who lay in a [pleasure-boat; the text is uncertain] and was
enrolled among the gods by Hadrian in this way. Timogenes in Asia is honored in the same
way. So are Kanobos, the pilot of Menelaus, and his wife Enmenouthis, who are honored in
Alexandria where they are buried, on the seashore, twelve miles apart. So also Marnas,
slave of Asterios the Cretan, among the people of Gaza, and Basios the shipmaster among
the people of Pelusium.

CHAPTER 107

1 107. When you examine all these things carefully in the midst of the church, you set
free those who have been led on in this way. [Here the text is corrupt: “a bad example of
a deadly road.”] You also bring others from adultery to self-control. You deliver them not
only from stealing other men’s marriages, but also lead them, through continence, to look
down even on their own [wives], since “the time is short,” as the holy apostle says. And
you instruct fornicators, so that they may not be punished for the unlawful act they have
committed before God and before men. 2 When you have labored to hand on all this by your
mouth and by your deeds, persuade them to accept everything from you. First do everything
yourselves in practice and form it in yourselves. Confirm your words by the deeds with
which you first taught yourselves, so that you may make disciples of others too.

3 For even in silence you have influence, like the sun, which silently teaches everyone
everywhere. As soon as it rises, without a word, it teaches all people their crafts. 4
When you hand on the benefit of all this to your own children, or to your most faithful
brothers, you lead them forward to walk on earth but to have “their citizenship in
heaven.” And you stir up in most of them a zeal for the monastic life. 5 Through the
firmness and sincere faith that are in you, you hate the heretics. You silence the
Manichaeans, the Marcionites and the rest like them, and you drive them away from [the
church] of God, dissolving all their pretexts and stopping their mouths. 6 For how many
bold things they pour out against God and his holy prophets! They are light-minded and
empty of the Holy Spirit. They blaspheme the Creator of all, and they hate all the good
things God graciously gave to all people through his holy prophets, by prophecy [in the
Spirit]. They hate the deepest things of the Law and the prophets, because they are
earthly and bodily. They examine these things [in a natural, soulish way] and do not
understand them. Their blasphemy is in vain.

7 Do not hesitate to shake their error off those who hear it at once, [refuting] them with
true proofs. For such empty-minded people are swept along by such words like twigs in the
current of a full river.

CHAPTER 108

1 108. They also say that the God of the Law is a good one, since he asked Adam where he
was, not knowing, saying, “Adam, where are you?” And he says to Cain, “Where is Abel your
brother?” And to Abraham, “Where is Sarah your wife?” and many other things like these. 2
Yet those who say such things believe in God the Savior with the mouth and not in truth.
He is God and has foreknowledge, yet he asks the very same kinds of questions in the New
Testament as well: “Where have you laid Lazarus?” and “Who touched me?” and “Do you have
bread with you?” and “Whom do you want?” or “Whom are you seeking?” 3 So the refutation of
these people is easy and ready to hand. Just as the Son asks questions while having
foreknowledge, so the Father also asks questions in the Law. He is always the same and
does not change.

4 For if he says, “Where have you laid Lazarus?”, he is ignorant neither of the gospel nor
of the Old Testament. He says “Where have you laid him?” because he wishes to expose those
who had not shown even equal faith to that of the Shunammite woman. She had her faith
toward a man, that is, Elisha the holy prophet, while the women around Martha had theirs
toward God. 5 And if he says, “Who touched me?”, he does not say it in ignorance. He says
it to persuade the woman to confess of her own accord, so that the Son of God would not be
testifying about himself, but would be glorified by others. 6 And when he says, “Do you
have bread with you?”, he says it for this reason: so that the smallness of the supply of
bread would be made plain to all, and the greatness of his miracle would be marvelled at,
since so great a crowd was fed with so few loaves. And when he says, “Whom are you
seeking?”,

7 he shows that those who seek him are deceived. They are “seeking Jesus”, a name which
means physician and savior, so that when they kill him, they would lose his salvation.

CHAPTER 109

1 109. In the same way, then, as we have shown that what is said about the economy of our
Lord is spoken humanly yet is not without foreknowledge (for no sensible person would say
that he did not know where they had laid Lazarus, when he was near the place, even if he
asked in the way we described. A little earlier he had been far off in Galilee and had
shown of himself that it was Lazarus), so we also explain these matters sensibly
concerning the Old Testament. 2 When God said, “Adam, where are you?”, it was not the
question of one who did not know. It was to show from what a height Adam had fallen, and
into what depth of shame. 3 And “Where is Abel your brother?” means: the one you ought
always to have carried in your arms and always to have been with has been thrown down to
the earth by you.

4 For he shows from what follows that he did not ask out of ignorance but to convict him,
when he says, “Cursed is the earth in your works, and cursed are you from the earth, which
opened its mouth to receive the blood of your brother from your hand.” 5 “For behold,” he
says, “his voice cries out to me.” And when he said, “Where is Sarah your wife?”, he did
not say it in ignorance. For how could he not know, when he knew that she was laughing
inside the house? So he did not ask out of ignorance. He asked to show Sarah’s daughters,
who “profess godliness”, that they should learn her way of life, whenever they try to
serve the saints from their own labors. 6 For she, though engaged in such great service,
herself made the unleavened cakes and the loaves baked in the ashes. She prepared all that
service together with her own servants, and she did not look at the faces of those she
served. In this she left to our generations a pattern of modest self-control. And this
will be enough to answer the arguments of the empty-minded.


THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN) (CHAPTERS 110–119)
========================================================

THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN) continued

CHAPTER 110

1 110. And suppose they say that the God of the law is good, because he cheated the
Egyptians and taught his own people to plunder them when they left the land of Egypt.
These fools do not know that with God nothing is lost, that there is righteous judgment,
and that “God is not mocked.” 2 What did the Egyptians think? That they were seeking to
have the Jews work for them for nothing? And not for just a few years, but for two hundred
and fifteen, [together with the two hundred and fifteen years of Joseph (the text is
corrupt here)]? 3 A sojourn of four hundred and thirty years had been fixed for Abraham
and his seed, as it says: “Your seed will be a sojourner in a land that is not its own.”
[Then] what had been fixed was being brought to completion. 4 So in his compassion God
divided the years of their sojourn. [At once, through] fifteen years [the text is corrupt
here], while they were still in their own [land], and the other two hundred and fifteen he
assigned to those who went down into Egypt.

5 The count of these years is reckoned like this. It was then Abraham’s seventy-fifth
year. So from Abraham’s seventy-fifth year until the birth of Isaac there are [number
unclear in the Greek] years. Isaac, in his sixtieth year, fathers Jacob, and the total
comes to [number unclear] years. Jacob, when he was [number unclear] years old, fathers
Levi, and the total comes to [number unclear] years. Levi, at [number unclear] four years
old, fathers Kohath. In Levi’s [hundred and] seventh year Jacob goes down into Egypt, and
the total comes to two hundred and eleven years. After their entry into Egypt, four more
years pass, and the two hundred and fifteen are completed. 6 From here I count again the
remaining two hundred and fifteen years of the Israelites’ sojourn. Kohath, after the
descent into Egypt, in his sixty-fifth year fathers Abraham, the father of Moses. So from
the first Abraham, from his seventy-fifth year until the birth of the last Abraham, there
are [number unclear] years, and from the going down into Egypt, sixty-five years.

7 Abraham, at seventy years old, fathers Moses. So from the first Abraham there are
[number unclear] years, and from the going down into Egypt, one hundred and thirty-five. 8
Moses, in his thirtieth year, walks through the Red Sea as he leaves Egypt with the
Israelites. So from the great Abraham there are [number unclear] years, and from the going
down into Egypt, one hundred and sixty-five. 9 The remaining fifty years were spent after
the crossing of the Red Sea, until they reached Palestine. This was not because of the
length of the road, but because they had to fight, and were hindered by the nations they
met along the way. 10 So from the seventy-fifth year of the great Abraham, when this
prediction was given to him by God, until Moses and the arrival of the sons of Israel in
Palestine, there are four hundred and thirty years. From the going down into Egypt until
their arrival [in] Palestine, there are two hundred and fifteen years.

CHAPTER 111

1 111. The Jews worked for so many years without pay. Was it not right, before God and
before men, that they be given their wages, even if only at the end? So God was not unjust
when he brought his own people out of there with spoils. 2 If anyone doubts that the years
are counted this way, let him listen to Moses, who says: “The dwelling of the sons of
Israel in the land of Canaan and in the land of Egypt was four hundred and thirty years.”
3 Since the Lord took care of that perfectly just payment, what empty objection is left
for those who want to bring blame against the holy God? No one could ever find fault with
the true God. Those who find fault only blame themselves. 4 They also put forward another
empty objection, like the first. They say that the God of the law is good because he
cheated the Canaanites, in order to give the Israelites their place: “houses they did not
build, and olive groves, fig orchards and vineyards they did not plant.”

5 To this I answer: you fools! If God were like a man, what is said and done today would
pass away, and he would give it no thought. But since God “is God and not man,” he does
not forget what is done against him. He avenges it even after many generations. If they do
not know this, let them learn it.

CHAPTER 112

1 112. Everyone knows that the righteous Noah became the remnant of the world after the
flood. So he was left, he and his three sons. He was a righteous man and tried to make his
children devout, so that they would not fall into the same evils as those in the flood. He
did not hand on devotion to them by words alone. He also demanded an oath from each of
them, pledging goodwill toward his brother. 2 Having been made heir of the world by God,
he divided the whole world among his three sons. He split it into lots and assigned each
portion to each son by lot. 3 To Shem, the firstborn, the lot fell from Persia and Bactria
to India in length. In breadth it ran from [gap in the text] to the land of Rhinocorura.
This Rhinocorura lies between Egypt and Palestine, opposite the Red Sea. 4 To Ham, the
second son, went the southern parts, from that same Rhinocorura to Gadira. To Japheth, the
third, went the northern parts, from Media to Gadira and Rhinocorura.

CHAPTER 113

1 113. To Shem were born children and children’s children, twenty-five in all, down to the
time when the languages were divided. They are scattered among languages, tribes and
kingdoms. 2 Their names are these: Elymaeans, Paeonians, Lazones, Cossaeans, Gasphenians,
Palestinians, Indians, Syrians, Arabs (who are also [Tai]), Arians, Mardians, Hyrcanians,
Magousaeans, Assyrians, Germans, Lydians, Mesopotamians, Hebrews, Coelenians, Bactrians,
Adiabenians, Camelians, Saracens, Scythians, [Chiones, a corrupt reading], Gymnosophists
(the “naked philosophers”), Chaldeans, Parthians, Eetae, Cordylenians, Massynians,
Phoenicians, Midianites, Commagenians, Dardanians, Elamasenians, Kedrousians, Elamites,
Armenians, Cilicians, [Egyptians], Cappadocians, [Phoenicians], [Bions, a corrupt
reading], Carians, Chalybes, Psyllites, Lazi, Mossynoeci, Iberians, Phrygians. 3 To Ham,
the second son, were born children and children’s children, thirty-two in all, down to
that same division of the languages. They are: Ethiopians, Troglodytes, Angaeans,
Taienians, Sabines, Fish-eaters, Hellenic peoples, Egyptians, Phoenicians, Marmaridae,
Carians, Psyllites, Mossynoeci, Phrygians, Macones, Macrones, Syrtites, Leptimagnites,
Bithynians, Nomads, Lycians, Mariandynians, Pamphylians, [Moschesidians, a corrupt
reading], Pisidians, Augalaeans, Cilicians, Mauretanians, Cretans, Magardae, Numidians,
Africans (who are also Bizacenes), Phasgenians, Mazices, Garamantes, Getulians, Blemmyes,
Axomites. These hold the land from Egypt to the Ocean.

4 Their islands are: Cursula, Lopadusa, Gaulos, Rhide, Melite, Corcyra, Mene, Sardinia,
Gortyna, Crete, Glaucus, Rhide, Thera, Carianthos, Astypalaea, Chios, Lesbos, Tenedos,
Imbros, Iasos, Samos, Cos, Cnidus, Nisyros, Megiste and Cyprus. 5 To Japheth, the third
son, were born children and children’s children, fifteen in all, down to that same
division of the languages. They are: Medes, Albanians, Gargians, Armenians, Arraeans,
Amazons, Coli, Corzenians, Beneagenians, Cappadocians, Galatians, Paphlagonians,
Mariandynians, Tibarenians, Chalybes, Mossynoeci, Colchians, Melanchlaenians,
Sauromatians, Germans, Maeotians, Scythians, Taurians, Thracians, Bastarnians, Illyrians,
Macedonians, Greeks, Libyans, [Phrygians, a corrupt reading], Pannonians, Istrians,
Venetians, Daunians, Iapygians, Calabrians, Hippici, Latins (who are also Romans),
Tyrrhenians, Gauls (who are also Celts), Ligurians, Celtiberians, Iberians, Gauls,
Aquitanians, Illyrians, Basantes, Cannians, Cartanians, Lusitanians, Vaccaeans, Britons,
Scots and Spaniards. 6 Their islands are: Britain, Sicily, Euboea, Rhodes, Chios, Lesbos,
Cythera, Zacynthus, Cephallenia, Ithaca, Corcyra and Cyprus. 7 If anywhere the name of a
nation or an island is listed twice, in one man’s lot and a city in another’s, this is
because of shared borders, or colonies planted at various times, or because Ham grasped
for more and took parts of Shem’s share. Let no one be surprised or doubt.

CHAPTER 114

1 114. So these nations came from the three sons of Noah, and the world was divided in
three among the three sons, as I said before. Their father demanded an oath from them that
no one would encroach on his brother’s lot. 2 They said, in the oath, that whoever
transgressed the terms of the oath would be utterly destroyed, together with all his
offspring. 3 Now Palestine fell within Shem’s lot, along with everything near it. But
Canaan, Ham’s son, was grasping. Later he came against the land of the Palestinians, that
is, Judea, and snatched it away. And patient was the 4 God. He gave times of repentance,
so that the descendants of Ham might repent and give back to the descendants of Shem their
own inheritance. But they did not repent. They wanted to fill up their measure. 5 Then,
many generations later, God, being just, avenged the breaking of the oath. This is how the
measure of the Amorites had to be filled.

6 For Shem begets Arphaxad. Ham begets Canaan. And Canaan, after the grasping act, begets
the Amorite, the Gergesite, the Perizzite, the Hivite, the Arkite, the Aradian and the
Sidonian. 7 So the generations are counted in this way down to the vengeance for Shem.
Shem, who was wronged, begets Arphaxad, as we said. Arphaxad begets Kenan, Kenan begets
Sala, and Sala begets Eber, and in his time the building of the tower takes place. Eber
begets Phalek, and in his time the division of the earth and of tongues takes place.
Phalek begets Ragau, Ragau begets Serouch, Serouch begets Nachor, Nachor begets Tharra,
Tharra begets Abraham, Abraham begets Isaac, and Isaac begets Jacob, who was named Israel,
from whom come the Israelites. Jacob begets Judah, Judah begets Phares, Phares begets
Esrom, Esrom begets Aram, Aram begets Aminadab, Aminadab begets Naasson, and Naasson
begets Salmon. This is the line of those born from Shem.

8 So God took vengeance for these people, who had been wronged by the sons of Ham and
deprived of their own place. He destroyed the descendants of Canaan, in keeping with their
own oath, and the seed of Shem received back its own land. God therefore did no injustice,
for he gave to each side what was just. “For God is not mocked,” as I said before.

CHAPTER 115

1 Then, at the exodus, when God was about to fit together an assembly for himself, he says
to Moses, “Take your sandals off your feet.” For everyone who is about to approach clean
washings first takes off his shoes. 2 A long time had passed, however, and each one of us
had “wandered in his own way,” and this assembly had remained in its own evils. So God did
not yet reveal “the washing of regeneration.” He put it off for many years, and later he
revealed the all-holy washing to the holy church. In Moses he did so by having him take
off his sandals. 3 In the prophets he did so by stripping off the outer tunic, leaving
only a loincloth to Jeremiah. In John he changed the whole clothing of the world and
remade it out of camel’s hair. In the Savior himself and his disciples he stripped off the
fashion of the world, and then, after their cleansing, he clothed them from above, from
heaven, with a garment “of fire and Spirit.”

4 But when the Israelites saw this grace, they did not know that he is God. So the
prophet, as a charge against them, lamented over them because of the dishonor they would
show to the Savior, saying, “Is this how you repay the Lord, you foolish and senseless
people?” 5 For they did not recognize that this was the one who was in the beginning, with
whom the Father took counsel, saying, “Let us make man in our image and likeness.” 6 For
the words “let us make” do not indicate a single person. Rather, the Father took counsel
with the Son and the Holy Spirit. “For by the word of the Lord the heavens were made firm,
and by the Spirit of his mouth all their power.” 7 Nor did they understand the one who
says in that same book, in plain words, “The Lord rained fire and sulfur from the Lord out
of heaven on Sodom and Gomorrah.” For “the Lord rained fire” refers to the one who had
come to Abraham, and “from the Lord out of heaven” refers to the one who had sent him.

8 Nor did they recognize him when he brought them out of Egypt. Nor did they understand
the prophet who says, “And you, Bethlehem, are not the least.” (For how could one call
“least” a city that held him whom heaven and all things cannot contain?) And: “from you
shall come forth for me a ruler.” But if he comes forth from Bethlehem and is a man, how
is he spoken of as God?

CHAPTER 116

1 What troubles them is that he is both God and man. For in the same passage it says, “His
goings forth are from the beginning, from the creation of the world.” That no longer
belongs to a man, but to God. 2 They do not remember that “Behold, the virgin will
conceive in the womb and bear a son, and they will call his name Emmanuel.” The word “they
will call” points to the way of the holy and faithful, the sons of the church. 3 For when
they are questioned by the Jews, the killers of the Lord, about the Savior, asking how
they [believe] in the one who was crucified, and they confess him, they hear from the same
believers: “With you he was crucified, but with us he is God.” 4 They did not listen to
David, and they did not understand his word, which he spoke in the Holy Spirit as he saw
it, trembling at the saving plan of the Lord himself that was to come. He said, “The Lord
said to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand,’” and so on.

5 So the old sabbaths have passed away, and among us the true sabbath is proclaimed. The
first circumcision has ceased, since it cut away one very small part of the body. But the
heavenly circumcision is working very well, since it circumcises the whole body. 6 For the
waters and the holy invocation do not work on one part of the human being. They seal the
whole body of the man, make it clean, circumcise it, and set it free from all evils. This,
then, is what the holy Church has received: these mysteries. 7 But fierce enemies, called
“members of the household,” have risen up against her. They are not of the true faith of
the Lord’s apostles. For if they had been of them, they would have remained with them. 8
But they are illegitimate and mixed in, and they long again with a wicked desire for the
food of Egypt, the fish and the cucumbers. They blaspheme the Son of God up and down.
These are the Arius-maniacs, whom we have already pilloried in the earlier discourses, and
others who are Sabellians.

9 The Sabellians deny outright that there is a Son and a Holy Spirit. They say that the
Son is the Father, and the Father himself is the Son, and the Holy Spirit himself is the
Father, so that there is no Son and no Holy Spirit. They are exposed as second Jews and
killers of the Lord. 10 The Arius-maniacs are the most impious of all. They dare to divide
the Son from the Father’s substance and make him a stranger to it. They do not think the
Son worthy of equal honor with the Father, nor that he was begotten from the Father’s
substance. 11 There are others, their offspring, whom we counted earlier with the others
listed before. Like the Jews, they blaspheme the Holy Spirit. They are second Sadducees
and Samaritans, unknown, dead and faithless.

CHAPTER 117

1 117. So that we do not make our testimonies against these people long, “with ink and
paper,” and so that our readers do not grow weary, a few will be enough. Against the
Sabellians, along with the other testimonies, the testimony of the Jordan will suffice, as
I have already said. 2 For the Son truly comes to the Jordan, having become God as man. He
did not undergo a change but took flesh. It was not by the seed of a man but from the holy
virgin that he took up a body, conceived by the Holy Spirit: a perfect body, that is, a
perfect man, with soul and body. 3 So God, who is also man, came to John at the Jordan,
being one and the same Son and Christ and Lord. And the Father cries out from above,
bearing witness to the Son who had come to the Jordan: “This is my beloved Son.”

4 And the Holy Spirit came down on him in the form of a dove, when he had gone down into
the waters. This was to show the waters clean for the sake of those who were going to be
baptized into the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. 5 Against the
Arians, along with what was said before, it will be enough that the Son said, “I am in the
Father and the Father is in me.” For here he showed the Son’s equality with the Father,
and that he is truly his own. 6 Against the offspring of the Arians, who blaspheme the
Holy Spirit, two testimonies already set out earlier, along with the other testimonies,
will be enough. One is from Daniel, and goes like this: in the furnace of fire, Shadrach,
7 Meshach and Abednego, praising God, take in with themselves the whole creation of God
and say, “Bless the Lord, all you works of the Lord.” They listed heavens and angels, moon
and sun and powers, earth and sea and everything in them, and nowhere did they count the
Son and the Holy Spirit among the created things. And the Seraphim sanctify a Trinity, one
may suppose, saying “Holy” not once, nor twice, nor four times, but three times.

CHAPTER 118

1 118. Let Peter also refute these people again, rebuking Ananias and those with him and
saying, “You have tempted the Holy Spirit.” 2 And he says, “You have not lied to men, but
to God.” The apostle knows, as we have said many times, that the Spirit is not foreign to
God, for he says, “He searches even the depths of God.” But what is not from the substance
of God cannot search the depths of God. 3 We know the Father as Father, the Son as Son,
the Holy Spirit as Holy Spirit: a Trinity in unity. For there is one unity of the Father
and the Son and the Holy Spirit: one substance, one lordship, one will, one Church, one
baptism, one faith. 4 And let those who speak against the holy virgin of Christ and pure
bride, that is, our mother the holy Church, stop. 5 For her children received from the
holy fathers, that is, the holy apostles, the faith to guard, and at the same time to hand
on and proclaim to their own children.

6 You also, most honored brothers, are sons of this Church, so hand on this teaching to
your own children. 7 Say these things, and things like them drawn from the divine
Scriptures, [to confirm] yourselves and those who hear you. Do not stop teaching,
preparing the way, and instructing, you faithful and orthodox. Keep this holy faith of the
catholic church just as the holy and only virgin of God received it from the holy apostles
of the Lord. 8 In this way, for each of the catechumens who are about to come to the holy
washing, you must not only declare [the matter of believing] to your own sons in the Lord.
You must also teach them the words exactly, since she is the same mother of us all, yours
and ours, so that they say: 9 We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of heaven
and earth, and of all things seen and unseen.

10 And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten from the Father
before all ages, that is, from the substance of the Father, light from light, true God
from true God, begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father. Through him all
things came into being, both those in heaven and those on earth. For us human beings and
for our salvation he came down from the heavens and was made flesh from the Holy Spirit
and Mary the virgin, and became man. He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate,
suffered and was buried, and rose on the third day according to the Scriptures. He went up
into the heavens and sits at the right hand of the Father, and he will come again with
glory to judge the living and the dead. His kingdom will have no end. 11 And in the Holy
Spirit, the Lord and giver of life, who proceeds from the Father, who together with the
Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified, who spoke through the prophets; in one holy
catholic and apostolic church.

12 We confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the
dead and the life of the age to come. Amen. 13 Those who say, “There was a time when he
was not,” and, “Before he was begotten he was not,” or that he came into being out of
nothing, or who claim that the Son of God is from another hypostasis or substance, or is
subject to change or alteration, these the catholic and apostolic church anathematizes. 14
This faith was handed down by the holy apostles, and [was set out] in the church in the
holy city by all the holy bishops of that time together, more than three hundred in
number.

CHAPTER 119

1 119. But in our own generation other heresies have appeared, one after another. That is,
in the time of the emperors Valentinian and Valens, around the tenth year of their reign,
and again around the sixth year of Gratian, that is, in the ninetieth year of the tyrant
Diocletian, 2 for this reason you and we and all the orthodox bishops, and in short the
whole holy catholic church, speak as follows against the heresies that have arisen, in
keeping with the faith set out beforehand by those holy fathers. We say it especially to
those coming to the holy washing, so that they may declare and say as follows: 3 We
believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things unseen and seen; 4 and in one
Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of God the Father, only-begotten, that is,
from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God,
begotten, not made, of one substance with the Father. Through him all things came into
being, both those in heaven and those on

5 earth, seen and unseen. For us human beings and for our salvation he came down and was
made flesh, that is, was perfectly born of the holy Mary, ever-virgin, through the Holy
Spirit. He became man, that is, he took a perfect man: soul and body and mind, and
everything that a man is, apart from sin. 6 He did not come from the seed of a man, nor
did he come to be [in] a man. Rather, he formed flesh for himself into one holy unity. It
was not as in the prophets, where he breathed and spoke and worked; he became man
perfectly. 7 For “the Word became flesh.” He did not undergo change, nor did he turn his
own divinity into humanity. He united into one his own holy perfection and divinity. For
the Lord Jesus Christ is one and not two: the same God, the same Lord, the same King.

8 The same Lord suffered in the flesh, rose again, and went up into the heavens in that
same body. He sat down in glory at the right hand of the Father, and he will come again in
that same body, in glory, to judge the living and the dead. Of his kingdom there will be
no end. 9 We believe also in the Holy Spirit, who spoke in the law and preached in the
prophets, who came down upon the Jordan, who speaks in the apostles and dwells in the
saints. 10 This is how we believe in him: that he is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God,
the perfect Spirit, the Spirit who is the Comforter. He is uncreated. He proceeds from the
Father, and he receives from the Son, and † is believed in. † 11 We believe in one
catholic and apostolic church, and in one baptism of repentance, and in the resurrection
of the dead, and in a just judgment of souls and bodies, and in the kingdom of heaven, and
in eternal life.

12 As for those who say that there was a time when the Son or the Holy Spirit did not
exist, or that he came into being out of things that were not, or who claim that he is of
another substance or being, or that the Son of God or the Holy Spirit is changeable, the
catholic and apostolic church, your mother and ours, anathematizes them. And again we
anathematize those who do not confess the resurrection of the dead, and all the heresies
that do not come from this right faith. 13 Most blessed ones, since you and your children
believe in this way and carry out the commandments that flow from this faith, we hope that
you will always pray for us, so that we may have a share and an inheritance in the same 14
faith and in the inheritance of its commandments. And pray for us, you and everyone who
believes in this way and keeps the commandments of the Lord in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Through him and with him be glory to the Father, together with the Holy Spirit, for ever
and ever. Amen.

15 Up to this point, beloved brothers, my own littleness and the weak power of my mind
have been compelled to come. Your goodness and nobility urged us on, even though we are
unequal to the task, and in stretching beyond our own measure we need help. But he who is
faithful in heaven knows everything. 16 Peace, then, to everyone who walks by this rule of
the true and orthodox faith, and upon the Israel of God. Greet all the saints in the Lord.
The servants of the Lord greet you, and especially I, Anatolius, who wrote this book, the
discourse called the Ancoratus. And I pray that you may be well in the Lord.


WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
====================

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Epiphanius of Salamis

c. AD 310–403

Bishop of Salamis; wrote against heresies.

APPENDICES: TRANSLATION OF GREEK FRAGMENTS; THE ALPHABETS IN SYRIAC MANUSCRIPT B; SUMMARY OF THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES — INTRODUCTION

APPENDIX I — THE ALPHABETS IN SYRIAC MANUSCRIPT B

On the opposite page is a photographic reproduction of folio 13c-d of Or. Add. 14620,
designated in this work as B. Only the column at left (d) and the line of characters
across the bottom of both columns are of interest here. The rest is practically the same
as A, and the collation is found in its proper place under folio 60d. The caption at the
top of B folio 13d is: "The alphabet of various scripts." The words at the foot of the
first subcolumn to the right in 13d are: "The Greek of the books," that is, the uncials.
At the foot of the second subcolumn: "Of the numbers," that is, the minuscules, used in
writing numbers. At the foot of the third subcolumn: "Tadmorine." To the left of this
third subcolumn we read: "The Tadmorine alphabet, that is to say, the Phoenician. Tadmor
is Phoenicia of Syria." Since it is well known that the Greek Palmyra was the older
Tadmor, the identification of "Phoenicia of Syria" with Emesa, as quoted by R. Payne Smith
(Thesaurus Syriacus, col. 3066), is in direct opposition to our manuscript. For a
discussion of the forms of these Tadmorine letters see J. P. N. Land in Zeitschrift der
Deutschen morgenlandischen Gesellschaft XXII (1868) 549-51.

The word at the foot of the next subcolumn is the Greek shmeion, which Lagarde calls
"numerorum siglae syriacae veteres" (cf. L, p. 36 n.). Next toward the left is the
Mesopotamian alphabet, without special designation. At the extreme left of the folio are
the words, "Additions in the Mesopotamian alphabet are these," referring to the eight
characters immediately below, at least some of which are Syriac vowel signs. Land calls
the alphabet-like line of characters across the bottom of the two columns a Federprobe, as
evidenced by the fourfold writing of C, with the opening in as many directions, and the
presence of Greek φ. |136

APPENDIX II — TRANSLATION OF THE GREEK TEXT OF § 21

21. Thus far, O great lover of the good, we have sufficiently treated the subject of the
translators in all that precedes. Hereafter, for the rest, as we have promised in response
to your entreaties, O man of God, we give attention to the weights and measures and
numbers in the divine Scriptures, showing whence each one is named and what is the
quality, the weight, and the force of each of them. So the kor is a measure. And it occurs
in the Gospel according to Luke, where the Savior commends the sagacious steward who re-
wrote so and so instead of so many kors in their accounts, and made (it) so and so instead
of so many baths of oil. For the names of the measures are as follows: lethekh, homer,
bath, seah, modius, cab, choinix, hyfe of fine flour, handful of meal, ardeb, three
measures of fine flour, three baskets of coarse meal, nevel of wine, kollathon, alabastron
of ointment, kapsakes of water, kotyle of oil, kyathos, metretes of wine, metretes of oil,
tryblion, xestes, amphora, aporryma, shafitha, hin, chus, the golden stamnos in which the
manna was placed, mares, kupros, congiarium. Moreover, the koros is taken from the Hebrew
language, where it is called the kor. And it is 30 modii. But the kor gets its name from
the fundamental idea of a heap, for the heap is called a charia. And 30 modii heaped
together make a camel's load.

And (as for) a lethekh, since it is said in the prophet Hosea, "I have hired for myself
for a lethekh of barley," but in other codices, "for a homer of barley," they are the
same; for they signify 15 modii. But the lethekh is named according to a word of the
Hebrews which means a "lifting up," from the circumstance that a young man can lift up 15
modii and place them on an ass. And this is also called the homer. But there are two
homers, a great one and a small one, of which the great one is the same as the lethekh, it
being also 15 modii, but the small one is 12 baths. And this comes from the Hebrew
language, the oil press being synonymously called bith. For "bath" is interpreted oil
press, but it is 50 xestai |137 and is the measure of the craft of the oil-presser. Mnasis
or medimnos are taken, I think, from the Roman language, for in that language medium is
interpreted as "middle. Mnasis, moreover, is used as a measure among the Cyprians and
other peoples. And it is 10 modii of wheat or barley by the modius of 17 xestai among the
Cyprians. But the medimnos varies among the same Cyprians; for the people of Salamis, that
is to say, of Constantia, have a medimnos of 5 modii, while those of Paphos and the
Sicilians measure it as 4 1/2 modii.

(The seah) is called satos, being derived from the same Hebrew and pronounced as a
feminine, but in Greek as neuter, for it is called salon and not satos. And it is an
overfull modius, so that the modius is full and because of the overfulness a quarter of a
modius (more). But it is called a seah, meaning according to this language a "taking up"
or "lifting up," from the circumstance that the one measuring, according to a certain
custom, takes the measure and lifts it up. But the name of the modius was invented by the
Hebrews with great exactness, being 22 xestai, not in simple fashion or by chance, but
from great exactness. For the "just" modius, as the Law is accustomed to say, is measured
according to the sacred measure. For the sacred measure is nothing else than the twenty-
two works that God did in the six days of the hebdomad.

APPENDIX III — TRANSLATION OF THE FRAGMENTARY CONCLUSION OF THE GREEK TEXT FOLLOWING §24

But the cab, from the same language, is a different measure, that is to say, the fourth
part of a modius. But the choinix and hyfe are one, though called by a double name. And it
is 2 xestai and a certain fraction. The handful of meal. This is simple and clear to all.
The ardeb. This measure was named by the Egyptians, and it is 72 xestai. And this also is
so composed with great exactness. Seventy-two men were building the tower at the time when
the one language was confounded into seventy-two. Hence also they are called meropes,
because of the divided speech. But the metretes has the same capacity according to the
sacred measure. "Three measures of fine flour," those which Abraham commanded Sarah to
prepare for the angels, from which measures he commanded an ash cake to be made. Every one
of these measures held an omer.

The omer, however, was the tenth part of the great measure, that is, of the ardeb, which
makes 7 1/5 xestai. Three baskets of coarse meal, where they were at that time accustomed
to put the coarse meal. But it is a kind of wheat cut in two. The nevel of wine, which is
a measure of 150 xestai. The seah is 56 xestai. The alabastron of ointment is a little
glass jar containing a libra of |139 oil, and the capacity is half a xestes. But it is
called an alabastron because of its fragility. (As for) the kapsakes of water, 12 xestai
of water is the capacity; but the kapsakes prepared for Elijah is 4 xestai. The kotyle is
a measure, it is half a xestes. And it is called a kotyle because the xestes is cut in
two. The kyathos is the sixth part of a xestes. But the Scripture calls the kyathoi
medekoth. And it calls the strainers masmaroth, which we also call ethmoi. But both are
called by the same name because they have also the same use.

The tryblion is a saucer in form, that is, a dish, but it has the capacity of half a
xestes. The Alexandrian xestes holds 2 librae of oil by weight. The aporryma is employed
as a measure only among the Thebans, for it is half a saites. The true saites, however, is
22 xestai. The sabitha. This is the Syriac term which is translated "the drawing vessel of
the wine press"; among the people of Ashkelon it is 22 xestai. The hin. The great hin is
18 xestai; the sacred hin is 9 xestai. The chus is 8 xestai. But the one called "sacred"
is 6 xestai, which is the twelfth part of a metretes. The talent is that measure used in
weighing that exceeds every other, and in librae it is 125 librae, 6,000 lepta to the
talent, which lepta are called assaria; but the denarion is 60 assaria, and the silver
(talent) is 100 denaria.

Now the silver (coin) was coined as a coin from the beginning, but it was coined by the
Assyrians. And they say Abraham brought the coin into Canaan. The 1/125 part of the talent
is 1 libra. But the libra is 12 ounces. And the ounce contains 2 staters. |140 And the
stater is half an ounce, being a didrachmon. Concerning the shekel. The shekel, which is
also called the kodrantes, is the fourth part of an ounce, half of the stater, being 2
drachmae, for the drachma was the eighth part of the ounce. And the drachma was called the
holke. By this weight, the shekel,they weighed the hair of Absalom whenever he had his
hair cut, the weight being 125 shekels, which is an ounce of 1 shekel, amounting to 2 1/2
librae. Even the obolus was coined among silver (coins). But this was the eighth part of
the ounce, the one made not of silver but of iron. But there was also another obolus
coined of silver, being a very small coin, the eightieth part of the ounce. For it is said
in Leviticus: "The didrachmon is 20 oboloi." We have already shown that the didrachmon is
the fourth part of the ounce.

The chalkoi. The Egyptians invented these. There are two silver (coins) coined, and the
silver (coins) are called copper among the Alexandrians. But the chalkus is the eighth
part of an ounce by weight, like the drachma. The mina, which is called the mane in
Hebrew. But the Italian mina is 40 staters, which is 20 ounces, a libra and two-thirds.
And there have been many types of silver coins from time to time. The nummus was coined by
a certain Numa, king of the Romans. But the ancients called half of the silver (denarius)
the dichryson. |141 And this silver (denarius) is what the Romans call the miliarision,
which is translated "military gift." This dichryson also was the silver (coin) that was
later called repudiated, because after a time the king was killed and his stamp, which had
been engraved upon the dichryson, was removed from it. For thereafter when one was found
bearing the image of the dead king it was accounted repudiated, that is, fraudulent.

The follis, which is also called the talent. But it is double, composed of 2 silver
(minas), which is 208 denarii. And the follis is 2 lepta according to the copper coinage,
but not according to the silver coinage. The mares is a measure of 2 pots among the people
of Pontus. But the pot among them is 10 xestai, so that the kupros is 20 Alexandrian
xestai. Among the same people of Pontus the kupros is a measure of dry produce of 2 modii,
which is said by them to be 5 choinikes. And the choinix among them is 5 xestai, so that
the kupros would be 20 xestai. For among them the great modius is 24 xestai. The kollathon
among the Syrians is half of a liquid seah, and it is 25 xestai. And the congiarium is a
liquid measure, and called the same among the Hebrews. This measure is explained in the
Chronicle of Eusebius and by other chroniclers, (who tell) how each of the kings in (his)
time in accordance with (his) ambition made grants to the Roman populace for good cheer.
It is to be interpreted "put together" or "coiled up." |142

[Notes moved to the end and renumbered] 1. Lit., "upon" or "to." 2. Lagarde says both c
and r read ὑφε; he has οἰφεὶ in text. 3. Lagarde says both c and r read σαβιθα; his text
reads σαφιθα. 4. Greek: βαδον. 5. This ἐλαιοτρέπτης should be added to the Greek lexicon.
6. Greek: h2; but καὶ would fit the plural verb better. 7. This sense of μετρέω in the
passive is not indicated in the lexicons. 8. Petavius (see Dindorf's ed. of Epiphanius IV
98) says that the emendation of δε και to δεκα was made already by Cornarius. 9. I.e.,
seah. 10. I.e., the week (of creation). 11. Greek: ποστημορέον. 12. Lagarde has the
singular; Dindorf uses the plural without any word of explanation. Lagarde's footnote says
both c and r read αρτου. 13. Both Lagarde and Dindorf declare that their sources read
γομον, but Lagarde prints γομορ in his text; there can be no doubt as to the meaning.

14. Both Lagarde and Dindorf read ἄρτου instead; but in his Symmicta I 211 and 215 Lagarde
has σέτου from various fragmentary Greek mss. 15. But 50 in Syriac § 32. 16. Originally
the name of a mineral (a variety of gypsum or calcite) from which vases and jars were
made; but the term came later in careless popular speech to be applied to such objects
made of other substances. 17. ὀψόβαφον for the more usual ὀξύβαφον. 18. See p. 55, n. 372.
19. Cf. p. 136, n. 2; the Syriac is shafitha. 20. κατα δὲ τὸν ληρισμον, emended to
λιτρισμὸν by both Lagarde and Dindorf. Lagarde, op. cit. I 216, gives this latter word.
21. Much of this sentence is hopelessly corrupt; cf. Hultsch, Metrologicorum scriptorum
reliquiae I 143 f. and 265, who gives on pp. 143 f. the emended reading translated above.
Cf. also p. 57, n. 394, on denarion, denaria.

22. For the emended reading (Ἀσσυρέων rather than ἀσσαρέων) cf. Hultsch, op. cit. I 265.
23. Petavius (see the edition of Epiphanius by Dindorf or that by Migne) thinks δ́ δραχμάς
was originally written and that a scribe copied the numeral mark as ι and thereupon
further modified his text, thus giving us an inaccurate statement and a most unusual term,
διδραγμα instead of δέδραχμον. 24. According to Lagarde, both c and r read σιμου. 25. Both
Petavius and Hultsch (op. cit. I 265) insist that h ("eighth") must be supplied to make
sense out of this sentence. Lagarde, op. cit. I 216, gives, indeed, ογδοον. 26. Lagarde,
op. cit. I 216, adds φημι, corresponding to the Syriac @ in § 48, and also uses the finite
verb ἐστάθμιζον rather than a participle. 27. Again corrupt. Cf. § 48 and Lagarde,
loc.cit. 28. Hultsch, op. cit. I 266, emends to this reading, which is found in Lagarde,
op. cit. I 217.

29. This spelling is cited by Hultsch, op. cit. I 266. 30. The Lexicon of Sophocles
identifies this ἄργυρον with the miliarision, the equivalent of the denarius. 31. Hultsch,
op. cit. I 267, and Lagarde, op. cit. I 217, give the true reading, βαλάντιον, "bag" or
"purse"; cf. § 53. 32. Lagarde says that r reads 220 denarii. The Syriac says 2 1/2 silver
(minas) and 250 denarii; cf. § 53. 33. Where the word mares might be expected; but kupros
is the only reading I have been able to find in either Greek or Syriac. Cf. p. 63, n. 448.
34. "Which" apparently refers to the kupros, but should refer to a single modius. 35.
Lagarde, op. cit. I 218, and Hultsch, op. cit. I 270, supply the right number, 2 xestai.
36. One of the meanings of congiarium is a gift bestowed upon the populace on some
festival occasion.

APPENDIX IV — SUMMARY OF THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES

Superior figures indicate the section in which any particular equation is found.

APPENDICES: TRANSLATION OF GREEK FRAGMENTS; THE ALPHABETS IN SYRIAC MANUSCRIPT B; SUMMARY OF THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES — MEASURES OF CAPACITY

kor......................30 modii lethekh...................15 modii............great
homer bath.....................50 xestai............little homer
mnasis..................10 modii modius.... 17 xestai in Cyprus.......22 xestai
usually.... 24 xestai in Pontusmedimnos.... 5 modii in Constantia.... 4 1/2 modii in
Paphos and Sicily seah*.......1 1/4 modii cab........1/4 or 1/5 or 1/6 modius choinix...
1/8 (Cyprian) modius... 2 xestai.... hyfi.... 2 handfuls ardeb (dry
measure).........metretes (liquid measure) metretes......72 xestai usually......104 xestai
of wine in Cyprus.....also measured as 88 xestai .....82 xestai .....and 96 xestai "three
measures".....little omer.......6 xestai† omer.................1/10 ardeb........7 1/5
xestai nevel........150 xestai......3 liquid seahs..... amphora or foreus liquid
seah.........50 xestai kollathon..........1/2 liquid seah...........25 xestai
shatifta.....alabastron ......1/2 xestes ........libra of oil great kapsakes. .. .12
xestai ... .spondeion .....1/4 liquid seah.... qvuna (?) |143 small kapsakes = 4 xestai...
.stamnos.......qvurta (?) kotyle.............1/2 xestes kyathos............1/6 or 1/3
xestes tryblion...........1/2 xestes xestes.....2 librae of oil in Alexandria........8
librae in Pontus........22 ounces in Italy.......20 ounces in Nicomedia........24 ounces
in the xestes castrensis .......sextarius aporryma......1/2 saites ............11 xestai
true saites........22 xestai Nicaean saites.....8 or 10 xestai shafitha......sapation
......22 xestai in Ashkelon.......18 xestai in Azotus.........14 xestai in Gaza great
hin...........18 xestai sacred hin...........9 xestai complete chus.....8 xestai .....1/9
metretes ........1/6 samios sacred chus.......6 xestai.....1/12 metretes mares........2
pots in Pontus.......20 Alexandrian xestai pot (of the Pontians).......10 xestai
kupros.....2 modii .......10 choinikes ........20 xestai (dry measure)
congiarium.........6 xestai. little xestes........sexton

APPENDICES: TRANSLATION OF GREEK FRAGMENTS; THE ALPHABETS IN SYRIAC MANUSCRIPT B; SUMMARY OF THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES — MEASURES OF WEIGHT

talent.....6,000 lepta or assaria ........125 librae centenarius......100 librae libra ...
12 ounces......288 grams......1,728 carats......3,456 barleycorns ounce.. .2 staters...
.24 grams... .4 shekels.....8 lepta .....7 oboloi stater.........2 double zuze gram.....6
carats shekel.........2 lepta .........2 zuze ........kodrantes (another)
kodrantes...........25 denarii zuza.............lepton ..........holke ......1/8 ounce
iron obolus......1/8 or 1/7 ounce silver obolus.... 1/80 ounce |144 Italian mina.....40
staters......20 ounces.......1 2/3 librae Theban mina.........60 staters...........2 1/2
librae other minae.............................2 or 4 librae assarion.........100 lepta

APPENDICES: TRANSLATION OF GREEK FRAGMENTS; THE ALPHABETS IN SYRIAC MANUSCRIPT B; SUMMARY OF THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES — MEASURES OF LENGTH AND AREA

field.... 5 or 6 seahs.......5 plethra of land of the first class or 6 plethra of land of
the second class jugon......5 or 6 fields.......30 sataeans .........koraean field......20
akainai by 20 akainai akaina.....6 2/3 cubits Egyptian field.......100 cubits by 100
cubits plethron............20 (akainai) by 20 cubits koraean of second class.....60
sataeans jugum.............2 1/3 sataeans sataean (modius)...........5 or 6 cabs
jugera.....called zyga in Cyprus, syntelesmata elsewhere decad......(apparently) 10 days'
plowing among the Palestinians, 10 sataeans, about 5 Roman jugera cubit.......length of
forearm to tip of middle finger cubit... .24 fingers... .3 spans... 6 hands... 4 palms or
hand-lengths square cubit.......48 fingers solid cubit....... 192 fingers
finger..............8 lepta palm (handlength).....6 fingers span..................8
fingers hand..................4 fingers COINS denarion..............60 assaria silver
(talent)......100 denaria ......6,000 lepta .....nomisma stater..............2 double zuze
shekel..........2 lepta ...........2 zuze silver mina.....100 denarii kodrantes........25
denarii ........ködarion iron obolus......1/8 ounce |145 silver obolus......1/80 ounce
double zuza........20 silver oboloi chalkus..........zuza .............1/8 ounce
nummus...........dichryson ........1/2 silver (denarius) silver
(denarius)........miliarision lepton...........assarion ........ziretia ...........obolus
double follis or purse........2 1/2 silver (minae)........250 denarii
follis...................125 silver (denarii) follis............2 lepta according to the
copper coinage folis.............sala or (better) sela........1/2 ounce

APPENDICES: TRANSLATION OF GREEK FRAGMENTS; THE ALPHABETS IN SYRIAC MANUSCRIPT B; SUMMARY OF THE WEIGHTS AND MEASURES — PRINTED IN USA

* Apparently based on the Cyprian modius of 17 xestai, which would make the seah about the
same as the usual modius of 22 xestai, more exactly 21 1/4 xestai. Peshitta and LXX
identify seah and modius in Matt. 5:15. The seah is a dry measure. † But cf. § 8.


APOCRITICUS
===========

APOCRITICUS Macarius Magnes

c. AD 400

Author of a reply to a pagan critic of Christianity.

INTRODUCTION

1 TRANSLATIONS OF CHRISTIAN LITERATURE. SERIES 1. GREEK TEXTS THE APOCRITICUS OF MACARIUS
MAGNES By T. W. CRAFER, D.D. SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. London The
Macmillan Company. New York

CONTENTS

2 PAGE INTRODUCTION :--- Summary ix The Nature of the Apocriticus x The History of the
Apocriticus to 1867 xi Its History since 1867 xii The Heathen Objections in the
Apocriticus xiv The Date of the Apocriticus xvi The Authorship of the Apocriticus xix The
Title of the Work xxiv The Literary Relations of the Apocriticus xxv The Text and MSS
xxvii Its Theological and Apologetic Value xxix TRANSLATION :--- BOOK I. Fragment of ch.
vi. Concerning Berenice or the woman with an issue of blood BOOK II. Ch. vii. Answer
concerning the saying: Think not that I am come to send peace on the earth Ch. viii.
Answer concerning the saying: Who is my mother, who are my brethren ? Ch. ix. Answer
concerning the sayings: None is good save one, even God; and A good man out of the good
treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good

3 Ch. x. Answer concerning the saying: Lord, have pity on my son, for he is lunatic Ch.
xi. Answer concerning the saying: If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true Chs.
xii. and xvii. Question and answer concerning the discrepancies of the Evangelists (with
brief introductions to the next five questions and answers by the Philosopher and the
Christian) Chs. xiii. and xviii. Question and answer concerning the saying: But when they
came to Jesus, when they saw He was already dead, they brake not His legs Chs. xiv. and
xix. Question and answer concerning the Resurrection of Christ and His manifestation. Chs.
xv. and xx. Question and answer concerning the saying : Now is the judgment of the world,
now shall the prince of this world be cast outside. Chs xvi. and xxi. Question and answer
concerning the saying: Ye cannot hear my word (The summaries of Books III and IV are
translated from the headings of the chapters in the Athens MS.)

4 BOOK III. These words are contained in the Third Book of the words of Answer to the
Greeks.1 Proem (Introduction to seven attacks by the Philosopher) The Christian
(Introduction to his seven answers) Chs. i. and viii. How Jesus endured to be crucified
with insult Chs. ii. and ix. How it is said : If it be possible, let the cup pass Chs.
iii. and x. How it is said : If ye believe Moses, ye would believe me Chs. iv. and xi.
What is the meaning of the swine and the demons ? Chs. v. and xii. What is the meaning of
the saying : It is easier for a camel to go through a needle, than a rich man into the
kingdom of God ? Chs. vi. and xiii. How it is said : About the fourth watch of the night
He came upon the sea Chs. vii. and xiv. What is the meaning of: The poor ye have always,
but me ye have not always ?

5 The Greek (Introduction to the next eight attacks) Chs. xv. and xxiii. (With the
Christian's Introduction to his eight answers.) What is the meaning of: Except ye eat my
flesh and drink my blood, ye have no life in you ? Chs. xvi. and xxiv. How it is said :
And if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them Chs. xvii. and xxv. What is the
meaning of the grain of mustard seed ? Chs. xviii. and xxvi. How it is said : Cast thyself
down Chs. xix. xx. and xxvii. What is the meaning of: Get thee behind me, Satan ; and the
address to Peter? What is the meaning of the seventy times seven ? (The beginning of
another proposition from the Acts of the Apostles.) Chs. xxi. and xxviii. How Peter killed
Ananias and Sapphira Chs. xxii. and xxix. How Peter went forth when the prison was shut

6 Chs. xxx, and xxxvii. (With brief introductions to the next six questions and answers by
the Greek and the Christian.) How Paul circumcised Timothy Chs. xxxi. and xxxviii. How
Paul says he is a Roman, though he was not a Roman Chs. xxxii. and xxxix. How it is said :
No one goeth a warfare at his own charges Chs. xxxiii. and xl. How it is said: He is a
debtor to do the whole law Chs. xxxiv. and xli. How it is said : The law entered, that the
transgression might abound Chs. xxxv. and xlii. How it is said: I would not that ye should
become partakers of demons Chs. xxxvi. and xliii. How it is said: In the latter times some
shall depart from the faith BOOK IV. The following is contained in the Fourth Book of the
words of Answer to the Greeks.2 Proem (Introduction to ten attacks by the Philosopher)

7 The Christian (Introduction to his answer in eight chapters) Chs. i. and xi. Concerning
how it is said: The fashion of this world passeth away Chs. ii. and xii. How it is said :
We which are alive shall be caught up in the clouds Chs. iii. and xiii. How he says: The
Gospel shall be preached in all the world Chs. iv. and xiv. How the Lord speaks to Paul by
a vision, and how it befell that Peter was crucified Chs. v. and xv. What is the meaning
of: Take heed, for many shall come saying, I am Christ ? Chs. vi., vii. and xvi.3 What is
the meaning of the judgment in the Apocrypha? How it is said: The heaven shall be rolled
together as a scroll, and the stars shall fall as leaves. Chs. viii., ix. and xvii.3 What
is the meaning of the leaven, the mustard seed, and the pearl? How it is said: Thou hast
hid these things from the wise and prudent, and revealed them unto babes.

8 Chs. x. and xviii. What is the meaning of: They that are whole need not a physician, but
they that are sick ? Chs. xix. and xxv. (With brief Introductions to the next six
questions and answers by the Philosopher and the Christian.) What is the meaning of: But
ye were washed, but ye were sanctified ? Chs. xx. and xxvi. What is the meaning of the
Monarchy? Chs. xxi. and xxvii. What is the meaning of the angels having immortality ? What
is the meaning of the tables being written with the finger of God? 4 Chs. xxii. and
xxviii. How the Godhead was made flesh in Mary and was born Chs. xxiii. and xxix. How it
is said : Thou shall not revile gods Chs. xxiv. and xxx. What is the meaning of the
resurrection of the flesh ? BOOK V. Fragment quoted in Greek by F. Turrianus in the
sixteenth century

9 Further quotation from the same author, which is probably a translation of Macarius
Index [omitted] NOTE.---When passages in the Apocriticus are referred to by page and line,
the numbering is that of the Greek edition, and not of the translation contained in this
book.

INTRODUCTION

10 AN introduction to the Apocriticus of Macarius Magnes cannot be written on the ordinary
lines. This is the first time that it has been introduced to English readers, and those
who wish to study it in the original Greek will find it very difficult to obtain a copy of
the only edition. My own study of this obscure and neglected author has probably been more
lengthy than that of any one outside Germany, and it is therefore a great pleasure to
share with others the result of it. He is still surrounded with so much uncertainty that
it is impossible to offer final conclusions with regard to him, but he is full of an
interest which is in many ways unique, and his work not only affords a critical problem
which should prove fascinating to many besides myself, but also contains much that is both
interesting and novel. The Apocriticus really presents us with two separate works, for the
questions of a heathen objector are in each case quoted verbatim before the "answer" is
given. As the objections represent an attack on the Scriptures in detail, and undoubtedly
reflect the philosophy of Porphyry, the famous Neoplatonist of the third century, the
reproduction of them preserves for us a form of anti-Christian literature in a fulness
which has no parallel. I have therefore translated them without any abbreviation. The
answers have proved too lengthy to give in full, but, rather than offer a mere selection,
I have translated the most important parts, and given the rest in the form of a summary.

11 Such is the chequered history of the work, that the author's name, date, and country
have always been a matter of doubt, while the dialogue which he claims to be reproducing
in his book has generally been considered a mere literary device. It was rescued from
oblivion by its use in a bitter controversy in the ninth century, after which there is no
mention of it until the sixteenth, when its use was again controversial. When its
genuineness was then called in question, the only Manuscript was found to have disappeared
from Venice. Nothing more is heard of the book until 1867, when a Manuscript was found in
Epirus, and taken to Athens. It was collated by a young French scholar, who died before it
could be published. The destructive criticism of a series of German scholars reduced its
importance and checked the study of it. While I was myself talking of another collation, a
German scholar sought it at Athens and found that the Manuscript was not in the Library,
but in private possession, with the risk of being lost. The only edition is increasingly
difficult to obtain, and there is a danger of the Apocriticus again sinking into oblivion.
I therefore greatly welcome this opportunity of making it more widely known.

12 THE NATURE OF THE APOCRITICUS. It may be stated at the outset that it was originally a
work in five books, and claims to represent a dialogue between Macarius and a heathen
philosopher, which took place on five successive days. The Athens MS. is mutilated,
beginning in Chapter VII of Book II, and ending in the middle of Chapter XXX of Book IV. A
fragment of Book I has been preserved in Nicephorus,5 and I had myself the good fortune to
discover a fragment of Book V in Turrianus.6 The questions are mostly objections to
selected verses of the Gospels, Acts, and Pauline Epistles, but one or two concern the Old
Testament, and some in the later part are purely doctrinal. There seems some sequence in
their subjects, Christ's miracles being first attacked, and then His words, the chief
charge being that of inconsistency. There follow like charges of inconsistency against S.
Peter and S. Paul, and then objections are brought to such doctrines as the Incarnation,
the Monarchy of God, and the Resurrection. The fragment from Book V suggests, that the
latter part dealt with some of the more inward doctrines of Christianity, such as
justification by faith.7 The method of the book is to give about seven objections in a
series, and then their respective answers, with a few words of introduction in each case,
especially at the beginning of each book.

13 THE HISTORY OF THE APOCRITICUS TO 1867. The book seems to have disappeared until the
ninth century. This is not to be wondered at when the anti-Christian blasphemy of the
questions is remembered, which might have caused its suppression under the edicts of
Theodosius II or Justinian. Possibly the survival of the copy then brought to light was
due to the fact that it had as frontispiece a portrait of the author in ecclesiastical
vestments. In the Iconoclastic controversy, those who were in favour of the destruction of
images garbled a quotation from it as a support to their position. Nicephorus, Patriarch
of Constantinople, in answering them, had some difficulty in finding out anything about
it. He was able to show that his opponents had used it wrongly, but regarded it with
little favour on the ground that it was inclined towards heresy. His importance, however,
lies in the fact that he also quoted a fragment from the first book, which has not been
preserved otherwise. It contains part of the answer of Macarius to an objection to the
miracle of the woman with the issue of blood, in which the story appears that she was a
great woman of Edessa named Berenice, and that a bronze statue in that city still
commemorated her healing.8

14 The Apocriticus next appears in the sixteenth century, when it was one of the favourite
weapons in the patristic armoury of the Jesuit Franciscus Turrianus (De la Torre) in his
controversy with the Lutherans.9 He not only quotes from all the extant books, but makes a
quotation from the lost fifth book. He gives the author's name as Magnetes, and places his
date soon after A.D. 150. His opponents in the Eucharistic controversy refused to believe
that there was such a book, and when search was made in S. Mark's Library at Venice, the
MS. was nowhere to be found, though mentioned in the catalogue. Little is heard, about the
book in the centuries that followed. Boivin, of Paris, considered the author to have been
a younger contemporary of Athanasius. Magnus Crusius,10 a Gottingen professor, believed
his opponent to be none other than Porphyry the Neoplatonist, and placed the work at the
end of the third or beginning of the fourth century. He held that neither of the author's
appellations was necessarily his proper name, as of course Macarius Magnes may simply mean
"The Blessed Magnesian."

15 ITS HISTORY SINCE 1867. In 1867 a MS. of the Apocriticus was discovered at Athens, and
on the death of its first editor, C. Blondel, it was finally published by his friend
Foucart,11 but without an introduction. This was supplied the next year by Duchesne,12 who
believed that the Athens MS., was identical with the one lost three centuries before at
Venice. As other evidence has been added since his time, this theory cannot now be
accepted. He thinks the author was from Magnesia, but locates his abode as near Edessa,
giving him a date between A.D. 300 and 350. Concerning his opponent he makes the brilliant
suggestion that he was the well-known Hierocles, who was something of a Neoplatonist
philosopher, and a follower of Porphyry, but was also governor of Bithynia, and perhaps
also at another time of Palmyra. This man wrote two books called Philaktheis Logoi (often
simply referred to as Philalethes, or "Friend of truth"), and after addressing them "not
against the Christians but to them," 13 he became an instigator of the terrible
persecution of the Christians which broke out under Diocletian in A.D. 303. I have found
much to substantiate this theory, and shall therefore refer again to its acceptance.

16 However, a series of German critics14 refused to date the work from the fourth century,
and identified the author with the Macarius, Bishop of Magnesia, who was at the Synod of
the Oak in A.D. 403, and accused Heraclides of Ephesus of heresy in his following of
Origen. This new German theory was really an old French one, which had been suggested by
Le Quien nearly two centuries before. There is much to be said against it, as I have shown
in my articles on this subject in the Journal of Theological Studies.15 It is quite
impossible to repeat in this short introduction the arguments on this and many points, so
I venture to refer the reader to what I have already written elsewhere. In 1911 Harnack
took up the subject, and set forth lengthy arguments for the theory that the heathen
objector is Porphyry himself, and actually suggested that it affords material for an
edition of his lost treatise in fifteen books against the Christians.16 But he has to
admit that in any case the Apocriticus simply contains a series of excerpts from Porphyry
made by a later anonymous writer, and that Macarius did not know they were from Porphyry,
or he would not in one of his answers have referred his opponent to Porphyry's book De
Abstinentia as an authority. With regard to the answers, Harnack accepts the theory of a
later date, and puts aside my arguments in favour of, the earlier.

17 For the many weaknesses in his theory, and the difficulties which may be better
overcome by other explanations, I must again refer to what I have already written.17 The
only other recent contribution to the subject was made by Schalkhausser,18 who searched
for the solitary MS. of the Apocriticus in the National Library at Athens, and made the
strange discovery that the MS. had been the property of the late librarian Apostolides,
who had left it to his widow, and it was now not to be traced. It may be mentioned here
that ten short fragments remain of another work of Macarius, his Homilies on Genesis. The
only place where they are all to be found together is an appendix to the treatise of
Duchesne.19 They contain the word Monogenes, which is the sub-title of the Apocriticus, as
a title of God the Son. And the allegorical method used, including the interpretation of
the coats of skins, shows the same following of Origen as we see in the rest of Macarius.

18 THE HEATHEN OBJECTIONS IN THE APOCRITICUS. 19 Nowhere else does so detailed an attack
on Christianity remain to us. It evidently comes from one who is not merely engaged in the
vulgar work of trying to destroy the faith; for he claims a higher morality, and writes as
a philosopher. And the modern character of many of his attacks, and of some of his actual
arguments, give his work more than an antiquarian interest. These assaults of long ago,
which were successfully parried by a champion of the faith, may have a reassuring effect
upon those who think that their religion has never met with such plausible assaults as to-
day. They reflect the master-mind of Porphyry, the great Neoplatonist philosopher, but
even Harnack admits that they are borrowed from him by some smaller man, who thus
popularised his work. This is exactly the case of so many who speak and write against the
Church to-day. And the most recent tendency of those who refuse to accept the Christian
faith is to approve at least in some sense of its Founder Himself, but deny that the
Church has either the power or the right to interpret Him to the. world. The objections
before us are mostly to the human side of the faith, and are directed against the
Evangelists rather than the Leader whose words and deeds they profess to recount, and
against the unreasonableness of the Apostles and their teaching rather than that of
Christ.

20 We will take the theory as substantiated that the author was Hierocles, who attacked
Christianity with the pen before he tried to destroy it with the sword of persecution.
Harnack has given unintentional support by showing that the Apocriticus is really to be
divided into two parts, after iii. 19, though the author has concealed the division.20
This is a new argument for the theory that he is using the two books of the Philaletheis
Logoi, or Philalethes, of Hierocles. But there are other problems connected with the
Apocriticus which this theory helps to solve. For instance, Duchesne adduces an
inscription 21 as proving that, before his governorship of Bithynia in A.D. 304 he had
been in office at Palmyra. Now Macarius came from Asia Minor, but when he points his
opponent to the effects of the faith, it is to Syria that he turns, especially to Edessa
and Antioch.

21 Again, we find that in the Apocriticus the life of Christ is belittled by adducing that
of Apollonius ofTyana, whose miracles were said to be superior, and who, instead of humbly
submitting to death, "spoke boldly to the Emperor Domitian and then disappeared." 22
Eusebius himself wrote an answer to Hierocles, in which he says that Apollonius was thus
adduced, and gives a statement of Philostratus about him, saying, "He says that he
disappeared from the judgment-seat."23 Lactantius gives similar testimony, for in writing
about Hierocles he speaks of Apollonius "who, as you describe, suddenly was not to be
found at the judgment-seat, when Domitian wished to punish him."24 It may be added that,
whereas the language of theobjector in the Apocriticus has nothing in common with the
extant words of Porphyry, there are a few sentences given by Eusebius 25 as occurring
verbatim in the Philalethes of Hierocles, in which, out of eleven words of a distinctive
kind, no less than seven are found in the Apocriticus.26

22 THE DATE OF THE APOCRITICUS. 23 Upon the date of Macarius depends the question as to
whether a real dialogue underlies his work or not. If such is the case, we must place him
at the beginning of the fourth century, though he may have written his book years after
the dialogue had taken place. Critics have been so unanimous in declaring that the book
was written long afterwards, and that its form is a mere literary device, that I do not
like to make an assertion to the contrary. But at least I would plead that, unless other
considerations make such a date impossible, there is a strong suggestion of reality about
the dialogue described as in process. For the questions as well as the answers sometimes
contain indications of a dispute;27 and a study of the author's remarks, made from time to
time in the dialogue, shows him to have been either an unusually skilful simulator of
doubts and fears which were not his, or a man giving a record of what had actually
happened, though doubtless using the book into which Hierocles had already put the
questions that he had raised in the debate. But, in any case, if Macarius is writing long
after Christianity had ceased to be an unlawful religion, why should he adopt such a
trembling attitude before his opponent, and need to brace himself continually against a
nameless dread which nearly overwhelmed him ?

24 All is explained if it is reminiscent of a contest with a man who shortly afterwards
became "prime mover in causing the persecution." 28 But this is not in the least like the
language of Christians who faced opponents in later years. If the battle is only a
literary one, and the Christian is showing, before a world in which the stigma of
Christianity has been removed, how he got the upper hand, why should he cringe so before
the heathen, as though he were making a desperate effort to uphold a humble and popular
cause ? 29 This was not the way to represent the relation of Christian and heathen a
century later for the edification of fellow-Christians. If this be all literary padding,
why is it of this kind ? 25 A few suggested indications of date may now be added. 1. Twice
it is stated that 300 years have passed since Christianity began.30 But this is in the
words of the heathen, not of Macarius, and in any case a round number does not count for
much, especially in days before time was reckoned by the Christian era. 2. In the other
direction the date is limited by the statement that "many rule the world,"31 and the
taking of Hadrian as an example of a "monarch," for the Empire was divided among two
Augusti and two Caesars in the year A.D. 292. 3. Macarius gives a short list of some of
the peoples of the earth who had not yet heard the preaching of the Gospel.32 They not
only include some of the Ethiopians, but also Mauretania, which had certainly heard the
Gospel long before the end of the fourth century.

26 4. He also has a list of heretics, which does not extend further than the Manichaeans,
and makes no mention of the Arians. It is true that some have thought that the latter are
meant by Christomachi (iii. 14, p. 91), but they are further defined as "sharers in
judaistic folly," and seem to refer to the Monarchians. 5. But in the eyes of all German
critics other considerations have been considered enough to brush these aside. The
Trinitarian doctrine of the book has been considered as belonging to a period some time
after A.D. 325. It is true that there is a passage on the baptismal formula which contains
the words "that the name of three Persons in one substance may be recognised." 33 But two
points should be considered;34---this is not the ordinary use of the words ὑπόστασις and
οὐσία in the book ; and the whole passage is contained in twenty-three lines which are
extraordinarily inappropriate to an argument with a pagan, with whom the argument has just
been about the Monarchy of the one God. Brief theological phrases replace the usual
diffuse style of Macarius, and the possibility is suggested that the words are a later
interpolation, inserted for the instruction of Christians, not for the defence of the
faith.

27 The other consideration is suggested by the likeness of some of the words and arguments
of the Apocriticus to some of the fathers of the fourth century, notably Gregory of Nyssa.
But an examination reveals the fact that the passages are mostly of a character which
express ideas common in the fourth century, so that the theory that Macarius borrowed in
each case cannot be substantiated. For instance, the language of Macarius about our Lord
enticing the devil to attack Him in the Passion, and Satan, like a fish, gulping down the
bait of His humanity, and so being caught by the hook of His divinity, is much like that
of Gregory.35 But a close parallel is found in a passage of Rufinus,36 and another in
Amphilochius.37 And indeed the latter, in introducing it, uses the unusual title Monogenes
in speaking of Christ; but this is the alternative title of the Apocriticus itself, and
probably was originally the chief one. So that he may . have used the title because he was
borrowing from a book of that name. But as a matter of fact the simile dates back to
Origen (Comm. in Psalm xxii.), and the idea is present in germ in Ignatius, Ad. Eph. xix.

28 For a further discussion of the date, I must refer to what I have written elsewhere.38
If German conclusions are to be accepted, it is about A.D. 410. But sufficient has been
said to show that there are many objections to this, and that it is quite possibly a
century earlier. Of course this makes a great deal of difference to the importance of the
answers. THE AUTHORSHIP OF THE APOCRITICUS. 29 In spite of the ambiguity of his double
name,39 we may safely speak of the author as Macarius, and regard Magnes as a place-name,
meaning "the Magnesian. The question still remains whether the latter implies that he was
Bishop of Magnesia. The fact that there was such a bishop, whose name was Macarius, has
naturally suggested an identification of the two. Photius records that this Macarius came
forward at the Synod of the Oak in A.D. 403 as one of those who accused Heraclides of
Ephesus of heresy, his offence consisting of an undue following of Origen. But it is
difficult to see how such a charge can have been brought by the author of the Apocriticus,
who is himself steeped in Origenism. Not only was this the conclusion arrived at by
Nicephorus, when he studied the book in the, ninth century,40 but it is obvious to any one
who looks at it. And it is a complete puzzle why such a man should have thought it
necessary to represent himself as having a desperate encounter with a heathen philosopher
of a hundred years before, and facing his long-forgotten arguments in fear and trembling.
And internal evidence is against the fact of the author having been a bishop.

30 When his opponent says that, if to "drink any deadly thing" cannot hurt a true
believer, this ought to be made a test in the choosing of bishops, there is no attempt at
personal defence in the answer.41 And, after giving examples of great bishops of former
time and the power of their prayers, he refers to those of his own day in a way that seems
to indicate that he himself bore no such exalted position in the Christian community. It
is true that Nicephorus called him a "Hierarch," and said there was a portrait of him on
the MS. of his book, in which he was robed as a priest,42 but this does not prove
anything.43 And it is evidently not in Asia Minor that the Apocriticus was written. It is
not only that, as already stated,44 he points his opponent to the East, and particularly
to Antioch and Edessa, and that he once uses the Persian word "parasang" as a measure of
distance.45 But, when he gives a list of countries which had not yet heard the Gospel, he
locates Ethiopia as south-west, which implies that he was as far eastward as Syria. And
yet he shows a special interest in Asia Minor also.

31 In his list of heretics, in which he refers exclusively to those of the East, he speaks
of Montanus of Phrygia, and Dositheus of Cilicia, and he shows a knowledge of the
Encratites of Asia Minor, which suggests that those regions were familiar to him.46 He
also knows details of other natives of those parts, such as Aratus, the astronomer of
Cilicia,47 and Apollonius of Tyana, about whom he adds further facts to those mentioned by
his opponent.48 When he mentions the heroes of the Church, there is one about whom he
gives details, namely, Polycarp of Smyrna, concerning whom he records stories like those
given in the Vita Polycarpi, which may have formed a local tradition.49 It is true that he
turns to the West for the rest of his list, which has led Duchesne to the surmise that the
author had visited Rome. And he recalls traditions about both S. Peter and S. Paul at
Rome, which might suggest that he was linked with that part of the world,50 were it not
that he speaks elsewhere of the Romans as "a barbarian race."51 Whether all this accords
with the authorship of such a small-minded man as the Macarius of the Oak, who accused
another of the same tendency which is so plainly seen in the Apocriticus, is very
doubtful.

32 It must be remembered that the title "Of Magnesia" does not necessarily imply that he
was bishop there. It is often used of the locality whence a man derived his birth or
upbringing, as is the case with Joannes Damascenlus, or John of Damascus. It seems better
to picture the author as a man bearing the very common name of Macarius,52 who was not a
bishop, but came from Magnesia, and, after perhaps having travelled as far as Rome, had
settled in Syria at the time that he wrote his book. As he makes no attempt to connect his
opponent with Syria, and only refers him to those regions in an entirely natural way,
there is no reason for thinking that his language is merely part of a literary device. And
a reason for the neglect of his work from the first may find an explanation in the fact
that his theology was entirely different from that of the schools of Antioch or Edessa
which were flourishing during the fourth century. His allegorical method of
interpretation, which is even fuller of Origenism than that of Origen himself, would have
been distasteful to the theologians of the neighbourhood, which would explain the fact
that his book seems to have been unappreciated, and allowed to pass into oblivion, the
only MS.

33 of it to be found in the ninth century possibly owing its preservation to the portrait
which formed the frontispiece.53 Whether he wrote in the first decade of the fourth
century, or at a later period, is impossible to decide with certainty. Harnack has evolved
an elaborate theory of there being two men who are responsible for the heathen objections
in the book, namely, Porphyry and an anonymous author who made excerpts from his book and
issued them in the form of an attack on the New Testament and its teaching. Perhaps
therefore I need not apologise for a similar attempt with regard to the answers, though in
this case it is the earlier and not the later authority who is anonymous. I can imagine an
Origenist writing a work, not far into the fourth century, in which he faced, probably by
name, Hierocles and the arguments which he had brought against the Scriptures in his
Philalethes, a real dialogue being conceivably the foundation of his work. He was living
in the East, but had visited Rome, and was also well acquainted with the eastern part of
Asia Minor. He was a really great exponent of the Christian faith, and worthy to be ranked
with some of the great fathers of that century. His work was seized upon by Macarius
Magnes, the Bishop of Magnesia, who is heard of in A.D. 403, and worked into its present
form, the original division of the two books of Hierocles being quite obscured.

34 Nothing leads us to expect any great originality or literary talent or powers of
Catholic exegesis from this Macarius. It well accords with what we know of him, that he
should simply arrange another man's work. He carefully suppresses the names of both
Hierocles and the man who had answered him, and alters just enough to make it appear a
work of his own time, perhaps changing "200 years" into "300" (as Harnack suggested), and
making the Trinitarian doctrine more definite 54 when opportunity offered. He does not
trouble to change the locality from the East to Asia Minor, nor to add to the list of
earlier heretics, but it is perhaps he who is responsible for the details about a local
hero, Polycarp of Smyrna. As an opponent of Origenism, he would not have used such methods
himself, but he allowed those he found to remain in their place. He may have curtailed the
number of questions and answers to suit his purpose, which would explain the occasional
failure of sequence in the questions, to which Harnack has called attention. It is
surprising that so weighty a work was not carefully preserved by the Church. But if, in
addition to the fact that it contained blasphemous objections to Holy Writ, it bore the
name of an obscure bishop, of whom what was known was not particularly to his advantage,
it can easily be understood how it was soon forgotten and was very nearly lost to
posterity. The above theory of authorship is merely a suggestion ;

35 I leave it to others to improve on it. 36 THE TITLE OF THE WORK. 37 The double title is
a strange one, "Monogenes or Answer-book to the Greeks (Μονογενής ἢ ’Αποκριτικὸς πρὸς
Ἕλληνας.)" Its very strangeness may have produced the further title found in the Athens
MS., viz. "An account of the disputed questions and solutions in the New Testament" (περὶ
τῶν ἀπορουμένων ἐν τῇ καινῇ Διαθήκῃ ζητημάτων καὶ λύσεων λόγος), with the added mention of
five books. Neumann55 long ago suggested that the title is to be transposed as "Monogenes
or Apocriticus to the Greeks," and this is tacitly accepted by Bardenhewer.56 But the
further suggestion that the title Monogenes, as applied to God the Son, was probably made
more use of in the first part of the work, now lost, is not borne out by the fact that of
the seventeen times the word occurs in the extant books, fourteen are in six chapters of
Book III. I prefer to think that the first part of the title was Apocriticus, as given in
the MS., and I would offer the following explanation of Monogenes to the Greeks. If we
consider the opponent's book to have been "Philalethes, to the Christians," it is natural
that the answer should bear a name reminiscent of it. There is a certain amount of
similarity between the word Philalethes (friend of truth) and Monogenes (Only-begotten),
though the second is infinitely higher, and points to Him on whom reliance is placed for
the answers. So we can understand the choice of such a title, with a further address "To
the Greeks," to correspond to the dedication "To the Christians" in the earlier work. It
may be added that there is a suitability in this dedication in each case. For Hierocles is
said to have addressed his book "To the Christians, not against them,57 and in the
objections the second person plural is often used in addressing the hearers, as well as
the singular, which is directed against a single opponent.58

38 THE LITERARY RELATIONS OF THE APOCRITICUS. This part of the subject must be dealt with
briefly. Let us begin with the Scriptures. In the questions, quotations occur from Exodus,
Deuteronomy, Joshua, the Psalms, and Isaiah, and also from the four Gospels, Acts, Romans,
1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, 1 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, and the Apocalypse of Peter.
With regard to the apocryphal book last mentioned, the fact that "its popularity seems to
have been almost confined to the less-educated class of Christians,"59 helps to explain
how one came to know and quote it who only knew Christianity from outside. 39 In the
answers, there are quoted, independently of the questions, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus,
Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, 1 and 2 Kings, Job, the Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel,
and Habakkuk,60 and also the four Gospels, Acts, Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, 1
Thessalonians, and 1 Timothy. Thus, in the New Testament, Ephesians is the only book
quoted which had not been used in the questions. It is probable, but uncertain, that
Macarius shows a knowledge of 2 Peter, but it is strange that, in answering the objection
from the Apocalypse of Peter about the destruction of heaven and earth, he passes by the
obvious parallel from 2 Peter iii. 12, and chooses that from Isaiah xxiv. 4. His attitude
towards the Apocalypse of Peter is non-committal, but his substitution of similar passages
from canonical Scriptures seems to suggest that it did not form part of his canon. With
regard to the text used, the quotations on both sides seem to have been mostly made from
memory. But Hierocles uses the text of Codex Bezae in quoting Mark xv. 34 as "My God, my
God, why hast thou reproached me? and also in John xii. 31.61 In the latter case Macarius
follows him, but adds that there is another reading "Now shall the prince of this world be
cast down" instead of "cast out" ( κάτω for ἔξω ). This is the reading of the Old Syriac
and some of the Latin versions.62 Passing from the Scriptures; we may note that Macarius
makes several indirect references to Apocryphal literature and legendary stories.

40 His statement that milk flowed from the wound at the martyrdom of S. Paul,63 is also to
be found in Pseudo-Abdias and Pseudo-Linus.64 The latter was translated into Latin in the
fourth century, so it may well have been previously known further East. The Acts of Paul
and Thecla is referred to in ii. 7, p. 6, when, in speaking of the way the Gospel divides
kinsfolk, Macarius gives as an instance the parting of Thecla from her mother Theocleia.
41 As he is so steeped in the spirit of Origen, we shall expect to find considerable
indebtedness to the similar apologetic works in which Origen had answered the attacks on
the faith made by the heathen philosopher Celsus. There are at least four objections to
the Gospel which are identical in their respective opponents, but in each case the defence
of Macarius is entirely different from that of Origen, and although the Contra Celsum must
have been known to him, he does not seem to have used it in writing his Apocriticus.65 But
it is with the writers of the fourth century that most similarities have been found, and
it is the suggestion of the indebtedness of the Apocriticus to its literature which has
inclined so many to relegate the work to the following century. There is no doubt that its
explanation of the Passion as a deception of the devil, wherein Christ surrounded the hook
of His divinity with the bait of His humanity, is the same as that of Gregory of Nyssa,
Rufinus, and Amphilochius, but it has already been stated that the idea dates from an
earlier time, and so the fact of dependence must remain unproven.66 In the case of the
suggested similarity between the list of heresies in Macarius and one in Epiphanius, it
does not look as if either borrowed from the other.67

42 THE TEXT AND MSS. OF THE APOCRITICUS. We do not now know the whereabouts of a single
MS. The Athens MS., which was at first generally considered to be identical with the
Venice MS. which disappeared in the sixteenth century, was fortunately collated by Foucart
and Blondel while in the National Library at Athens, before it passed into private
possession by being left by the curator Apostolides to his widow. It is a paper MS. of the
fifteenth century, and is described by Duchesne as badly written, with many gaps. Its
accuracy can only be tested by comparing it with the fragments which are quoted by
Nicephorus and Turrianus, and a few MSS. containing fragments. In every case, many
mistakes and corruptions are revealed in the Athens MS.68 And besides this, Blondel has
had to alter obvious blunders on every page, or to note that they have been corrected by a
later hand. Nor is the text always to be trusted in the form in which he has been content
to leave it. In the translation which follows, I have suggested a few obvious emendations,
but more remains to be done, and, as the MS. is necessary for the purpose, it is
particularly unfortunate that its present whereabouts is so uncertain.

43 This side of the Apocriticus was discussed at length a few years ago by Schalkhausser,
who confined himself to the textual problem, and did not touch the literary one.69 He
carefully sets forth the quotations preserved in Turrianus from the Venice MS., to prove
that it was not the Athens MS. which he had before him. After a very lengthy discussion of
the problem, he adds a piece of evidence (p. 112) which, if it is to be relied on, is
sufficient in itself to prove the point. It seems that the Athens MS., which only contains
three out of the five books of the Apocriticus (and even they are mutilated at both ends),
consists of one hundred and twenty-five leaves, but an ancient catalogue reveals the fact
that the Venice MS., which was complete, contained only one hundred and four. 44
Schalkhausser also cites certain other MSS. which contain the famous chapter (iii. 23) on
the Eucharist, which is the most familiar and oftenest-cited passage in the Apocriticus.
At the end of it they add the story of the convincing of a doubting brother, which is
plainly an interpolation. Linked by a colon or a hyphen to the final words of the chapter
that "that which is eaten remains unconsumed," comes the abrupt commencement of a
narrative. "A certain brother was in doubt concerning the things which were consecrated,
saying that they were not the Body and Blood of the Lord, but types of these things." It
proceeds to tell of the vision he had, while the deacon was reading the Gospel, of the
heavenly Child slain and offered for food, of his inability to eat the flesh thus given,
and of its being turned into bread as a concession to man's weakness. There seems no doubt
whatever that the story is a mere insertion, of a later date than Macarius. Perhaps some
one who reads this may recognise the source from which it comes. But the fact of there
being such an interpolation adds point to my own suggestion with regard to the passage
about the Trinity, where there is a sudden change of style, and the use of seemingly post-
Nicene terms for "Person" and "Substance." If the Eucharistic chapter tempted some one to
interpolate, the passage on Baptism in the name of the Trinity may well have done the
same.70

45 THE THEOLOGICAL AND APOLOGETIC VALUE OF THE APOCRITICUS. We may set aside the charges
of heresy brought against the work by Nicephorus, who was biassed by its use by his
opponents. He specifies the particular dogma in it derived from Origen as being the non-
eternity of punishment, and in iv. 16, p. 187, we find a second and better beginning
postulated of "the whole nature and substance of created things." He speaks of Christ in
one place as of Him "Who seemed to be subject to human affections" (iii. 8, p. 68), but
other passages are entirely opposed to anything Docetic. In one passage (iii. 14) he
speaks of His manhood as having become divine after the Passion, but if his language is
heretical, he is following his master Origen. The Virgin-birth is regarded by his opponent
as well as himself as an essential part of the faith (iv. 28). The power of Christ's
atoning death is set forth in iii. 9 and 14, and His Resurrection and appearances are
shown in ii. 19 to rest on the power, not of men, but of God. His Ascension and present
ubiquity are discussed in iii. 14, His Godhead and His manhood being for ever
indissoluble. Allusion has already been made to the very definite Trinitarian passage in
iv. 25.

46 With regard to the Church and the Christian life, iv. 25 and iii. 23 are of the chief
value. The water of Holy Baptism has the power to cleanse from the stain of evil, nor is
it the fault of the Giver if this grace is abused. The Eucharist is the plainest
explanation of Christ's words about eating His flesh and drinking His blood, and is far
more than a mere type. Bread and wine are produced from the earth which He made, and so
bread is already in a mystical sense His flesh. But the bread of the Eucharist is not
ordinary bread, but is "tilled in the blessed land of Christ." In spite of its present
obscurity, I believe the Apocriticus to rank as one of the great apologies for the faith.
Others deal with outlines, but Macarius is unique in his defence of details, and, except
for his frequent use of allegory, his answers are mostly sound in the light of to-day. It
is a great thing for a man to answer so many cunning objections without involving himself
in inconsistency. He shows his readiness to meet his opponent on his own ground, and an
absence of narrowness which ought to appeal to the modern reader. For instance, when the
Mosaic books are discredited as written long after Moses, he accepts a later date without
any weakening of their authenticity (iii. 10). In answering the charge of discrepancies in
the Gospels, he replies that details of expression are not the criterion of the truth of a
fact, and in such narratives as those of the Crucifixion, the varied accounts may be
truthful, and yet reflect the suspense of the crisis, the very strangeness of which had
unnerved all who were present.

47 One is tempted to multiply illustrations of the teaching and methods of Macarius, but
it is better simply to refer to the pages which follow. There are some who will look in
them chiefly for the pagan objections of his opponent, which have a special value of their
own apart from the answers. I have thought it best and handiest not to follow the plan of
giving about seven questions in succession and proceeding to give the answers. This
involves much turning of pages in order to read the corresponding answer after each of
them. I have therefore placed each question and its answer together, irrespective of
chapters in the book. The only drawback to this is that it makes the little exordium with
which Macarius begins each fresh series, seem somewhat out of place. Let me conclude by
saying that my great hope in writing thus on Macarius Magnes is that many to whom his name
has meant nothing will regard him with interest henceforth, and that those who know
something of the Apocriticus will be induced to study it again for themselves, and
possibly to help in the solution of those interesting problems which are still raised in
connexion with it.

48 THE APOCRITICUS OF MACARIUS MAGNES

BOOK I

[Lost, with the exception of the following fragment of Chapter VI, which is preserved in
the Antirrhetica of Nicephorus, Spicil. Solesm. i p. 332.] CONCERNING Berenice,71 or the
woman with the issue of blood. . . . Berenice, who once was mistress of a famous place,
and honoured ruler of the great city of Edessa,72 having been delivered from an unclean
issue of blood and speedily healed from a painful affection, whom many physicians
tormented at many times, but increased the affection to the worst of maladies with no
betterment at all, He made to be celebrated and famous in story till the present day in
Mesopotamia, or rather in all the world---so great was her experience 73---for she was
made whole by a touch of the saving hem of His garment.74 For the woman, having had the
record of the deed itself nobly represented in bronze,75 gave it to her son, as something
done recently, not long before. . . .

BOOK II

1 [The Athens MS. does not begin till Chapter VII. The first set of objections in the Book
is therefore lost Chapters VII-XI contain answers to five objections. This looks as if
Chapter 1 was in the nature of an introduction, unless there were six objections, and
Macarius has combined two of them in one answer, as he does more than once in the later
part of his work.] CHAPTER VII. This is an answer to an objection based on the words of S.
Matt. x. 34 ff.: "I came not to send peace on the earth, but a sword. I came to separate a
man from his father," etc. The first part of the answer is lacking, and the rest is
lengthy and diffuse. The following is a summary of it:--- [To those who wish to receive
the heavenly armour Christ speaks thus: "This warfare will mean putting away all earthly
thoughts and giving up all human dear ones. After the victory a heavenly Father will take
the place of the earthly one who has been renounced. This is the only way to conquer sin.
The man who prefers earthly relationships will not survive the fray, and is not a soldier
worthy of me."

2 Success in such a warfare may be plainly seen in the deaths of the martyrs. They were
able to leave all those that were dear, and take up their cross and follow Christ. This is
what is meant by the "sword," which cuts relations from each other, as it cut Thecla from
Theocleia.76 Daughters have taken this sword and cut themselves off from their mothers
either by martyrdom or virgins' vows. Sons of great men have left their family customs to
practise abstinence. Nor are those angered who are left behind. Go through the cities of
the East, and the province of Syria,77 and test my words. Look at the royal city of
Antioch,78 and see what countless divisions there are. Some marry, others refuse; some are
luxurious, others ascetic.79 In a single house the "sword" of salvation cuts them apart,
doing so without wound or pain, for it cuts not bodies but dispositions asunder.80

3 If the words bear an allegorical meaning,81 the man divided from his father means the
Apostles separated from the law. The daughter is the flesh, and the mother circumcision.
The daughter-in-law is the Church, and the mother-in-law the synagogue. The sword that
cuts is the grace of the Gospel.] CHAPTER VIII. Answer to an objection based on the
saying: "Who is my brother and sister ?" and the words which Christ added, as He pointed
to His disciples, "Behold my brethren and my mother" (Matt. xii. 48-49). [These words were
a reproof to those Jews who regarded Christ as merely a man, and not the Only Begotten.82
So He asks, "Who is my brother, if I am the Only Begotten ? Who is my mother, if I created
all things ? What man, acknowledging mother and brethren, ever did the miracles I have
done ? As no such man ever has done or will do them, why call me a mere man with brethren
? The man born blind saw the Godhead with the eyes of his soul, but you are blind to the
brightness of such power in your midst. So I say to you as to blind men, ' He that doeth
the will of my Father (with which mine is identical) is my mother and brother,' for in so
doing he both brings me forth as a mother does, having conceived me in doing the Father's
will, and he also is brought forth along with me, not by coming into personal
subsistence,83 but by being made one in grace of will. For he that doeth the will of my
Father bringeth me forth in the fellowship of the deed, and is brought forth with me. For
he that believes that I am the Only Begotten of God in some sense begets me, not in
subsistence but in faith, being mystically present with that which is begotten."

4 Note that Christ does not specify any of His Apostles by name,but simply says, "He that
doeth the will of the Father."] CHAPTER IX. Answer to an objection based on S. Mark x. 18
and S. Matt. xii. 35. Come now, let us also make clear the question of those two sayings:
"None is good save God," and "The good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth
forth that which is good." 5 See how plainly here also Jesus dissociates Himself from man
when He says, "None is good save one, even God. And without doubt Christ is Himself God,
even as John says, "And the Word was God. Also the Saviour Himself, revealing the essence
of His own Godhead, says, "I and the Father are one"; which means that undoubtedly He who
spoke the words was God. Why, then, if He be God, did He deny that He was God, by saying,
" None is good save one, even God; why callest thou me good? If your desire is to pay a
genuine heed to the saying, the subject will become clear and easily grasped, though it be
disputed and a matter of discussion among many. A certain young man of comely appearance
pictured in the Saviour's presence a state of righteous action,84 imagining that He, who
for man's sake had become man, was like other men, possessed of no relationship besides
that which is mortal. This young man played the impostor and desired to show himself off
as often receiving much praise at the hands of many, besides thinking that the Lord was an
ordinary man. So it was not as God but as man that he addressed Him when he came near and
said, "Good master. Christ faces the man who has such an opinion of Him by saying, "Why
dost thou call me good when thou thinkest me a mere man?

6 Thou art mistaken, young man, in holding the theory that I am mortal and yet addressing
me as good; for among men there is nothing inherently good, but in God alone. So according
to thee at least I deny that I am good, since I am reckoned as a man. For if thou didst
hold the belief that God is in me, and the unalloyed nature of the Godhead, thou wouldst
have decided that I bear affinity to the nature of the Good, and wouldst have had no
doubt.85 But since thou didst secretly steal away the good that is absolute, and dost bear
unreasoning witness to the good that is relative,86 thou canst not reckon me as a partner
of this thy reckless act of theft. For do not suppose that I myself have ever used the
word 'good' without due thought. For even if I said 'The good man out of the good treasure
bringeth forth that which is good,' I do not call the man good absolutely, but relatively,
whenever he performs some good action through sharing in that which is good. Take an
illustration. The fire is warm, and that which is brought near the fire is also said to be
warm.87 But one is called warm absolutely and the other relatively. It is not that the
identity of name steals away the truth and has a single way of expressing the matter.
Rather is the difference of the nature of each wont to determine the identity of name.

7 Thus if any one calls the Creator good, and also that which is created, he makes it
plain that in the one case the goodness is in Himself, and in the other case it is derived
from another. Hence a man is good,88 not as having this possession from his own nature,
but as having obtained this advantage from another. But God is good, not as having
received or won this from another, but as a good which is. absolute, and as such is
neither changeable nor visible. This then must be the distinction in your mind with regard
to what is "good. It will prevent you from thinking that Christ stultified His own words
by saying, "No one is good save one, even God. For the absolute good, the inherent good,
the archetypal good, the invisible and unchangeable good,---this, He declares, is unique,
and the Godhead underlies it. But the relative good, the good that is easily altered, that
does not stand steadfast, but suffers change,---this He connects with man, and also with
any created thing; as for example when He called a fish or an egg good, by saying, "Ye
know how to give good gifts to your children."

8 CHAPTER X. Answer to an objection based on S. Matt, xvii. 15: "Have pity on my son, for
he is lunatic," although it was not the effect of the moon, but of a demon. [In answering
this question, we will also consider the apparently uncalled-for rebuke which Christ adds
to the multitude, in the words "O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you ? "
The dragon or demon was cunning enough to attack the boy at the changes of the moon, so
that men might think that his sufferings were due to its influence. Thus by one act he
accomplished two objects, for he both tortured the boy's body, and suggested blasphemy to
the minds of those who saw it, for if they ascribed it to the moon's action, they would
naturally blame Him who created the moon. Christ perceives that they likewise have been
affected by the demon, and so calls them a "faithless generation," because of their ideas
about the moon. By expelling the demon, He shows them their error.

9 S. Matthew does not prove, by saying that "a lunatic boy" was brought to Christ, that he
really was under the moon's influence. Like a good historian, he recorded things as he
heard them, not as they actually were.] CHAPTER XI. Answer to an objection based on S.
John v. 31: How is it that Christ said, "If I bear witness to myself, my witness is not
true," and yet He did bear witness to Himself, as He was accused of doing when He said, "I
am the light of the world"? (John viii. 12, 13). [Such witness is not true in man's case,
but it is in God's. The Jews thought Christ was only man, but it would have been a sad
thing for the world if He had accepted their judgment and sought man's witness for His
divine acts. So He speaks as man when He does not bear witness to Himself, but seeks it
from God. But it is as God that He says He is the Light, the Truth, etc., disdaining
witness from his inferiors. He therefore simply allows that if, in their erroneous
judgment, He is merely man, His witness is not true. Thus He contradicts, not His own
statement, but their opinion about Him.]

10 CHAPTER XII. Objection based on the discrepancy of the Gospels about the Crucifixion.
The Philosopher. 11 But he with bitterness, and with very grim look, bent forward and
declared to us yet more savagely that the Evangelists were inventors and not historians of
the events concerning Jesus. For each of them wrote an account of the Passion which was
not harmonious but as contradictory as could be. For one records that, when he was
crucified, a certain man filled a sponge with vinegar and brought it to him (Mark xv. 36).
But another says in a different way, "When they had come to the place Golgotha, they gave
him to drink wine mingled with gall, and when he had tasted it, he would not drink" (Matt.
xxvii. 33). And a little further, "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice
saying, Eloim, Eloim, lama sabachthani ? That is, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken
me? This is Matthew (v. 46). And another says, "Now there was set a vessel full of
vinegar. Having therefore bound a vessel89 full of the vinegar with a reed, they offered
it to his mouth. When therefore he had taken the vinegar, Jesus said, It is finished, and
having bowed his head, he gave up the ghost" (John xix. 29). But another says, "And he
cried out with a loud voice and said, Father, into thy hands I will commend90 my spirit.
This happens to be Luke (Luke xxiii. 46). From this out-of-date and contradictory record,
one can receive it as the statement of the suffering, not of one man, but of many.

12 For if one says "Into thy hands I will commend my spirit," and another " It is
finished," and another "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me ? and another " My God,
my God, why didst thou reproach me ?" 91 it is plain that this is a discordant invention,
and either points to many who were crucified, or one who died hard92 and did not give a
clear view of his passion to those who were present. But if these men were not able to
tell the manner of his death in a truthful way, and simply repeated it by rote, neither
did they leave any clear record concerning the rest of the narrative. 13 CHAPTER XVII.
Answer to the objection based on the discrepancy of the Evangelists. The Christian. Thus
far and in such words did he declaim, setting forth with boasting the Hellenic view. But
we were not overcome by the din of his words, nor did we fear for our life. Though we
shrank from speaking the essential word as the result of acquaintance with it, we spoke as
the divine grace gave us help. Speaking as follows, we gave a clear interpretation of the
Evangelists as preserving one tenor of a single record, though with interchange of
phraseology.

14 No one seeks the truth that is in the nature of the facts from syllables or letters,
but starting from the fact he estimates the divergences of language. For instance, if some
one simply speaks of the rational as " man," and another as "mortal," another as "endowed
with speech," and yet another as "human being," he will mention many things in word, but
there will be one thing that underlies them all. And whether any one says " mortal," or
"human being," or "endowed with speech," he means nothing else but "man." Similarly in the
case of the outer garment. Whether a man speaks of a "mantle" or a "cloak" or a "robe" or
"woven garment," he does not mean many things, but some one thing with an interchange of
names. Thus the Evangelists, writing in their eagerness of what was once done at the
Crucifixion, spoke one in one way and one in another, but they did not mar the record. So
then, if one said "vinegar" and another said "wine," they made no mistake. And in the case
of the sponge and the hyssop do not think it strange when you hear it said, "Having bound
a vessel of vinegar to a hyssop they gave him to drink"; and again, "Having filled a
sponge with vinegar they brought it to him." For the reed and the sponge and the hyssop
seem to point in one direction in their origin, for each of them comes as a wild plant,
and afterwards is cut down. Therefore when he had to say "reed," he said "hyssop" on
account of the similar course of their growth and cutting. And most particularly do they
observe the rule of the record, and do not write a single thing beyond what was spoken
then amid the seething confusion of that deed of madness.

15 For His accusers were Jews, and His judges were Romans, both of them a barbarian
race,93 which does not lay claim to the language of freedom, and has not grasped the
subtlety of Hellenic education. Moreover, everything was at that moment being driven about
in confusion; the earth was trembling from beneath as though smitten by a blow, and the
rocks were being rent and struck by the crash. Then suddenly there fell a darkness that
could be felt, and the sun hid the rays that belong to it. No one was then in his sober
senses, but was blinded by the confusion of the elements, while the innermost recesses
were shaken of sky and earth and under the earth. . . .94 Tell me, then, who was sound in
mind amid such a state of things as this? Who was strong in soul ? Who had not been
stricken in mind ? Whose understanding was not harassed ? Who did not throw out his words
as if he were in liquor? Who was not like a cheap-jack in the obscurity of his utterances
? Who did not behold the things that were coming to pass as a deep and mighty vision of
their dreams? No man, young or old, no woman, whether aged or virgin, no one of tender
age, was possessed of steady reasoning, but all were senseless as though heaven's thunder
were sounding in their ears, and all did different things, losing their wits and not
preserving the sequence of things, nor reason, nor habit. Wherefore those who wrote
recorded their frenzy and the strange happening that then befell in word and deed, without
seemliness, but without a word of falsehood.

16 Again, it is not allowable for a historian to write anything beyond the things done or
said, even though the language be barbarian. And you yourself have Herodotus who was not a
foreigner, but a clever writer of history, but he put sayings of a foreign kind in his
history, even barbarous names of mountains and rivers, which would never have been
mentioned at all, had he not discovered them from somewhere and written them down, with
more careful regard for truth than for purity of style. It is therefore not surprising if
the Evangelists seem to record some things that are strange. For it was not their care
that what they said should have force, but their zeal was to preserve the truth of what
was stated. And even if some woman or some man said something that was not consistent or
was a solecism, all their desire was only to set this down. For they perceived that in
this way the record would be above suspicion before the world, if the writing of the
history was unaffected, and not at all elaborate. Those who wrote these things were not
descended from men who were educated or skilled in letters. And even if they had been
educated, it was not fitting to rob the history of its unlettered expressions, and to
adorn the action with cleverness of language, but rather to preserve the character of what
was said in the way that it was spoken.

17 CHAPTER XIII. Objection, based on S. John xix. 33-35 (the piercing with the spear). It
will be proved from another passage that the accounts of his death were all a matter of
guess-work. For John writes : "But when they came to Jesus, when they saw that he was dead
already, they brake not his legs; but one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side,
and forthwith came there out blood and water." For only John has said this, and none of
the others. Wherefore he is desirous of bearing witness to himself when he says: "And he
that saw it hath borne witness, and his witness is true" (v. 35). This is haply, as it
seems to me, the statement of a simpleton. For how is the witness true when its object has
no existence ? For a man witnesses to something real; but how can witness be spoken of
concerning a thing which is not real ?

18 CHAPTER XVIII. Answer to the objection based on S. John xix. 33-35. Pray do not let
that passage trouble you either, in that it is only John who says: "When they came to
Jesus, they brake not his legs," while the others do not record it. For when he alone said
it, he is not deserving of rejection. Rather is he naturally to be praised, because in his
zeal he called this to mind. And indeed through saying this he has spoken something else
greater still, which also preserves the mystery of the dispensation, and introduces the
word of marvel. For he says : "One of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side." This
was in order that the opened side might grant an inlet to the cleansing, which had
hitherto been closed,95 so that when the blood and water flowed like a spring, those who
dwelt in the country of the captivity might be delivered by the blood, and those who had
the stripes of their sins might be washed in the water. This then has been done, not in a
superfluous way, but of intention, with the divine forethought as it were underlying it.
For since [? the flow of death came from His side] 96 the cause of salvation must needs
also flow from His side From His side did the blow spring, from His side flowed also the
spring of life.97 From His side came the disease and also the healing. From His side was
the wandering and from his side was the returning. From His side was the pain, and from
His side was the painlessness.

19 John, the one witness of this, which is itself the one secret thing, testifies to that
which is secret. John has proclaimed that the smiting of His side has been made good by
His side. This is true, even if he is the only one who says it, and the other three do
not. For another is telling the truth when he tells of the beggar Lazarus and the rich
fool, though the other three do not mention them. This is my answer so far. CHAPTER XIV.
Objection based on the Resurrection of Christ and His manifestation of Himself (Matt.
xxviii. 6, etc.). 20 There is also another argument whereby this corrupt opinion can be
refuted. I mean the argument about that Resurrection of His which is such common talk
everywhere, as to why Jesus, after His suffering and rising again (according to your
story), did not appear to Pilate who punished Him and said He had done nothing worthy of
death, or to Herod King of the Jews, or to the High-priest of the Jewish race, or to many
men at the same time and to such as were worthy of credit, and more particularly among
Romans both in the Senate and among the people. The purpose would be that, by their wonder
at "the things concerning Him, they might not pass a vote of death against Him by common
consent, which implied the impiety of those who were obedient to Him. But He appeared to
Mary Magdalene, a coarse woman who came from some wretched little village, and had once
been possessed by seven demons, and with her another utterly obscure Mary, who was herself
a peasant woman, and a few other people who were not at all well known. And that, although
He said: "Henceforth shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and
coming with the clouds." For if He had shown Himself to men of note, all would believe
through them, and no judge would punish them as fabricating monstrous stories.98 For
surely it is neither pleasing to God nor to any sensible man that many should be subjected
on His account to punishments of the gravest kind.

21 CHAPTER XIX. Answer to the objection based on the Resurrection of Christ and His
manifestation of Himself (Matt. xxviii. 6, etc.). Come now, and let us examine carefully
that other action also which does not seem to you to have been rightly done. I mean why
the Saviour, after having conquered the power of death and returned on the third day after
His Passion from the depths of the earth, did not appear to Pilate. It was in order that
those who have learnt how to do away with what is good, should not do away with the true
fact. It was to prevent any base suspicion from base men from creeping in and stealing
away the truth of the Lord's Passion. It was to prevent the unscrupulous from thinking
that what took place was untrue, that the tongues of the Jews might not again hiss out the
poison of the dragon, and that the fact might not become the universal scandal of the
world.

22 For at once, if He had shown Himself to Pilate and the men of note who were about him,
at once, I say, they would have spread abroad a statement, through the device of cheating,
namely, that Pilate had nailed one man to the cross in place of another, through some plan
of screening him; that he had done this as either himself deceived, or as being altogether
put out of countenance with regard to Him, as is often wont to happen in such matters face
to face.99 Whence they would say that He had appeared to him after rising as the result of
an intrigue, desiring to proclaim on authority the resurrection which had not taken place
as if it had done so, and to strengthen by the Roman power a lying statement. Thus the
matter was contrived as a mockery; the earnestness shown was mere play-acting. He who had
had no passion was solemnly parading within the Praetorium as if He had had it and
conquered it; some criminal had been delivered over to the cross in His stead ; a trick
had taken place in a court of law. He whom they had seized had got His freedom by a
cunning device, and a form of jugglery; some other condemned man had been bound without
exciting suspicion. And now Pilate, who had just judged Him according to appearance, had
no more appearance of so doing, but was embracing Him who was still answerable, as if He
were a friend. This action was a new one added to the evils already done against Judaea.
Great is the resulting ridicule in the East. We Jews have an indelible shame in having
fought against one man and not got the better of Him. See how much knavery the deceiver
wrought, both while He lived and when He died in pretence.

23 [Macarius continues this lament of the Jews at some length, picturing Pilate as telling
the Emperor, and orders being issued to believe what they knew to be a fraud, while they
themselves were held up to odium for murdering the Saviour of the race, and felt most
acutely of all the extreme publicity and officialism of the whole thing.] Because of the
likelihood of such happenings, and of such foolish talking on the part of the Jews, He did
not appear to Pilate when He rose from the dead, lest that which had been done rightly
should be judged as a trick of rascality and deceit. Nor did He approach men of repute of
the company of the Romans, that there might not seem to be need of human support and co-
operation for the confirmation of the story of the Resurrection. But He made Himself
manifest to women who were not able to give help, nor to persuade any one about the
Resurrection. Then He appeared to the disciples who were also themselves without power,
and largely obscure because of their poverty. This He did fittingly and well, that the
story of the Resurrection might not be heralded by the help of the power of the world's
rulers, but that it might be strengthened and confirmed through men who were inferior and
made no show in their life according to the flesh, so that the proclamation might not be a
human thing, but a divine.

24 CHAPTER XV. Objection based on the words: "Now is the judgment of the world, now shall
the ruler of this world be cast outside" (John xii. 31). 25 Any one will feel quite sure
that the records are mere fairy tales, if he reads another piece of clap-trap that is
written in the Gospel, where Christ says: "Now is the judgment of the world, now the ruler
of this world shall be cast outside" (John xii. 31). For tell me, in the name of God, what
is this judgment which then takes place, and who is the ruler of the world who is cast
outside ? If indeed you intend to say it is the Emperor, I answer that there is no sole
ruler (for many rule the world 100), nor was he cast down.101 But if you mean some one who
is abstract and incorporeal, he cannot be cast outside. For where should he be cast, to
whom it fell to be the ruler of the world? If you are going to reply that there exists
another world somewhere, into which the ruler will be cast, pray tell us this from a
record which can convince us. But if there is not another (and it is impossible that two
worlds should exist) where should the ruler be cast, if it be not in that world in which
he happens to be already ? And how is a man cast down in that world in which he is ?

26 Unless it is like the case of an earthenware vessel, which, if it and its contents are
broken, a man causes to be cast outside, not into the void, but into another body of air
or earth, or perhaps of something else. If then in like manner, when the world is broken
(which is impossible), he that is in it will be cast outside, what sort of place is there
outside into which he will be cast ? And what is there peculiar in that place in the way
of quantity and quality, height and depth, length or breadth ? For if it is possessed of
these things, then it follows that it is a world. And what is the cause of the ruler of
the world being cast out, as if he were a stranger to the world ? If he be a stranger, how
did he rule it ? And how is he cast out ? By his own will, or against it ? Clearly against
it. That is plain from the language, for that which is "cast out," is cast out
unwillingly. But the wrong-doer is not he that endures force, but he that uses it.

27 All this obscure nonsense in the Gospels ought to be offered to silly women, not to
men. For if we were prepared to investigate such points more closely, we should discover
thousands of obscure stories which do not contain a single word worth finding.102 CHAPTER
XX. Answer to the objection based on S. John xii. 31. [Note that there are two readings :
"cast out," and "cast down," and that the words which follow are: "I, if I be lifted up,
will draw all men unto myself." "World" does not mean all creation (which is subject to
God), but men, who can subject themselves to some one else. And "ruler" does not mean the
Creator, but an arch-demon that by guile rules man (who may be termed "the world within
the world" 103). The verse means that Christ came to free them from his tyranny, casting
him out and down from it. His rule was only recent, and not universal. He is said to rule
"the world," although only "man" is meant, and there is more in the world than man.

28 For this identification of whole and part, we may compare the saying that a man is ill
when one limb is so, or that all a cloak is poor because a tassel is lost. If it means
everything that exists, we must remember that there are things invisible as well, thrones
and powers, etc. Inspired language similarly uses whole for part, as when S. Paul says, "I
am crucified to the world." He does not mean all the world, but the evil and fleshly part
of it. If then S. Paul calls the fleshly side, which he painfully crucified, "the world,"
it was natural that the Saviour, when His cross was set up, should speak similarly of the
weak and wavering human race. Such was Christ's judgment in dividing men from their
deceiver. Their former ruler was cast down, but they themselves were to be drawn upwards,
as is suggested in v. 32. For He took a human body as the cord with which to judge His
kin, and, binding it to His Godhead, He drew men up to heavenly abodes (for the race is
bound to that body of His as by a rope, and drawn upward).

29 The "casting down" of the world's tyrant is not literal, but metaphorical. Supposing an
earthly king passes judgment on one in authority, his fall is not from a hill or a
housetop, but from his own power. He may still remain in the palace, but his authority is
gone. So is it with the "strongman" whom Christ, as the "stronger man," cast down from his
earthly power.] CHAPTER XVI. Objection based on S. John viii. 43, 44. 30 Come now, let us
listen to that shadowy saying also which was directed against the Jews, when He said, "Ye
cannot hear my word, because ye are of your father the devil (Slanderer), and ye wish to
do the lusts of your father," Explain to us then who the Slanderer is, who is the father
of the Jews. For those who do the lusts of their father, do so fittingly, as yielding to
the desire of their father, and out of respect for him. And if the father is evil, the
charge of evil must not be fastened on the children. Who then is that father, by doing
whose lusts they did not hearken to Christ? For when the Jews said, "We have one father,
even God," He sets aside this statement by saying, "Ye are of your father the Slanderer"
(that is, Ye are of the Slanderer). Who then is that Slanderer, and where does he chance
to be? And by slandering whom did he obtain this epithet ? For he does not seem to have
this name as an original one, but as the result of something that happened. (Whatever we
learn, we shall understand as we ought. For if it is from a slander that he is called
Slanderer, among whom did he appear and work the forbidden action ? Even in this, it is he
who accepts the slander who will appear unscrupulous, while he that is slandered is most
wronged.

31 And it will be seen that it was not the Slanderer himself who did any wrong, but he who
showed him the excuse for the slander. It is the man who places a stake on the road at
night who is responsible, and not the man who walks along and stumbles over it. It is the
man who fixed it there who receives the blame. Just so, it is he who places an occasion of
slander in the way who does the greater wrong, not he who takes hold of it or he who
receives it. 32 And tell me another thing. Is the Slanderer subject to human affections or
not? If he is not, he would never have slandered. But if he is subject, he ought to meet
with forgiveness; for no one who is troubled by bodily ailments is judged as a wrongdoer,
but receives pity from all as being sorely tried. CHAPTER XXI. Answer to the objection
based on S. John viii. 43, 44. [First observe that the verse following throws some light
on these difficult words, namely, " He is a liar and so is his father " 104 (John viii.
44). It is not that the Slanderer himself is the Jews' father. Nor does Christ say so. The
words do not mean "You are of your father the Slanderer," but "Ye are of the father of the
Slanderer."105 So the slander does not originate in himself, but in his father's
promptings. In fact, their relation may be compared with that of the divine Son and
Father. As those who believe the Son are brought to the Father as His heirs, so those who
believe the Slanderer are dragged from their true Father by that Antichrist, and brought
to his father who is the opposite of God.106

33 You want to know who the father of the Slanderer is, and what the slander was. You have
heard of the fall of man from Paradise, and the slander of the serpent, when sin and death
entered. It was thence that the Slanderer and his father got their terribleness. The
serpent slandered men to God, and God to men. His "father" was a spiritual force who took
possession of him. This was he of whom Job said, "He waxed headstrong against the
Almighty" (Job xv. 25). This angel of deceit found the serpent, and by sowing in him the
seed of slander, became the father of the Slanderer. When therefore the Jews rejected
Christ's words and turned from His Father, they turned by their rebellion to the
rebellious father of the serpent. That was why Christ spoke these words.] Let this much
suffice. If you approve, we will at this place solemnly conclude the argument, which has
been sufficiently discussed. At some other time, if any point arises of the things that
perplex, we will meet you again, and speak, as the divine gift grants us aid.


APOCRITICUS
===========

APOCRITICUS continued

BOOK III

1 Proem (introducing the first seven questions by the Philosopher). THIS is the third
contest which our much-admired opponent prepared for us, after bringing a notable assembly
of auditors. This, O Theosthenes,107 we now unfold to your incomparable wisdom, relating
to the best of our power the propositions which were the results of his reflection. When
we had found a quiet spot, we spent a great deal of the day in discussion. He began to
roll down upon us the loftiness of his Attic oratory,108 so that the mighty throng of
onlookers almost felt themselves joining in the contest, as they saw the terror of his
wrath, which was meant to scare us away. Then, as though he were descending on us at a run
from some hill, he threw us into consternation by troubling us with the force of his
tongue. The beginning of his speech to us was as follows :---

2 Introduction to the answers of Macarius to the objections of Chapters I to VII. When the
exponent of Hellenic cunning had uttered these words against the divine teachings of
Christ, he became silent for a space, as though there were no one to answer him. But we
had the same feelings as the man who attacked with sword-thrusts a many-headed hydra,
which, when one dragon-head was cut off, immediately produced many heads instead of the
one. Feeling somewhat like this, we continued exhausted for a space. For no sooner did we
with persuasiveness explain three or four or five propositions of his, than he, in
imitation of the mythical hydra, when one was explained, put forward countless further
questions, thus proposing endless study concerning the matters in dispute. He therefore
forthwith, after raising questions on so many points, declared that it was for us to make
answer to each. And we, recalling to mind the things he had spoken, replied as follows,
beginning with his first inquiry.

3 CHAPTER I. How did Jesus allow Himself to be crucified with insult? Why did not Christ
utter anything worthy of one who was wise and divine, when brought either before the high-
priest or before the governor? He might have given instruction to His judge and those who
stood by and made them better men. But He endured to be smitten with a reed and spat on
and crowned with thorns, unlike Apollonius,109 who, after speaking boldly to the Emperor
Domitian, disappeared from the royal court, and after not many hours was plainly seen in
the city then called Dicaearchia, but now Puteoli. But even if Christ had to suffer
according to God's commands, and was obliged to endure punishment, yet at least He should
have endured His Passion with some boldness, and uttered words of force and wisdom to
Pilate His judge, instead of being mocked like any gutter-snipe. CHAPTER VIII. Answer to
the objection based on the fact that Jesus allowed Himself to be crucified with insult.

4 Why did Christ, when brought before the high-priest and Pilate the governor, work no
miraculous sign, and show no manifestation which seemed worthy of Him, nor any mighty word
begotten of wisdom ? Why did He appear in humble fashion, with utterance restrained and
brief, and with heavy look ? 5 It was in order that He might not make prophecies void of
meaning, nor convict the sacred tablets of falsity, and make of none effect the toil of
holy men, which they endured in their godly preaching of the message of the dispensation,
as they wrote the mystery of His coming and unveiled the manner of His Passion long
before. As the great Isaiah with voice of might says, "We have seen him, and he had no
form nor comeliness, but his form was without honour " (Isa. liii. 2); and again, "a man
smitten, and knowing how to bear sickness," and, "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter,
and as a lamb he was dumb. And when speaking in the Person of Christ he says, "I gave my
back to scourges, my cheeks to blows ; my face was not turned away from the shame of
spitting" (Isa. 1. 6). And it is possible to find thousands of other things spoken by the
holy prophet concerning Him. If then, as you suggest, He had uttered violent words when
standing before the high-priest or the governor, He might indeed have smitten them with
divine signs, and made these men afraid by some novel sight; He might have made them
suddenly fall prone to the ground by some act of miracle; but He would have flung away all
prophetic testimony, He would have disregarded the foreknowledge of the noble men of old,
and stultified the words of those far-famed pillars;

6 He would have made of none effect the divine revelations of the Holy Spirit, and He
would simply have thrust aside all the expectation concerning Him, by fulfilling the
dispensation of death by means of a phantom of the air, enslaving all things to the
necessity of their fears, and constraining those who stood there by the force of His
terrible brow. And if by virtue of His Godhead He had made the rock tremble at His word,
or shaken the house; if by a word He had produced a thick atmosphere or made an onslaught
against the purpose of these savage brutes, then He would have done wrong by forcing the
governor and the high-priests into subjection, He would have erred in compelling that
which was evil110 to admit of that which was just. And in this He would have come under
the suspicion that He was working these marvellous novelties by means of magic.
Accordingly, He would have been judged one of those who are regarded as Gorgons. If He had
terrified Pilate with fateful portents, if He had frightened the priests with signs of a
novel kind, if He had reduced the Jewish nation by the sight of apparitions, it would have
resulted in that which was false combating the truth. For the wonderful works which had
been done by Him would have admitted of a base suspicion among men, as though they had
been wrought, not in accordance with judgment,111 but merely in phantom form and lying
semblance.

7 Hence that which had come to pass in a godly way long before, whether on land or sea,
whether in town or country, would have been maligned and judged as an illusive dream and
not a reality. The other result would have been the non-fulfilment of the foreknowledge of
the men of old time, for Jeremiah would have made a mistake in describing Him as a
guileless lamb which was led as a sacrifice (Jer. xi. 19). But, in addition to this, there
would have been no truth whatever in God being enrolled among men as the Word. For he who
does things foreign to the nature of men does not remain among their number, but has a
separate place of vantage of his own. Again, it would have been an utter lie when some one
else, speaking in the Person of the Only Begotten, says (Ps. lxviii. 22), "They gave me
gall for food, and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink. For who would have dared,
if struck by the lightning of His visitation, to make ready vinegar and offer Him gall?
Who would not have trembled when they saw Him stern and fearsome, and combining with His
words a terrifying look, first speaking and then forthwith concealing Himself, suddenly
seen and then again invisible ? Tell me, who would not have hidden himself from a
countenance so full of portents? Who would have forged cross or tree, or goad or sharp
nails ?

8 Who would have ventured to master Him who could not be mastered, or to seize as a man
Him whose speech and deed were more than human? But if the cross had not been set up in
the ground and no nail had been sharpened as a horn,112 then the Passion would not have
atoned through the Cross, nor would He have won healing by being pierced with evil. Nor
would Habakkuk have made any clear revelation when he prophesied that He had horns in His
hands, that is, the nails of the cross or its horn-like arms 113 (Hab. iii. 4). And again,
Moses would not be worthy of credit in declaring Him first and foremost as life that was
hanged (Deut. xxviii. 66). All would have been false, with no more than verbal truth, and
fr.r from the deeds of godliness, and so it would have been lawful to seek and expect
another Jesus. For He who was heralded in the books of the Bible would not have come, for,
as I have said, He would not have kept to such a fashion, but would have become man in the
guise of a strange marvel.

9 For if He had acted like Apollonius,114 and had made a sport of His life by magic art,
and, when speaking to the Emperor solemnly in the midst of his palace somewhere, He had
been digging garden herbs at the same moment for those who kept gardens, the world would
really have been justly deceived, and all creation would have been enveloped in the cloud
of His deceit, since it would become the blind slave of a wizard philosopher, who was able
by his knavery to snatch away his body and to conceal by his phantoms the name of
godliness. If He had done this He would have been judged to be neither God nor the Son of
God, but one of those wizards who spend their lives in cheating. 10 It was in order that
no stumbling-block of this kind should turn His saving Passion into mockery, and that no
suspicion of the laws of magic should tamper with the mystery of the dispensation, that He
bore as man the experiences of insult. And yet no shame really touched Him, for He had the
indwelling of One who was not subject to human affections,115 and He did not admit the
principle of shame. For just as a vessel when filled with fire within does not receive any
impression of coldness that is brought to it from without, but thrusts it away by virtue
of its inward warmth, so Jesus, having the in-dwelling of God, who is a divine Fire which
cannot be destroyed nor spent, reckoned as nothing the coldness of the insults, and when
He saw the revilings He was not influenced thereby. Just as a child, though he sees the
laughter of his comrades being turned upon him in abundance, feels no shame, so Christ
turned His face from the taunts of the Jews, as though they came not from men but from
babes. Even as a rock which receives the trail of countless reptiles, feels neither trace
nor track nor mark, for it carries moving things upon its natural hardness, and yet is not
scratched by them at all; so Jesus, when the band of the Jews rushed upon Him like
reptiles, remained firm and unharmed like a rock, receiving no shame by their impress.

11 And there is another reason for what He did. It was fitting that before the Passion He
should have kept His divine power in check, in order that after it, and while it was in
progress, and when He had burst the bands of Hades and cleft the earth and raised again a
band of men with souls and bodies, and revealed the company of those who have passed from
hence---He should show who He was that endured the Passion, and who it was that dwelt
within Him. For if creation in one point116 has been conquered by Him who seemed to be
subject to human affections,117 it was undoubtedly the God and Creator in Him that shook
the world, and quenched the orgies of the foolish. And, indeed, it is not before the shock
of battle but after it, that a soldier's qualities became manifest to his enemies. What
greater thing could there be than to return from Hades after three days ? 118

12 We conclude therefore that Christ, by working no new marvel when brought before Pilate,
illustrates a rule, and the conduct which results from it, seen in the theatre; namely,
that a man should not rouse up the malice of the wild beasts against him by some novel and
terrible mask, but should rather provoke them to the contest by a humble one, and should
overcome their savagery by excelling both in skill and in strength. So He who had appeared
humble in the contest, was seen to be most terrible after it, such as earth could not
bear, nor could heaven endure to look upon the conflict, for the former fled hither and
thither, and by its quakings made mighty efforts to escape, while the latter shut (so to
speak) the eye of its light, and no longer had power to look upon that which was coming to
pass. Concerning the Passion then, you may accept such points as these by way of answer.

13 CHAPTER II. Objection based on the saying: "If it be possible, let this cup pass from
me" (Matt. xxvi. 36 seq., etc.). Moreover, there is another saying which is full of
obscurity and full of stupidity, which was spoken by Jesus to His disciples. He said,
"Fear not them that kill the body," and yet He Himself being in an agony and keeping watch
in the expectation of terrible things, besought in prayer that His passion should pass
from Him, and said to His intimate friends, "Watch and pray, that the temptation may not
pass by you."119 For these sayings are not worthy of God's Son, nor even of a wise man who
despises death. CHAPTER IX. Answer to the objection based on the saying: "If it be
possible, let this cup pass from me " (Matt. xxvi. 36 seq., etc.). (This answer sounds
strange and unsatisfactory to modern ears, but the latter part is given in full, for it
raises the important question of its relation to the similar explanations of the Passion
given in other Fathers of the period.)

14 [Evidently it is Christ's inconsistency that is complained of. This is a saying where
we must look below the surface, like doctors, who do not judge a herb by its being
disagreeable, but look within it for some hidden use. Christ's action in Gethsemane must
be explained as follows : The devil had seen His mighty works, and was so convinced of His
Godhead, that he was afraid to bring his forces against Him, and was slow in bringing on
the predicted Passion. Had he altogether failed to do so, Christ's coming to take away sin
would have been in vain, and the last state of the world would have been worse than the
first. To prevent this misfortune, He lays bare His manhood, and pretends to be afraid of
death, as a man might stir up a wild beast by making a noise. Now man had met his fall
through two things, a tree, and the food from that tree. In the case of the latter, Christ
had already won back the victory by fasting from food; but it was only when He pretended
to be hungry that the devil attacked Him as he had the first Adam, and was beaten. Just in
the same way Christ now provokes him to a second conflict, by pretending to be afraid, so
that by means of a tree He may counteract the deceit once caused through a tree, and when
His tree is planted, He may slay from it him who himself shows his enmity in a tree.

15 So He really wants the cup to come quickly, not to pass away. Note that He calls it a
"cup" and not "suffering"; and rightly so, as being associated with good cheer. And,
indeed, He sipped nectar which was to bring life to the faithful. Thus was the devil to be
finally ensnared, like a dragon with a hook.120] 16 This is what an experienced angler
often does when he wishes to draw a weighty fish from the deep. By placing a small worm on
the hook, he deceives him through the greediness of his belly and draws him up. Thus, when
Christ wished to draw up by his throat the cunning and deceitful dragon who is hidden in
the sea of life, and is the source of all mischief, He put the body like a worm round the
hook of the Godhead, and, speaking through it, he deceived the metaphorical serpent of the
spirit world. Wherefore speaking as man in a psalm of long before, He revealed this,
saying, "I am a worm and no man" (Ps. xxi. 17). This worm, which was brought together with
God the Word and then held fast in the sea of mortal life, provoked the mouth of the
dragon against itself, and seized it at the moment that it seemed to be seized itself.
This worm devoured in a hidden manner the tree of death; this worm creeping imperceptibly
over the mount of impossibilities, aroused the voiceless bodies of the dead. This worm by
coiling round and encircling Hades strangled the commanders that watched over its
garrisons, and seized the mighty ones there and bound them together. This worm, descending
to the archives of the despotism, cut through the leaves with their record of sins,
wherein had been written the transgressions of men, and destroyed them utterly. This worm
made the devil's ark disappear, which he planned and made from the tree of transgression,
wherein he had put away and hidden the robe of man's glory. This worm came into being
without parentage and union; it is mystic, only begotten,121 ineffable. Through this worm
the mystic hook drew up the primeval122 dragon, concerning whom one of the chosen holy
ones prophesied, "Thou shall draw a dragon with a hook."123

17 The points of our answer to you are sufficient, and the fact is quite plain that Christ
deprecated His Passion for the sake of the dispensation of the world. CHAPTER III.
Objection based on the saying: "If ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me" (John v.
46, 47). Again the following saying appears to be full of stupidity : "If ye believed
Moses, ye would have believed me, for he wrote concerning me." He said it, but all the
same nothing which Moses wrote has been preserved. For all his writings are said to have
been burnt along with the temple. All that bears the name of Moses was written 1180 years
afterwards, by Ezra and those of his time. And even if one were to concede that the
writing is that of Moses, it cannot be shown that Christ was anywhere called God, or God
the Word, or Creator. And pray who has spoken of Christ as crucified ?

18 CHAPTER X. Answer to the objection based on S. John v. 46, 47. I must now answer you on
a third point, as to why Christ said to the Jews, "If ye believed Moses, ye would have
believed me, for he wrote concerning me." That Moses did write concerning Christ the whole
world openly recognised, when he said a prophet should rise up in his stead, and spoke of
Him as forming man along with the Father, and related His Passion in a mystical way in the
bush, and wrote of His cross and revealed it by his rod, and of the golden pot (even His
pure body which had the heavenly Word within as the food which cannot moulder), and
thousands of things which are akin to these and follow from them. But when you say that
Moses' writings perished in the Captivity and were written pgain incorrectly by Ezra, you
will find that they were written a second time with all accuracy. For it was not one who
spoke to Ezra and another to Moses, but the same Spirit taught them both, and clearly
revealed the same things to each of them. The Mosaic law was like a house that is pulled
down by enemies, for the same Builder brought together each part and fitted them
harmoniously together by the rule of His wisdom.

19 [So far from the Crucified not being called God in the Old Testament, prophecy is full
of it. Look, for example, at such words as "The Lord's Christ" (Ps. xix. 7); "The Lord's
Word shall go out from Jerusalem" (Isa. ii. 3); and "Therefore the Lord hath anointed thee
" (Ps. xliv. 8).124 Christ spoke the words of the text in question, because, though Moses
had written so much about Him, the Jews would not accept the fact.] CHAPTER IV. Objection
based on the incident of the swine and the demons (Matt. viii. 31, 32 ; Mark v. 1, etc.).
And if we would speak of this record likewise, it will appear to be really a piece of
knavish nonsense, since Matthew says that two demons 125 from the tombs met with Christ,
and then that in fear of Him they went into the swine, and many were killed. But Mark did
not shrink from making up an enormous number of swine, for he puts it thus: "He said unto
him, Go forth, thou unclean spirit, from the man. And he asked him, What is thy name? And
he answered, Many.126 And he besought him that he would not cast him out of the country.
And there was there a herd of swine feeding. And the demons besought him that he would
suffer them to depart into the swine. And when they had departed into the swine, they
rushed down the steep into the sea, about two thousand, and were choked; and they that fed
them fled !" (Mark v. 8, etc.). What a myth ! What humbug ! What flat mockery ! A herd of
two thousand swine ran into the sea, and were choked and perished!

20 And when one hears how the demons besought Him that they might not be sent into the
abyss, and how Christ was prevailed on and did not do so, but sent them into the swine,
will not one say : "Alas, what ignorance ! Alas, what foolish knavery, that He should take
account of murderous spirits, which were working much harm in the world, and that He
should grant them what they wished." What the demons wished was to dance through life, and
make the world a perpetual plaything. They wanted to stir up the sea, and fill the world's
whole theatre with sorrow. They wanted to trouble the elements by their disturbance, and
to crush the whole creation by their hurtfulness. So at all events it was not right that,
instead of casting127 these originators of evil, who had treated mankind so ill, into that
region of the abyss which they prayed to be delivered from, He should be softened by their
entreaty and suffer them to work another calamity.

21 If the incident is really true, and not a fiction (as we explain it), Christ's saying
convicts Him of much baseness, that He should drive the demons from one man, and send them
into helpless swine; also that He should terrify with panic those who kept them, making
them fly breathless and excited, and agitate the city with the disturbance which resulted.
For was it not just to heal the harm not merely of one man or two or three or thirteen,
but of everybody, especially as it was for this purpose that He was testified to have come
into this life ? 128 But to merely loose one man from bonds which were invisible, and to
inflict similar bonds upon others; to free certain men happily from their fears, but to
surround others with fears without reason---this should rightfully be called not right
action but rascality. 22 And again, in taking account of enemies and allowing them to take
up their abode in another place and dwell there, He is acting like a king who ruins the
region that is subject to him. For the latter, being unable to drive the barbarians out of
every country, sends them from one place to another to abide, delivering one country from
the evil and handing another over to it. If therefore Christ in like manner, unable to
drive the demon from His borders,129 sent him into the herd of swine, he does indeed work
something marvellous which cau catch the ear, but it is also full of the suspicion of
baseness. For when a right-thinking man hears this, he passes a judgment at once, forms
his opinion on the narrative, and gives his vote in accordance with the matter. This is
the way he will speak : "If he does not free from hurt everything beneath the sun, but
pursues those that do the harm into different countries, and if he takes care of some, but
has no heed of others, it is not safe to flee to this man and be saved. For he who is
saved spoils the condition of him who is not, while he who is not saved becomes the
accuser of him who is. Wherefore, according to my judgment, the record contained in this
narrative is a fiction."

23 Once more, if you regard it as not fiction, but bearing some relation to truth, there
is really plenty to laugh at for those who like to open their mouths. For come now, here
is a point we must carefully inquire into : how was it that so large a herd of swine was
being kept at that time in the land of Judsea, seeing that they were to the Jews from the
beginning the most unclean and hated form of beast? And, again, how were all those swine
choked, when it was a lake and not a deep sea ? It may be left to babes to make a decision
about all this. CHAPTER XI. The answer to the objection based on the incident of the swine
and the demons (Matt. viii. 31, 32 ; Mark v. 1, etc.). So, now that this saying is made
quite plain, let us examine the point at issue in another subject, namely the question of
the man possessed with the demons, and the swine choked in the sea, and the swineherds who
fled from the place.

24 Do not let it disturb you that Matthew speaks of two men possessed with demons, but
Mark of only one. For Matthew speaks of two demons, but does not say that two men were
possessed by them ;130 while Mark says there was one man, but many demons in him. For
there must have been two chief demons, to which Matthew refers, of a specially evil kind,
but other demons were assaulting the man along with them, or perhaps Matthew speaks of the
number of persons131 affected, when he says there were two men, but Mark indicates the
nature 132 that suffered, without regarding the number. And indeed the common speech of
educated men often follows this usage. For example, when the shepherd guards the flock, if
a man speaks in reference to nature, he says: "The shepherd carefully preserves the
beast." In saying this he does not refer to one beast, for they are many in number. But
since, although the beasts happen to be many, they possess one physical nature, he says
"beast" by virtue of that nature. But when he says, "The shepherd preserves the beasts,"
he speaks in virtue of their number. And there are other cases in which what is collective
is wont to be spoken of singly. For instance, "The barbarian met the king," instead of
"the barbarians," or "the barbarous tribe"; and "the king brought the soldier with him,"
instead of "the soldiers"; and one may find countless kindred expressions. So we must not
be unduly worried, if one says there were two demoniacs and the other one. For, as I have
said, the one showed the nature, indicating that it was human nature that was oppressed,
while the other referred to the person, showing that there happened to be, not one of
them, but two.133

25 We must now inquire how it was that the demons, though for a longtime they had
triumphed over reasoning creation with numberless torments, begged not to depart into the
abyss, when their nature was searched by the ray of Christ's Divinity. We must also seek a
reason for His yielding to their entreaty and suffering them to be sent into the swine as
they demanded. I imagine that the demons, being terribly overcome134 by the fire which
shone from the sight of the Saviour, fevered as they were by its warmth, strove to run to
the waters and assuage the burning which oppressed them. And since, as having an
incorporeal nature, they were unable to enter naked into the bathing-place of the waters,
they looked to the herd of swine as a kind of ladder, so that they might enter it by their
means and get rid of their burning heat.135 And the demons, in their malice, do not seek
the support of other beasts, but of those forbidden by the Mosaic law. They do this under
the pretence of honouring the letter of the ordinance which was being ignored by those who
inhabited Palestine at that time. But do not jump to the conclusion that the herd of swine
belonged to the Jews.

26 They were those of the Roman soldiers who had taken the cities of the East under the
Emperor, for what the Romans call a "settlement." 136 For as the Jews were under treaty
with the Romans, cohorts and companies of the Roman Power certainly dwelt in their
provinces. For since the days of Augustus who caused all the world to be. enrolled, and of
Tiberius, and still earlier times, the Jews were Roman subjects, and all their country was
tributary. Indeed, the Emperor simply appointed as king of Judaea Herod the son of
Antipater, the latter being the man who supported the temple of Apollo at Askelon. He also
sent out Pilate as governor and judge, who was himself a Greek, and the Romans had taken
over all the offices among the Jews. For a long time the yoke of slavery hung round their
necks, on account of their misdoings. Whence at that time there were herds of beasts
belonging to Roman owners, and Roman managers answerable to their masters looked after
their possessions. But all the same, the demons led the swine into the water, showing both
their hostility and their guardianship of the law, and being inflamed accordingly.

27 As for Mark's record that Christ asked what the demon's name was, as though He were
ignorant of it, it was not in ignorance of the loathsome creature that He inquires what he
is called, but in order that He might convict him from his own words, as a deserter from
the heavenly kingdom. So He asks "What is thy name ? and he answers "Legion. He did not
exist as such then, but he once was a legion, wielding the might of the kingdom above,
even as it is written, "Can I not now pray to my Father, and he will give me twelve
legions of angels ? (Matt. xxvi. 53). But that legion ran away, and was involved in the
evil of desertion, finding the man a ready hiding-place; a sorry legion, indeed, which
threw away its shield; not really a legion, but a bandit, stripping the earthly sphere and
plundering it, and casting into incurable sorrows those who are taken captive. It was
therefore in order that He might teach His hearers from what a ministry the legion had
fallen, that He said "What is thy name ? His object was not to learn it Himself, for He
knew, but that the bystanders might do so. For the demons, being greatly troubled,
resorted to the former naming of their rank, in order that they might remind their great
and kindly king, so to speak, of the goodwill of their former warfare, practically saying,
"We were once a legion; we were the soldiers of thine impartial might.

28 Remember that position which we once held, and have pity, and do not send us into the
abyss. We were thy legion, but now are wicked bandits. Once we served, but now we plunder.
Once we lived near thy palace; now we have come near to the parts beneath the earth. For
then we dwelt in a pure abode; now we are befouled by mire and dirt. We claim to receive a
worthy abode, in order that we may not be troublesome to those who belong to the Word. For
as we have incurred the penalty of an evil smell, we seek that which may gladden us 137 as
a vehicle for our evil smell. We entreat to depart into a herd of swine, since we have
justly been cast out of the land of eternity. We do not yearn to seize herds of sheep or
horses (for those beasts are clean and without pollution), but rather a throng of smelling
and disorderly swine, in order that we may give a lesson to the inhabitants by what is
done, and lay bare their own condition of foulness. For every one who is strong in mind
and strong in thought, will be afraid to imitate a way of living which is foul and like
the swine, perceiving that the demons drag such a one into the gulf of destruction. For
from our evil case he will learn by some means or other of the rout we have suffered, and
he will have no desire to obtain a like choice.

29 Therefore, in order that we may be a living memorial, a great example, and a general
warning, grant us the swine that they may guide us as strangers to the sea, in order that
all may learn that we have not the power to control even small things, unless we are
commanded and receive orders from the divine Spirit. The result will be that henceforth
the whole world will look down on us, on the ground that we had not even authority over
swine, and not even the herds in the country which were removed from it fell under our
sway. I think it was for the sake of wise action such as this that the Saviour did not
send the demons into the abyss, but into a herd of swine, and through them into the sea.
He was doing good in each thing, and giving right instruction, making manifest to men both
the means of punishing the demons, and the warning not to desire the life of any unclean
beasts. For if He had sent them into the abyss, as you suggest, it would not have been
plain to them all, because it would not have been observed; it would have been left in
doubt as not being perceptible, and a matter of suspicion as not being in bodily form.

30 For any one might have suspected that they refused to obey Christ and did not depart
into the abyss, but went to men who lived over the borders not far away, and wrought
mischief that was worse still through running away. But as it took place, this was not so;
but it became quite plain and obvious to all, through the destruction of the swine, that
the demons left their human abode and went into the sea. Take this as a sufficient answer
with regard to this story. 31 CHAPTER V. Objection based on the saying about the camel
going through the eye of a needle (Matt. xix. 24, etc.). Let us examine another saying
even more baffling than these, when He says, "It is easier for a camel to go through a
needle,138 than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven." If it be indeed the
case that any one who is rich is not brought into the so-called kingdom of heaven though
he have kept himself from the sins of life, such as murder, theft, adultery, cheating,
impious oaths, body-snatching, and the wickedness of sacrilege, of what use is just
dealing to righteous men, if they happen to be rich ? And what harm is there for poor men
in doing every unholy deed of baseness ? For it is not virtue that takes a man up to
heaven, but lack of possessions. For if his wealth shuts out the rich man from heaven, by
way of contrast his poverty brings a poor man into it. And so it becomes lawful, when a
man has learnt this lesson, to pay no regard to virtue, but without let or hindrance to
cling to poverty alone, and the things that are most base. This follows from poverty being
able to save the poor man, while riches shut out the rich man from the undefiled abode.

32 Wherefore it seems to me that these cannot be the words of Christ, if indeed He handed
down the rule of truth, but of some poor men who wished, as a result of such vain talking,
to deprive the rich of their substance. At any rate, no longer ago than yesterday, reading
these words to women of noble birth, "Sell what thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou
shalt have treasure in heaven," they persuaded them to distribute to poor men all the
substance and possession which they had, and, themselves entering into a state of want, to
gather by begging, turning from a position of freedom to unseemly asking, and from
prosperity to a pitiable character, and in the end, being compelled to go to the houses of
the rich (which is the first thing, or rather the last thing, in disgrace and misfortune),
and thus to lose their own belongings under the pretext of godliness, and to covet those
of others under the force of want.

33 Accordingly, it seems to me that these are the words of some woman in distress. CHAPTER
XII. Answer to the objection based on the saying about the camel going through the eye of
a needle (Matt. xix. 24, etc.). [First study the narrative of the rich man coming with his
depraved ideas. Christ wished to lead him up through his riches to what was higher.] It
was not the case, as you declare, that his riches shut him out from the kingdom; on the
contrary, they would bring him in, if he were sober and managed them well. For as a
soldier, when he uses his armour skilfully and well, becomes famous through it, and noble
and conspicuous, and through it has an honoured entry to the king and makes a show within
his palace; and again through it he becomes notable for an archer's powers, and has a
peaceful time in the cities; but if he puts it on badly, and does not wear it as he ought,
he becomes subject through it to capture by every foe, and through it he is cast out of
the precincts as a traitor, and the spoil is taken off by the enemy; while through it he
is seen to be unpurified, and so is set aside, and is punished by being cut off from life.
And no one in all this blames the armour, but the man who did not use it rightly. No one,
when he sees a man glittering in a suit of armour, says that it is this that causes his
glory, but the zeal of him that uses the weapons.

34 [And it is just so with the man of letters, the statuary, etc.] And when a man has
wealth and manages it well, he becomes a partaker of the heavenly kingdom, but when he
abuses it, he is shut out from it, and does not suffer this experience as a result of the
wealth, but as a reasonable result of his own baseness. Nor indeed is a man who improperly
persists in his poverty praiseworthy on account of it. For many are poor, and they are not
all praiseworthy, but each is properly so on account of his own experience. It is not his
wealth that harms the rich man, but his unseemly course of life shows the wealth to be
useless and unbeneficial; neither does his poverty lead the poor man up to heaven, but his
bent of mind conduces to make his poverty profitable to his soul. For in rich and poor
alike it is the nature of upright conduct and the disposition towards it that give lustre
to his right action.

35 [Just as the same medicine will affect various people differently, so both riches and
poverty may make a man either good or bad.] But in any case no one is put to shame in the
life eternal who has lost his wealth through love of the kingdom of heaven, nor has he
missed the mark through falling from his own possessions. For by giving what he has, he
has received what he had not. By setting aside the earthly burdens which are grievous to
be borne, he has received a fame which is light and unburdensome. [Let me give you one
instance out of many of the way that earthly riches may lead a man up to the heavenly.
Job, as a rich man, fed the hungry and clothed the naked, and when the time came, he
welcomed poverty aright, and looked on worms as goodly pearls. His riches always included
virtue, and his poverty the love of his Maker.]

36 You must not therefore think that the Lord was making an absolute pronouncement when He
said : "It is easier for a camel to go through a needle139 than for a rich man to enter
into the kingdom of heaven." For many are found within the kingdom who have become rich.
And yet with good cause He casts 140 the rich man outside heaven, saying: " Hardly shall
they that have riches enter into the kingdom of heaven." Those who have them and do not
impart them, and give no share to those who have none, but confine their wealth to their
sole and personal enjoyment of life, and never have friendly intercourse with poor men,
neither giving comfort to pitiable poverty nor alleviating the wants of those who are in
trouble; those who turn their converse away from them that deserve mercy, and avoid the
griefs of the despised as if they were a pollution---these men are strangers to the
kingdom of heaven.

37 No one comes within sight of a court of law without an advocate,141 no one ascends the
judgment-seat who bears the suspicion of an accusation, no one appears before a king who
is implicated in any form of complaint ;142 no one departs to a feast who is soiled and
stained, no one introduces feasting along with burdens, no one enters a palace who bears
indications of a tyrant's instincts. It is as advocates of the rich that the poor exist;
without them wealth is unprofitable in the sight of God. Marks of wickedness exist, and a
man must cast these away and show himself free. Their existence betokens the suspicion of
accusations, and the better way is to put this out of the way by one's own management, and
openly serve the Divine. The accompaniments of abundance manifest themselves as spots and
blemishes in men, and it is right thus to disperse these by better reasoning, and to press
in to the blessed feast.143 The guarding of possessions is a heavy burden, and it is
righteous to shake off the burden and to march unencumbered to the assembly above.144
Possessions turn into accusations of covetousness, and it is profitable to cast them away
quickly, and to ride into the kingdom of heaven apart from them, if indeed a man truly
believes that a kingdom of holy ones does exist in heaven. But if he does not believe it,
why does he bother himself at all in arguing at random without faith ?

38 CHAPTER VI. Objection based on the saying: "And in the fourth watch of the night he
cometh to them walking on the sea " (Matt. xiv. 25; Mark vi. 48, etc.). Come, let us
unfold for you another saying from the Gospel which is absurdly written without any
credibility, and has a still more absurd narrative attached to it. It was when Jesus,
after sending on the disciples to cross the sea after a feast, Himself came upon them at
the fourth145 watch of the night when they were terribly troubled by the surging of the
storm, for they were toiling all night against the force of the waves. 39 Now the fourth
watch is the tenth hour of the night, after which three further hours are left. But those
who relate the truth about that locality say that there is not a sea there, but a small
lake coming from a river under the hill in the country of Galilee, beside the city of
Tiberias; this is easy for small boats to sail across in not more than two hours, nor can
it admit of either wave or storm. So Mark goes very wide of the truth when he very
absurdly gives the fabulous record that, when nine hours of the night had passed, Jesus
proceeded at the tenth, namely the fourth watch of the night, and found the disciples
sailing on the pond. Then he calls it a sea, and not merely that, but a stormy sea, and a
terribly angry one, causing them fear with the tossing of the waves. He does this in order
that he may thereupon introduce Christ as working some mighty miracle in having caused a
great and fearful storm to cease, and saved the disciples in their danger from the deep,
and from the sea. From such childish records we know the Gospel to be a sort of cunningly
woven curtain.146 Wherefore we investigate each point the more carefully.

40 CHAPTER XIII. Answer to the objection based on the saying: "And in the fourth watch of
the night he cometh to them walking on the sea " (Matt. xiv. 25 ; Mark vi. 48, etc.).
[With regard to the "fourth watch," perhaps it is to be reckoned so as to mean the fourth
"hour" of the night.147 With regard to the use of the word "sea," note three things:
First, the lake was certainly very like a sea if there were fishing-boats on it. Secondly,
any gathering of waters may receive the generic name of "sea." Thirdly, apart from
grammatical considerations, it is enough for us that the inspired author of Genesis tells
us concerning the Creator Himself that "the gathering together of the waters He called
seas." The inner meaning of the incident must not be overlooked. Having just performed a
miracle which showed His dominion over bread and the wilderness, Christ now proves to men
by another miracle His dominion over water and the sea. The very elements join in the
proof. The unwonted force of the storm reflects what nature feels at the fact that men
should fail to recognise the creative Word. And the prophecy was thus fulfilled concerning
Him who "walketh upon the sea as upon a foundation."

41 He prays to God, and then, after terrifying them through His Godhead, He pities them
through His manhood. "It is I" brings them light after cloud, for He means "I who called
you to be fishers of men, and fed the five thousand." Peter's faith wavers when he says,
"If thou art such, bid me come to thee." When Christ says "Come," He means "Come to
faith," for if Peter had actually been able to walk on the sea it would have falsified the
above prophecy by making it apply to more people than one. Add to this his presumption and
want of faith in saying "if," and his failure is explained. Christ saved him just as his
tongue was making him sink (like a ship through its broken rudder), and taught him not to
imitate the devil in the wilderness by saying " If thou art." So Christ says, "Come and
learn. Thou needest this fourth watch even more, than the ship. The darkness, the winds
and the waves are all in thy lack of faith and thy presumption. The four constituents
which should be blended in thy body are belied by thy doubting speech." Great, indeed, was
the fall of this leading Apostle. Two shipwrecks were his--- of the body and of the soul.

42 It was rightly "in the fourth watch " that Christ came to his help, for there were four
elements that raged against them, namely, impenetrable atmosphere, rushing wind, moonless
night, and roaring sea. But there is a yet deeper allegory underlying the story. The sea
denotes the brine and bitterness of existence; the night is human life; the boat is the
world; those who sailed all night are the human race; the contrary wind is the devil's
opposition; the fourth watch is the Saviour's coming. Note concerning this last point,
that, as there are four watches in the literal night, so there are in human life. In the
first watch the patriarchs helped life by their light; in the second, the law guided the
boat of the world; in the third, the prophets contended for those human sailors; and in
the fourth, Christ checked their fear and their foes, and ended the night by the light of
His love for men. So when S. Paul says, "The night is far spent," etc., he refers to this
dawn of the knowledge of God through Christianity.

43 Such an interpretation is supported by the passage about Elijah. His translation in a
chariot of fire was foretold to him in the vision that he had in Horeb (1 Kings xix. 11),
where the wind signifies the mighty word of the patriarchs, the earthquake is the Mosaic
law, the fire is the prophets, and either the voice of thin air148 is Gabriel's message,
or perhaps the thin air is the body of Christ, and the voice is the Word speaking within
it.] CHAPTER VII. Objection based on the sayings : "The poor ye have always, but me ye
have not always" (Matt, xxvi; 11, etc.), and "I will be with you until the end of the
world " (Matt, xxviii. 20). Moreover, as we have found another inconsequent little
utterance spoken by Christ to His disciples, we have decided not to remain silent about
this either. It is where He says, "The poor ye have always, but me ye have not always."
The reason for this statement is as follows : A certain woman brought an alabaster box of
ointment and poured it on His head. And when they saw it, and complained of the
unseasonableness of the action, He said, "Why do ye trouble the woman ? She hath wrought a
good work on me. The poor ye have always, but me ye have not always." For they raised no
small murmuring, that the ointment was not rather sold for a great price, and given to the
poor for expenditure on their hunger. Apparently as the result of this inopportune
conversation, He uttered this nonsensical saying, declaring that He was not always with
them, although elsewhere He confidently affirmed and said to them, "I shall be with you
until the end of the world"149 (Matt, xxviii. 20). But when He was disturbed about the
ointment, He denied that He was always with them.

44 CHAPTER XIV. Answer to the objection based on the sayings : " Me ye have not always "
(Matt. xxvi. 11, etc.), and "I will be with you always until the end of the world " (Matt,
xxviii. 20). [The difference may be explained by the fact that these statements were made
at different times, and between them a change took place in the speaker Himself. It was
before the Passion that He said they would not have Him always, seeing He was about to
die. But after the Passion, He had overcome death and the laws of the body, and made man
to be God.150 So, speaking as God, He tells them His power is not circumscribed by time
and space, but is present always and everywhere. After the Passion He passed through
everything and sealed it as His own, heaven and earth and things under the earth. This was
true in the Passion also, as well as after it, as the following considerations will
show:---

45 During the Passion itself, of course it was as God that He took the thief to His own
Paradise, and thus showed that He was not circumscribed. How altogether vile are those151
who twist His words into a mere promise for the future, by punctuating, "Verily I say unto
thee to-day, thou shalt be with me in Paradise." For this is to circumscribe Him at the
time of His death. But if it was He who rent the earth, darkened the sun, and brought up
the dead, why could He not take the thief to Paradise? Again, if the earthly sun shines
everywhere, why not the Heavenly ? So, when on the cross He was also everywhere, in
Paradise, and in the Father. Even man passes the limits of space when he is in his dreams;
can we suppose less of Christ when on the cross ? Otherwise what were the use of the cross
? The faithful got their requests and were healed during the ministry. Was there no
guarantee to the faithful thief at the moment which was the very climax and sum of all
Redemption?

46 The explanation of those scoundrels is quite untenable. They say He had power as God,
but not yet as man, to take the thief to Paradise. Is such a distinction possible? Can you
ask whether the faithful thief believed on Him as Divine or as only human? Such division
is impossible, even in a man's faith. He is the same Lord, under many names; it matters
not by which He is invoked, as Christ, or Jesus, or the Only begotten 152 of God; the
effect of them all is identical. Just as the smell of some herbal medicine would fill a
whole house when placed in one part of it, so, as the healing medicine of Christ's body
hung upon the cross, the odour of His Godhead spread through the whole house of the wide
world. Returning to the words of the objection, we conclude that after the Resurrection
Jesus is circumscribed by nothing. In whatever part of the world the faithful may cry, He
is there before they call Him. No separation of His Body is possible; it cannot be "
unloosed," like the "latchet" the Baptist spoke of. Hence we assert that Christ both led
the thief to Paradise, was present with the Apostles, and is not separated from the
faithful until the end of the world.

47 But before the Passion, He could truthfully say, "Me ye have not always," because of
the bodily separation which was about to come through His death.153 On the occasion when
Christ spoke as above about the poor, the desire that the ointment should be for the poor,
and not for the anointing of Him who for us became poor, originated with Judas, who valued
the earthly ointment at three hundred pieces of silver, but in his madness sold the
heavenly Ointment, which was emptied on the earth, at only thirty. But Judas must not
occupy the stage; he must give way to matters more important. Pray produce another
objection, as this argument is most useful to us.] CHAPTER XV. Objection based on the
saying : " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, ye have no life
in yourselves" (John vi. 54). The Greek.154

48 But he, with a smile on his face, made reply in a fresh attack on us, saying: You are
like the more audacious among those who run in a race, and proclaim their victory until
the contest comes, challenging many to run in the course; for you have taken up the same
attitude, in your desire to bring in another inquiry from the starting-point, as one might
say. Speak to us therefore, my friend, beginning from the following point:--- 49 That
saying of the Teacher is a far-famed one, which says, "Except ye eat my flesh and drink my
blood, ye have no life in yourselves." Truly this saying is not merely beast-like and
absurd, but is more absurd than any absurdity, and more beast-like than any fashion of a
beast, that a man should taste human flesh, and drink the blood of members of the same
tribe and race, and that by doing this he should have eternal life. For, tell, me, if you
do this, what excess of savagery do you introduce into life? Rumour does not record---I do
not say, this action, but even the mention of this strange and novel deed of impiety. The
phantoms of the Furies never revealed this to those who lived in strange ways, nor would
the Potidasans have accepted it unless they had been reduced by a savage hunger. Once the
banquet of Thyestes became such, owing to a sister's grief, and the Thracian Tereus took
his fill of such food unwillingly. Harpagus was deceived by Astyages when he feasted on
the flesh of his dearest, and it was against their desire that all these underwent such a
pollution. But no one living in a state of peace prepared such a table in his life; no one
learnt from a teacher any knowledge so foul. If you look up Scythia in the records, and go
through the Macrobian Ethiopians,155 and if you career through the ocean girdle round
about, you will find men who eat, live, and devour roots; you will hear of men who eat
reptiles and feed on mice, but they refrain altogether from human flesh.

50 What then does this saying mean? [Even if there is a mystical meaning hidden in it, yet
that does not pardon the outward significance, which places men lower than the beasts. Men
have made up strange tales, but nothing so pernicious as this, with which to gull the
simple.] Wherefore it seems to me that neither Mark nor Luke nor even Matthew recorded
this, because they regarded the saying as not a comely one, but strange and discordant,
and far removed from civilised life. Even you yourself could scarcely be pleased at
reading it, and far less any man who has had the advantage of a liberal education. CHAPTER
XXIII. Answer to the objection based on the saying : "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son
of man and drink his blood, ye have no life in yourselves" (John vi. 54). The
Christian.156 When the doctrine of godliness had thus been battered, and the foundation of
the Christian bulwarks was almost shaken, we sought for the support of abundant arguments.
Then we set up a fortified tower, so to speak, against the enemy, and trusting in this, we
remained un-wounded, although we had to face many wordy arrows, and we bore many an
emptied quiver of cunning sophistry. And indeed when he who possessed his full armour at
length began to grow weary from directing his bow against us with its sharpened darts and
their rushing noise, we quietly directed our array against him and sharpened our weapons.
We made our first letting-go, so to speak, by speaking to him and those with him about the
flesh of Christ, showing that it was not strange or horrible when the Saviour said :
"Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood, ye have no life."

51 Consider, I pray you, and let us speak of the new-born child, and the babe that is
brought forth on leaving its dark and humid abode. Except it eats the flesh and drinks the
blood of its mother, it has no life, nor takes its place among men, but departs into the
darkness of death. But if it receives a share of those natural springs and has abundant
enjoyment of that kindred flesh, it is brought subsequently to full growth and becomes
worthy of a better food and position, being enrolled among men, receiving its share of
education and learning the marks of a noble citizenship. Later it sometimes takes its
place among men who are great and famous, gaining experience as a general or an admiral or
in many a council-chamber. And the reason of all these great blessings is the eating of
the flesh and drinking of the blood of the mother who bore it.

52 [It is true that the nourishment comes in the form of milk, but milk is really the same
as blood; it is only its proximity to the air that gives it its lighter colour. Even so
frost will make water white, without changing its nature. Just as the Creator makes the
foul waters of the abyss trickle out in a clear fountain, so do a woman's breasts, by an
elaborate mechanism, gather blood from the veins, and send it forth in a palatable form.]
53 If then even boys tell us these things with persuasion as coming from physiologists,
and learn the real truth about such matters (and you value these things highly as well as
we), what is there that seems to you disturbing if the Gospel saying of Christ may be set
beside them ? For what was there horrible or strange in His teaching (as you seem to
think), when He said : "Except ye eat my flesh and drink my blood, ye have no life in you"
? For tell me, whereby is that nourished which is coming to the birth ? Is it not by the
blood of her that bears it, and the flesh, as has been demonstrated? This is through the
cunning discovery of persuasive words, and yet it is by the same rule of truth. For if
indeed Christ gave power to as many as received Him to become children of God, bringing
them to their birth by some mystic word and then wrapping them in divine swaddling-clothes
which cannot be described, pray tell me, whence will these children of God live and be
nourished when they are just born ? Will it not certainly be by tasting the mystic flesh
and drinking the mystic blood of her that bore them ? And it is none other than the wisdom
of God that is constituted their mother, for she prepared her own table for her own
children, and mingled her own wine for her own offspring, pouring forth richly from the
two Testaments as it were from two breasts. It is indeed she who nourishes her recent
offspring with her own flesh and blood, makes them comrades and renders them disciples of
the heavenly kingdom, and then enrols them in the assembly of the Angels on high, bringing
them into their pure council chamber, and, filling them with immortality and all
blessedness, makes them like unto the Father, giving to them eternal life.

54 Now the flesh and blood of Christ, or of Wisdom (for Christ and Wisdom are the same),
are the words of the Old and New Testaments spoken with allegorical meaning, which men
must devour with care and digest by calling them to mind with the understanding, and win
from them not temporal but eternal life. Thus did Jeremiah eat when he received the words
from the hand of Wisdom, and by eating he had life; thus did Ezekiel feel sweetness when
he ate the roll of the words (Ezek. iii. 3), and the bitterness of this present life was
cast away. Thus did the saints one by one, once long ago, and again and again, by eating
the flesh and drinking the blood of Wisdom, that is, by receiving in themselves the
knowledge and revelation of her, live for aye with a life that will never cease. It was
not only to the disciples that He gave His own flesh to eat and likewise His own blood to
drink (for He would not have done right in thus offering the life eternal to some at a
certain season, but not supplying it to others); but it was to all men alike in whom was
holiness and the spirit of prophecy, that He gave allegorically this supply of food.

55 But at the end of the times He gave to the Apostles bread and a cup, and said, "This is
my body and my blood. And in order that I may unfold the tale more clearly, and make plain
the question of the passage, I will reveal to you the physiological side of eating (if
indeed you are ready to put aside your preconceived views), for you may apprehend the
mystery by that means. How then do we state the case ? It is from the earth that we men
have all come into being in our bodies, and it is by eating, in a certain sense, not the
earth but its flesh, and drinking its blood, that we are prevented from perishing. For the
dry and wet products of the earth are its flesh and blood. We live by eating and drinking
of these to our full satisfaction, but doing no harm to the earth when we use up its flesh
and blood. For as we gladly gather the corn and the wine from it, we enjoy ourselves by
living on it. And now, for the rest, lend me your ear with regard to the dispensation of
the mystery, and turn your understanding to the hearing of it. How shall we express it
then? In the beginning the Only Begotten Son created the earth, and from the earth He took
man and wrought him, and from man He took His body and became incarnate.

56 If therefore the body signifies the earth when simply stated,157 and the earth is
Christ's creation through His operative word, as being truly the result of His own making,
and from this earth were given in later time both corn and 158 wine and also the body of
man, and moreover it was this body that Christ took upon Him, it was natural that when He
took the bread and the cup, He said, "This is my body and my blood. It is no mere symbol
of body nor symbol of blood, as some have protested in the hardness of their mind, but in
very truth the body and blood of Christ, since the body is from the earth, and the bread
and wine are from the earth likewise. How is it then that no one else dared to say, "My
flesh is food and my blood is drink" (John vi. 55) ? It is because no one else has been
made manifest as the maker and creator of the earth, nor is it the individual creation and
handiwork of any one else, but it is the peculiar work of the Son of God alone. It is for
this reason that He likewise said, "this is Mine, for the creation of the earth belongs to
Me and none other. For all men have come into being by receiving their body from Me after
the earth, but I, before the earth was, wrought it, receiving it from no one.

57 And I became incarnate by taking a body from it, or from what was My creation; for
certainly it is from Myself that I offer you My bounty; for it is from the earth that the
bread is ordained as a food for you, and the earth is of My manufacture. It is from the
earth likewise that the body comes, and so it is My mingling. Therefore I give the bread
and the cup, having sealed it as a result of the union wherein I the Holy One was linked
with that which is earthly, declaring that this is my flesh and blood." 58 If it were
Abraham, or any other righteous man, who had said, "My flesh is meat and my blood is
drink," it would have been a great and impudent lie, for he would have been offering what
was another's as if it were his own, and he would have been punished greatly for
recklessly giving the bread and the cup to any and saying, "This is my body, and this is
my blood." For it is not his, but belongs to the One who supplied it. Neither would the
things eaten impart life to them who ate, as not having the living Word in combination
with them. But the earthly body which is named the body of God led those who ate into life
eternal, and Christ gave indeed His own body and blood to those who believe, by inserting
the life-giving medicine of His Godhead. Therefore when He spoke of the flesh as "bread
and the blood as wine, He taught us plainly that the body is from the earth and the blood
likewise, and that both possess the same essence.

59 But the common bread which is tilled on the earth, even though it be the flesh of the
earth, has no promise that it contains eternal life, but it only grants those who eat it a
temporary satisfaction, and soon vanishes, as being without share of divine spirit. But
the bread that is tilled in the blessed land of Christ, being joined with the power of the
Holy Spirit, at one taste gives a man immortality. For the mystic bread that hath
inseparably acquired the Saviour's Name,159 bestowed upon His body and His blood, joins
him who eats it to the body of Christ, and makes him a member of the Saviour. For just as
the letter delta in the alphabet takes the force of the teacher and conveys it to him who
is taught, and by its means leads him up to the teacher by putting him in touch with him,
even so the body, that is to say, the bread, and the blood, which is the same as the wine,
drawing the immortality of the immaculate Godhead, gives thereof to him that shares it,
and by its means leads him up to the Creator's pure abode itself.

60 We conclude then that the Saviour's flesh is not wasted, neither is His blood used up
by being drunk, but while he that eats it arrives at an increase of heavenly powers, that
which is eaten is not exhausted, since it is akin to the nature which is inexhaustible,
and cannot be divided from it. Accept then, if you please, this mighty exposition of a
mighty question. CHAPTER XVI. Objection based on the saying: " If they shall drink any
deadly thing, it shall not hurt them" (Mark xvi. 18). Again, consider in detail that other
passage, where He says, "Such signs shall follow them that believe: they shall lay hands
upon sick folk, and they shall recover, and if they drink any deadly drug,160 it shall in
no wise hurt them." So the right thing would be for those selected for the priesthood, and
particularly those who lay claim to the episcopate or presidency, to make use of this form
of test. The deadly drug should be set before them in order that the man who received no
harm from the drinking of it might be given precedence of the rest. And if they are not
bold enough to accept this sort of test, they ought to confess that they do not believe in
the things Jesus said. For if it is a peculiarity of the faith to overcome the evil of a
poison and to remove the pain of a sick man, the believer who does not do these things
either has not become a genuine believer, or else, though his belief is genuine, the thing
that he believes in is not potent but feeble.

61 CHAPTER XXIV. Answer to the objection based on the saying: "If they shall drink any
deadly thing, it shall not hurt them" (Mark xvi. 18). [We must not take the words about
the "sickness" and the "deadly drug" in too literal a sense. Otherwise we shall find them
contradicted by two facts. First, those who are unbelievers may likewise recover from
deadly drugs, so that the recovery need not consist in whether men are believers or not,
but in the power of the drug. Secondly, many unbelievers run away at the first sign of
sickness, but we must not therefore argue that those who stay to tend the sick are
believers in consequence. Such literal and manward tests will not do, or we shall have
people boasting of their faith simply because they have some skill in nursing. So the
"deadly drug" must be taken in a less literal sense, and this "death" is like that wherein
S. Paul says, "We are buried with Him in baptism." Here there is a "deadly drug" which
actually saves men from the tyranny of sin. For to drink this in faith means the death of
the savage nature within, without any harm being received. So that which harms unbelievers
does not harm the faithful. We may illustrate this by a stepping-stone, which may be
either a help or a stumbling-block; or by the blessing on the world which came from the
fall of the Jews (Romans x.); or by the Cross, which causes both light and darkness.

62 "Laying hands on the sick" must have a similar spiritual explanation. Their "hands" are
their practical energies, and the "sick" are changes in the seasons, which are often sick
through such things as storms, or want of rain.] 63 Certainly Polycarp161 is an example of
this, for while he exercised the office of bishop at Smyrna, the season of standing crops
was greatly sick, when the heaven was not concealed by the smallest cloud, and poured down
from the sky a burning heat, scorching to a great degree the vast tracts of land that lay
beneath it; and it dried up the moisture of the foliage, and the trouble caused no little
difficulty to men. Then that great man of God came, and when he saw the inhabitants thus
afflicted, he in a sense laid his hands by means of prayer upon the burnt-up season, and
suddenly made all things to be well. And later, when the land was drowned with unlimited
rain, and the dwellers in it were in a pitiable state of distress, this same Polycarp
stretched his hands to the air and dispelled the calamity, by healing that which was
hateful to them. And indeed, before he became bishop, when he was managing a widow's
house,162 wheresoever he laid on his hands in faith, all things were well. And why should
I stay to speak of the blessings conferred on men by Irenaeus of Lugdunum, or Fabian of
Rome, or Cyprian of Carthage ? Passing them by, I will say something about men of to-day.
How many, by stretching forth their hands in prayer to the heavenly Ruler, for the
invisible diseases of suffering which press grievously upon the souls of men, have healed
the afflicted invisibly in ways we know not?

64 How many by the laying on of their hands have caused to be well those catechumens who
were in their former fever of transgression or disease, raising them to the new blessing
of health through the divine and mystical leaven?163 For the responsibility that is laid
upon the faithful is not so much zeal in driving away the sufferings of the body (for he
knows164 that these things train a man, rather than overthrow the government of his soul),
as in driving away, by counsel and action profitable to the soul, those things which are
wont to harm the understanding by enslaving the judgment of the reason. 65 Wherefore, as
at least it seems to me, the answer on this point is such as to persuade those who hear
it. CHAPTER XVII. Objection based on the saying about faith removing mountains (Matt.
xvii. 20). Look at a similar saying,165 which is naturally suggested by it, "If ye have
faith as a grain of mustard seed, verily I say unto you, ye shall say to this mountain, Be
thou removed and be thou cast into the sea, and it shall not be impossible for you."1 It
is obvious therefore that any one who is unable to remove a mountain in accordance with
this bidding, is not worthy to be reckoned one of the family of the faithful. So you are
plainly refuted, for not only are the rest of Christians not reckoned among the faithful,
but not even are any of your bishops or priests worthy of this saying.

66 CHAPTER XXV. Answer to the objection based on the saying about faith removing mountains
(Matt, xvii. 19). [It is the custom of teachers only to enjoin on their pupils what they
do themselves. But Christ never removed any mountain in Palestine, nor would there be any
point in removing the hills He had founded for ever. Even if the believer had the power to
do so, he would be prevented by the words of Scripture (Ps. xcii. 1), "He made fast the
world, which shall not be shaken." So there must be some other meaning in the words. The
Apostles' faith was great enough to have the world put under their power, and so much
greater was it than a mere mustard seed, that they could reduce cities thereby. They did
not move literal mountains, such as Parnassus, or Ida, or Gargarus, or Taurus, or
Bosphorus, or Sinai. But they rolled many metaphorical mountains away by driving away the
demons which pressed upon men. To such mountains Jeremiah's words refer (Jer. li. 24), "I
am against thee, O mountain, saith the Lord, which destroyest all the earth."

67 This explanation is confirmed by the context. Christ had just come down from the
literal mountain and cast the demon from the boy who was called lunatic, and the words we
are discussing were added when He told His disciples that it was because of their unbelief
that they themselves had been unable to free the boy from the demon. So when He says "To
this mountain," He means "That which has just been removed by Me from the afflicted boy."
Had He simply said "a mountain" it might have meant a literal one, but as He said "this
mountain," He showed that He was speaking of the demon, as being something which exalts
itself against the knowledge of God. Already He had cast many such mountains into the sea
from their human habitations, when He drove those who were called legion along with the
swine into the lake. In both places you must take the words as allegorical.]

68 CHAPTER XVIII. Objection based on the saying: " Cast thyself down" (Matt. iv. 6-7).
Come now, let us here mention another saying to you. Why is it that when the tempter tells
Jesus "Cast thyself down from the temple,",166 He does not do it, but says to him, "Thou
shalt not tempt the Lord thy God," whereby it seems to me that He spoke in fear of the
danger from the fall? For if, as you declare, He not only did various other miracles, but
even raised up dead men by His word alone, He ought to have shown forthwith that He was
capable of delivering others from danger by hurling Himself down from the height, and not
receiving any bodily harm thereby. And the more so, because there is a passage of
Scripture somewhere which says with regard to Him, "In their hands they shall bear thee
up, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone." So the really fair thing to do, was to
demonstrate to those who were present in the temple that He was God's Son, and was able to
deliver from danger both Himself and those who were His.

69 CHAPTER XXVI. Answer to the objection based on the saying : " Cast thyself down "
(Matt. iv. 6-7). [Why did not Christ cast Himself down? Because it was the devil who told
Him to, and thus to make peace with the adversary at the outset by taking his advice, is
to give up the struggle. The advantage of casting Himself down was more than
counterbalanced by this. Even to fulfil the words of prophecy, if it were at the immediate
prompting of the devil, would be to act in concert and therefore in friendliness with him.
The question whether He should fulfil prophecy and obey the devil or not, is certainly a
dilemma. But even if it were good in itself to do so, what follows makes it plain that it
would have led to evil. For the devil was leading up to his final request, "Fall down and
worship me." The other two requests were apparently harmless, but, had Christ yielded
twice to his persuasion, it would have inclined Him to yield in the third case also. He
sees the trick, and parries Belial's darts.

70 Certainly the prophecy referred to the Saviour, but it was a weapon which the devil had
put in his own quiver, and therefore a piece of armour which Christ refused to use.]
CHAPTER XIX.167 Objection based on Christ's saying to Peter: " Get thee behind me, Satan"
(Matt. xvi. 23). 71 It is only natural that there is much that is unseemly in all this
long-winded talk thus poured out. The words, one might say, provoke a battle of
inconsistency against each other. How168 would some man in the street be inclined to
explain that Gospel saying, which Jesus addresses to Peter when He says, "Get thee behind
me, Satan, thou art an offence unto me, for thou mindest not the things that be of God,
but the things that be of men" (Matt. xvi. 23), and then in another place, "Thou art
Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and I will give to thee the keys of the
kingdom of heaven" ? For if He so condemned Peter as to call him Satan, and thought of him
as cast behind Him, and an offence, and one who had received no thought of what was divine
in his mind; and if He so rejected him as having committed mortal sin, that He was not
prepared to have him in His sight any more, but thrust him behind Him into the throng of
the outcast and vanished; how is it right to find this sentence of exclusion against the
leader and "chief of the disciples?

72 At any rate, if any one who is in his sober senses ruminates over this, and then hears
Christ say (as though He had forgotten the words He had uttered169 against Peter), " Thou
art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church," and " To thee I will give the keys
of the kingdom of heaven,"--- will he not laugh aloud till he nearly bursts his mouth ?
Will he not open it wide as he might from his seat170 in the theatre ? Will he not speak
with a sneer and hiss loudly? Will he not cry aloud to those who are near him ? Either
when He called Peter Satan He was drunk and overcome with wine, and He spoke as though in
a fit; or else, when He gave this same disciple the keys of the kingdom of heaven, He was
painting dreams, in the imagination of His sleep. For pray how was Peter able to support
the foundation of the Church, seeing that thousands of times he was readily shaken from
his judgment ? What sort of firm reasoning can be detected in him, or where did he show
any unshaken mental power, seeing that, though he heard what Jesus had said to him, he was
terribly frightened because of a sorry maidservant, and three times foreswore himself,
although no great necessity was laid upon him ?

73 We conclude then that, if He was right in taking him up and calling him Satan, as
having failed of the very essence of godliness, He was inconsistent, as though not knowing
what He had done, in giving him the authority of leadership. 74 CHAPTER XX.171 Objection
based on Christ's words to S. Peter about forgiving "seventy times seven " (Matt, xviii.
22). It is also plain that Peter is condemned of many falls, from the statement in that
passage where Jesus said to him, "I say not unto thee until seven times, but until seventy
times seven shalt thou forgive the sin of him that does wrong." But though he received
this commandment and injunction, he cut off the ear of the high-priest's servant who had
done no wrong, and did him harm although he had not sinned at all. For how did he sin, if
he went at the command of his master to the attack which was then made on Christ ? CHAPTER
XXVII. Answer to the objection based on Christ's saying to S. Peter: "Get thee behind me,
Satan " (Matt. xvi. 23). Now we must examine the objections about Peter. For truly they
need testing and much explanation. Verily the foundation of the Apostles has been shaken
by so great a clamour; the very apex of the gospel story has been obscured by such a cloud
of unseemliness.172 If Peter has been called by Christ an offence, and Satan, and a cause
of stumbling; if Peter is convicted of having sinned in ways that cannot be forgiven, the
whole band of the Apostles is attacked, and the roots of the faith are all but plucked up.
It is right therefore to see the time and the place of this saying, in order that we may
judge the matter and take hold of what it means.

75 [The blessing on Peter was an answer to his words at Caesarea Philippi: "Thou art the
Christ, the Son of the living God." Christ sees that he has not received this truth from
"flesh and blood," nor even from angels, but as a direct revelation from the Father
Himself.] "Wherefore," he says, "receive a surname worthy of this grace, and be thou Peter
(Rock-man),173 showing to all the world a rock which is invincible and unshakeable, since
the knowledge and the reasoning which thou possessest cannot be moved, in that thou hast
borne witness this day to the fact that the blessed Essence cannot be shaken." It was
likely that the evil beast of deceit (the devil), hearing these words, and the witness
which Peter gave to the Saviour, cunningly worked with all manner of zeal so as to strip
Peter of his merit, and to overthrow the witness of Christ by the trickery of guile, and
to alter the dispensation of the Passion. For he knew, he clearly knew that the Passion of
Christ was a release from the tyranny of his wickedness, and so he was desirous of being a
hindrance to the cross. So he prompts Peter to say: "Be it far from thee, Lord, this shall
not be unto thee" (Matt. xvi. 22).

76 Christ recognises the real speaker, and addresses the devil and not Peter when He says:
"Get thee behind me, Satan." Then He turns to Peter and rebukes him for obeying the
prompting of Belial, with the words, "Thou art an offence unto me," etc. Peter's sudden
fall from the highest to the lowest deserved such a rebuke, and at the same time it taught
the disciples not to apply their petty talk to the eternal dispensation. What might have
been the persuasion of the others, if they saw Christ on earth as Peter did, and then
heard Peter persuading Him to postpone His glorious redemptive Passion and stay among the
things of earth ? His great faith had to have a great rebuke, and his great fall led to
his great grief. For note the height of his faith in the words, "Thou art the Christ,"
etc., wherein he was led up to the very court of heaven. He now knew the King upon His
throne, and had it in his power to open his knowledge to those who came to him, but to
keep it closed from those who were not fit for the beatific vision.174 Hence he was said
to have the keys of heaven, the power to open and shut it, and to lead men into it or out
of it.

77 Note also the definiteness of Peter's words. He uses the article all through; it is not
simply, "Thou art an anointed one, a son of a living God." For there are many anointed,
many sons (the angels are called "sons of God"), many who are living, and "gods many and
lords many." But the use of the article reveals the impregnable truth, and the unique
nature of each. Speaking by the Holy Spirit, Peter thus reveals the impregnable rock, and
gets his name of Peter (Rock-man) in consequence.175 But the devil tries to throw him from
this rock on which he was so firmly set, by making him say what was unworthy of the
promise, and express an unseemly sympathy. So Christ pierced him with a sharp rebuke. Such
was the rebuke implied in His healing the high-priest's servant,176 whose ear Peter had
cut off. Christ did not judge him by his stammering tongue, but by the inward desire of
his soul.]

78 CHAPTER XXI.177 Objection based on S. Peter's treatment of Ananias and Sapphira (Acts
v. 1-11). This Peter is convicted of doing wrong in other cases also. For in the case of a
certain man called Ananias, and his wife Sapphira, because they did not deposit the whole
price of their land, but kept back a little for their own necessary use, Peter put them to
death, although they had done no wrong. For how did they do wrong, if they did not wish to
make a present of all that was their own ? But even if he did consider their act to be one
of wrongdoing, he ought to have remembered the commands of Jesus, who had taught him to
endure as many as four hundred and ninety sins against him ; he would then at least have
pardoned one, if indeed what had occurred could really in any sense be called a sin. And
there is another thing which he ought to have borne in mind in dealing with others---
namely, how he himself, by swearing that he did not know Jesus, had not only told a lie,
but had foresworn himself, in contempt of the judgment and resurrection to come.

79 CHAPTER XXVIII. Answer to the objection based on S. Peter's treatment of Ananias and
Sapphira (Acts v. 1-11). [If you understand the circumstances, you will see that Ananias
did wrong, and was punished for the general good. The preaching of the Gospel and its
wonders uplifted the first Christians to heaven, and men came from all directions to drink
of the fountain of grace. They gave up individual possessions and joined all together, so
that wealth ceased to exist in this spiritual society. Among others, Ananias and his wife
offered their property to the common stock. When once given to Christ, it was no longer
their own. It was therefore wrong to keep some back, though merely in itself such a deed
does not appear so. Peter at once cut out this evil, in order that the disease might not
spread to the whole body of believers. The deed was not a wrong done to Peter, and
therefore it did not receive his forgiveness;178 but it was done to the Deity, and was an
outrage on the faith. Besides, if no notice had been taken, they would have thought their
hidden deed escaped Christ's notice, and so would have proceeded unrebuked to worse sins,
and have infected others, like a pestilence, with the same ideas. To prevent this, Peter
checks the disease, and drags up the weeds before they can spread over the field.

80 The above is proved by Peter's question : "Why did ye resolve179 to tempt the Holy
Spirit ?" Then they were slain, by a blow, not (as you say) of a sword, but of the
conscience, coming from the Holy Spirit of love. Peter is therefore without any blame for
the death of either of them, which was sent as a warning to the rest.] CHAPTER XXII.
Objection based on the escape of S. Peter from prison (Acts xii. 5-11) and S. Paul's words
about him (Gal. ii. 12 and 2 Cor. xi. 13). 81 This man who stood first in the band of the
disciples, taught as he had been by God to despise death, but escaping when seized by
Herod, became a cause of punishment to those who guarded him. For after he had escaped
during the night, when day came there was a stir among the soldiers as to how Peter had
got out. And Herod, when he had sought for him and failed to find him, examined the
guards, and ordered them to be "led away," that is to say, put to death. So it is
astonishing how Jesus gave the keys of heaven to Peter, if he were a man such as this; and
how to one who was disturbed with such agitation and overcome by such experiences did He
say "Feed my lambs" ? For I suppose the sheep are the faithful who have advanced to the
mystery of perfection, while the lambs stand for the throng of those who are still
catechumens, fed so far on the gentle milk of teaching.180 Nevertheless, Peter is recorded
to have been crucified 181 after feeding the lambs not even for a few months,182 although
Jesus had said that the gates of Hades should not prevail against him.183 Again, Paul
condemned Peter when he said, "For before certain came from James, he ate with the
Gentiles, but when they came he separated himself, fearing those of the circumcision; and
many Jews joined with him in his hypocrisy"184 (Gal. ii. 12).

82 In this likewise there is abundant and important condemnation, that a man who had
become interpreter of the divine mouth should live in hypocrisy, and behave himself with a
view to pleasing men. Moreover, the same is true of his taking about a wife, for this is
what Paul says : " Have we not power to take about a sister, a wife, as also the rest of
the apostles, and Peter? (1 Cor. ix. 5). And then185 he adds (2 Cor. xi. 13), "For such
are false apostles, deceitful workers. If then Peter is related to have been involved in
so many base things, is it not enough to make one shudder to imagine that he holds the
keys of heaven, and looses and binds, although he is fast bound, so to speak, in countless
inconsistencies. 83 CHAPTER XXIX. Answer to the objection based on S. Peter's escape from
prison (Acts xii. 5-11) and other inconsistencies. [After killing James, in his hostility
to Christ, Herod wanted to wreak public vengeance on Peter. It was not that Peter fled in
fear; rather he was waiting to preach Christ in Rome and then welcome the glorious cross.
It was not fit that Herod's malice should thus hinder the kindling of that Gospel torch
which was to be lighted among the Gentiles. As for the death of the soldiers, Peter was no
more responsible for it than the stag would be, if the shepherd killed his dogs because it
escaped from them. Herod did not owe his savagery to Peter, it was his own. The object
Peter continually had in view was to do and say what was most profitable. It is this which
must explain that conduct of which Paul speaks. His inconsistency was not for his own
sake, but for the sake of saving both Jews and Gentiles alike. For the only way properly
to influence the Jews was by showing reverence for the Mosaic law. Had he rejected it in
favour of the Gospel, they would naturally have turned away from him. So he skilfully
avoids the Gentiles' table while there is the chance of the Jews being scandalised, hoping
in time to persuade the latter to walk according to the evangelic instead of the Mosaic
rule. On the other hand, in order to attract the Gentiles, he ate with them when the Jews
were not there. The result was profitable to both parties.186

84 When Paul speaks of "false apostles," 187 he does not refer to Peter, but to those who
were sent about the world by the Jews with encyclical letters.188] The list of charges
against Peter is a long one, but what I have said should suffice for you and those who sit
with you. But if there lurks anywhere some other passage of the New Testament that is in
dispute, announce it without delay. CHAPTER XXX. Objection based on the inconsistency of
S. Paul, in his circumcising of Timothy (Acts xvi. 3). He remained a little while in deep
and solemn thought, and then said: "You seem to me very much like inexperienced captains,
who, while still afloat on the voyage that lies before them, look on themselves as afloat
on another sea. Even thus are you seeking for other passages to be laid down by us,
although you have not completed the vital points in the questions which you still have on
hand."189

85 If you are really filled with boldness about the questions, and the points of
difficulty have become clear to you, tell us how it was that Paul said, "Being free, I
made myself the slave of all, in order that I might gain all" (1 Cor. ix. 19), and how,
although he called circumcision "concision," 190 he himself circumcised a certain Timothy,
as we are taught in the Acts of the Apostles (Acts xvi. 3). Oh, the downright stupidity of
it all! It is such a stage as this that the scenes in the theatre portray, as a means of
raising laughter. Such indeed is the exhibition which jugglers give.191 For how could the
man be free who is a slave of all ? And how can the man gain all who apes all ?192 For if
he is without law to those who are without law,193 as he himself says, and he went with
the Jews as a Jew and with others in like manner, truly he was the slave of manifold
baseness, and a stranger to freedom and an alien from it; truly he is a servant and
minister of other people's wrong doings, and a notable zealot for unseemly things, if he
spends his time on each occasion in the baseness of those without law, and appropriates
their doings to himself.

86 These things cannot be the teachings of a sound mind, nor the setting forth of
reasoning that is free. But the words imply some one who is somewhat crippled in mind,194
and weak in his reasoning. For if he lives with those who are without law, and also in his
writings accepts the Jews' religion gladly, having a share in each, he is confused with
each, mingling with the falls of those who are base, and subscribing himself as their
companion. For he who draws such a line through circumcision as to remove those who wish
to fulfil it, and then performs circumcision himself, stands as the weightiest of all
accusers of himself when he says: "If I build again those things which I loosed, I
establish myself as a transgressor." CHAPTER XXXVII. Answer to the objection based on the
inconsistency of S. Paul, in his circumcising of Timothy, etc.

87 When his chosen band had stirred up such a swarm of subjects against Paul, and the
multitude of points 195 had at length grown quiet again like bees which have rushed to the
attack in dense array, we, being as it were pierced all round by the stings of the
difficulties raised, stood and fought against each in dire necessity, saying thus:--- [It
is not right that you should abuse a great man for behaving towards those young in faith
just as a teacher, or a doctor or a general does. For a teacher educates by imitating the
stammering voice of his pupil, a doctor cures by placing himself in the patient's
circumstances, and a general wins over a barbarian chief to his king by adopting his
customs rather than by force of arms. Paul did similar good by being all things to all
men. Sometimes he is the teacher, imitating Gentiles in order to educate them to the
Gospel, sometimes the doctor, saying: "Who is weak, and I am not weak ?" as if inflamed
with the trouble196 (2 Cor. xi. 29); sometimes the general, softening men's prejudices by
his strategy. So he went out to meet both those without law and the Jews, though he did
not himself really feel as they.

88 Therefore he only adopted circumcision in order to enrich the law with the Gospel by
giving way on one point. A good doctor may forbid a certain drug as being harmful, and yet
in a bad case he may combine it with other drugs in order to overcome the disease. Just
so, Paul rejected circumcision, and yet at a crisis he combined it with the doctrines of
the Gospel.197] CHAPTER XXXI. Objection based on S. Paul's inconsistency in claiming at
different times to be a Jew (Acts xxii. 3) and a Roman (Acts xxii. 27). 89 This same Paul,
who often when he speaks seems to forget his own words, tells the chief captain that he is
not a Jew but a Roman, although he had previously said, "I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of
Cilicia, and brought up 198 at the feet of Gamaliel, instructed according to the exact
teaching of the law of my fathers." But he who said, "I am a Jew," and "I am a Roman," is
neither thing, although he attaches himself to both. For he who plays the hypocrite and
speaks of what he is not, lays the foundation of his deeds in guile, and by putting round
him a mask of deceit, he cheats the clear issue and steals the truth, laying siege in
different ways to the soul's understanding, and enslaving by the juggler's art those who
are easily influenced. The man who welcomes in his life such a principle as this, differs
not at all from an implacable and bitter foe, who enslaving by his hypocrisy the minds of
those beyond his own borders, takes them all captive in inhuman fashion. So if Paul is in
pretence at one time a Jew, at another a Roman, at one time without law, and at another a
Greek,199 and whenever he wishes is a stranger and an enemy to each thing, by stealing
into each, he has made each useless, robbing each of its scope by his flattery.

90 We conclude then that he is a liar and manifestly brought up in an atmosphere of
lying.200 And it is beside the point for him to say : "I speak the truth in Christ, I lie
not" (Rom. ix. 1). For the man who has just now conformed to the law, and to-day to the
Gospel, is rightly regarded as knavish and hollow 201 both in private and in public life.
CHAPTER XXXVIII. Answer to the objection based on S. Paul's claim to be both a Jew and a
Roman. [Here again Paul showed the strategic powers of a general. If a general is driven
out by his own countrymen, he no longer considers himself one of them, and overcomes them
by joining some one else. Just so Paul was driven by the Jews into the hands of the
Romans, and so he could say he was not a Jew but a Roman.

91 He was not wrong in calling himself a Roman, for by the Romé ( ῥώμη = might) of the
Spirit he was to teach among the Roman nation. Just as one of the Galatian race is called
an Asian by living in Asia, so might Paul become a Roman, and yet remain a Jew. When he
calls himself a Jew, he honours his countrymen; when he calls himself a Roman, he
proclaims his nobility.202] CHAPTER XXXII. Objection based on S. Paul's use of the law for
his own advantage (as in 1 Cor. ix. 7, etc.). 92 That he dissembles the Gospel for the
sake of vainglory, and the law for the sake of covetousness, is plain from his words, "Who
ever goeth to war at his own charges? Who shepherdeth the flock and doth not eat of the
milk of the flock?" (1 Cor. ix. 7). And, in his desire to get hold of these things, he
calls in the law as a supporter of his covetousness, saying, "Or doth not the law say
these things ? For in the law of Moses it is written, Thou shall not muzzle an ox that is
treading out the corn " (v. 9). Then he adds a statement which is obscure and full of
nonsense, by way of cutting off the divine forethought from the brute beasts, saying,
"Doth God take care of the oxen, or doth he say it on our account? On our account it was
written" (v. 10).203 It seems to me that in saying this he is mocking the wisdom of the
Creator, as if it contained no forethought for the things that had long ago been brought
into being. For if God does not take care of oxen, pray, why is it written, "He hath
subjected all things, sheep and oxen and beasts and birds and the fishes" (Ps. viii. 8-9)
? If He takes account of fishes, much more of oxen which plough and labour. Wherefore I am
amazed at_such an impostor, who pays such solemn respect to the law because he is
insatiable, for the sake of getting a sufficient contribution from those who are subject
to him.

93 CHAPTER XXXIX. Answer to the objection based on S. Paul's use of the law for his own
advantage (1 Cor. ix. 7, etc.). [It is not in order to get something for himself that Paul
introduces the comparison of the soldier and the shepherd, but in order to make the
Corinthians thankful. For a soldier does his work faithfully only as long as the State
pays him; and just so a herald of the Gospel will give his best work when his hearers
respond to it. Similarly, the spiritual shepherd's encouragement is to see his sheep with
fair fleeces and abundant milk. Again, the labourer sows the seed of the knowledge of God
in his hearers' hearts, and is grieved if it does not bear fruit.204 Therefore it was in
order to benefit his hearers that Paul introduced these things, and supported them with
the witness of the law, so that they might show their gratitude. For the divine grace,
though lacking nothing, demands a little answering tribute from those whom it
enriches.205]

94 CHAPTER XXXIII. Objection based on his inconsistent attitude towards the law,
condemning it in Gal. v. 3 and iii. 10, and approving it in Romans vii. 12 and 14. Then he
suddenly turns like a man who jumps up from sleep scared by a dream, with the cry, "I Paul
bear witness that if any man do one thing of the law,206 he is a debtor to do the whole
law" (Gal. v. 3). This is instead of saying simply that it is not right to give heed to
those things that are spoken by the law. This fine fellow, sound in mind and
understanding, instructed in the accuracy of the law of his fathers, who had so often
cleverly recalled Moses to mind, appears to be soaked with wine and drunkenness; for he
makes an assertion which removes the ordinance of the law, saying to the Galatians, "Who
bewitched you that ye should not obey the truth," that is, the Gospel? (Gal. iii. 1).
Then, exaggerating, and making it horrible for a man to obey the law, he says, "As many as
are under the law are under a curse" (Gal. iii. 10). The man who writes to the Romans "The
law is spiritual" (vii. 14), and again, "The law is holy and the commandment holy and
just," places under a curse those who obey that which is holy! Then, completely confusing
the nature of the question, he confounds the whole matter and makes it obscure, so that he
who listens to him almost grows dizzy, and dashes against the two things as though in the
darkness of the night, stumbling over the law, and knocking against the Gospel in
confusion, owing to the ignorance of the man who leads him by the hand.

95 CHAPTER XL. Answer to the objection based on his inconsistent attitude towards the law.
[When he says that to do one thing in the law obliges a man to do all, he is not abusing
the law, but pointing to its minuteness, and to that difficulty in carrying it out which
Christ has freed us from, by coming to fulfil it Himself. For a man who attempts to fulfil
any part of it now may justly be accused of ignoring the complete fulfilment of it by the
Only Begotten. He loses the effect of the Saviour's fulfilment, and yet cannot complete it
himself, but is like one who has a hundred parasangs207 to ride to reach a city, and only
rides ninety-five; in which case he is no more in the city than when he started. If a man
keeps countless commandments, and yet leaves one undone, it is as bad as leaving one gate
of a city undefended out of thirty-five.

96 As an example of the difficulty in fulfilling the whole law, take two enactments,
concerning the sabbath and circumcision. What is to be done with the babe born on a
sabbath, upon the eighth day after its birth ?208 Here one rule contradicts the other. If
two points are so hard, what of the whole ? Indeed there are more rules than can be
remembered concerning sacrifices, cleansings, etc. Such a burden proved too much for the
Jews. Only Christ could fulfil it, and so cancel it that none need be subject to it any
more. As a cubit-rule measures dimensions, but can itself only be measured by the man who
made it, so the law, which is the measure of life, could only be measured by Christ, who
made it, and finally sealed it up by placing the better measure of the Gospel beside it.
To try and fulfil what Christ has thus fulfilled, is to act in opposition to Him. Thus
does Paul warn the Galatians. As for his calling the law "holy," etc., it was holy because
the Holy One fulfilled it.

97 Again, when he brings in the witness of the law and quotes from it, "Thou shalt not
muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn,"209 he is thinking of the apostolic band as the
unmuzzled ox, which threshes that harvest which Christ has sowed. Hence he says, " Not
concerning oxen were these things written, but concerning us" (1 Cor. ix. 10).] CHAPTER
XXXIV. Objection based on another inconsistency, in saying "The law entered that the
offence might abound " (Rom. v. 20). For see here, look at this clever fellow's record.
After countless utterances which he took from the law in order to get support from it, he
made void the judgment of his own words by saying, "For the law entered that the offence
might abound"; and before these words,210 "The goad 211 of death is sin, and the strength
of sin is the law" (1 Cor. xv. 56). He practically sharpens his own tongue like a sword,
and cuts the law to pieces without mercy limb by limb. And this is the man who in many
ways inclines to obey the law, and says it is praiseworthy to live according to it. And by
taking hold of this ignorant opinion, which he does as though by habit, he has overthrown
his own judgments on all other occasions.

98 CHAPTER XLI. Answer to the objection based on S. Paul's saying that "The law entered
that the offence may abound " (Rom. v. 20). [There was naturally much wickedness in life,
and this could not be corrected unless the law came to reveal it. Good and bad could not
be distinguished till standards of right and wrong were set up. From such a life of
ignorance and sin the law guided men to the life of light. But its enactments naturally
revealed as sin what was not before understood as such, and in this sense it "made the
offence to abound." Sin was a "goad of death" to drive men from true life, and took its
"strength" from the law, because the law punished sinners (see 1 Cor. xv. 56). A goad
requires some one to wield it in order to make it deadly, and it was thus that the law
wielded sin. Paul bids men flee from it, not to the law, but to Christ who is Master of
the law. He does not destroy the law, but its work as "schoolmaster" ( paidagwgo&j ) is
done when it has brought men to Christ (Gal. iii. 23). The law is like the moon, and the
prophets like the stars, which fade away at dawn before the Sun and His twelvefold crown
of Apostles, and yet remain, though without power.212]

99 CHAPTER XXXV. Objection based on S. Paul's words about their not having "fellowship
with demons" in 1 Cor. x. 20, and also what he says in 1 Cor. viii. 4 and 8 and x. 25-26.
When he speaks again of the eating of things sacrificed to idols, he simply teaches that
these matters are indifferent, telling them not to be inquisitive nor to ask questions,
but to eat things even though they be sacrificed to idols, provided only that no one
speaks to them in warning. Wherein he is represented as saying, " The things which they
sacrifice, they sacrifice to demons, but I would not that you should have fellowship with
demons" (1 Cor. x. 20).213 Thus he speaks and writes : and again he writes with
indifference about such eating, "We know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that
there is none other God but one" (1 Cor. viii. 4), and a little after this, "Meat will not
commend us to God, neither, if we eat, are we the better, neither, if we eat not, are we
the worse" (v. 8). Then, after all this prating of quackery, he ruminated, like a man
lying in bed, and said, "Eat all that is sold in the shambles, asking no questions for
conscience' sake, for the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof" (1 Cor. x. 25-26).
Oh, what a stage farce, got from no one ! Oh, the monstrous inconsistency of his utterance
! A saying which destroys itself with its own sword! Oh, novel kind of archery, which
turns against him who drew the bow, and strikes him!

100 CHAPTER XLII.214 Answer to the objection based on S. Paul's words about having
fellowship with demons (1 Cor. x. 20), etc. 101 Now that we have laid bare the full
meaning of this passage, we will deal with the rest, if agreeable to you--- namely, how it
was that Paul forbade them to eat things offered to idols,215 but he does not forbid them
to take what was sold in the shambles, although it was well known that it was Greeks who
did most of the slaughtering at that time.216 So you may perceive in this the accuracy and
wisdom of Paul, how he protects their daily life and forbids the godly to touch things
sacrificed to demons, but he permitted his friends to eat what was sold in the shambles
without asking questions. For the sacrifice of animals was at that time manifold, and
different in various parts of the world. There was one kind to the spirits of the air,
another to those on the earth, while there were other sacrifices again to those under the
earth. For error, taking the deceitful serpent as its minister, whistled many a strain,
charming and subduing with its deadly spells 217 earth, sea, air, and the things beneath
the earth. So invisible spirits which flew in the air, which Isaiah sang of as flying
serpents (Isa. xxvii. 1), demanded white and transparent sacrifices of birds, seeing that
the air chances to be bright, and filled with light for the manifestation of the things
that are below.

102 But there are certain of the demons of the earth, which demanded herds of beasts for
sacrifices which were black-skinned and dusky, seeing that the earth is by nature black
and gloomy; and they ordered their sacrifices to be slain on lofty altars. Other demons of
the regions beneath them enjoined that black offerings should be sacrificed to them in
trenches, and that they should be buried alongside the remains of the things that had been
slaughtered.218 Other deceitful phantoms of things in the seas demanded sacrifices of
black things that were winged and living, and ordered them to be sent down into the sea,
since the sea is black and in constant motion. Seeing then that wickedness thus destroys
the things without reason through those that possess it, by feeding in this pitiable way
on a multitude of beasts and birds, the Apostle naturally forbade the faithful to touch
such things.

103 You can verify these things from the book "Concerning the philosophy of oracles,"219
and learn accurately the record of the things sacrificed, as you read the oracle of Apollo
concerning sacrifices,220 which Porphyry, puffed up with conceit, handed down to his
intimates in a mystery, charging them with a terrible oath, as he himself reckoned, that
they should not freely tell these things to many. The tragedy of this novel calamity will
be well known to you, how the plotting of destroying spirits ruthlessly mangled the human
race in various ways, as a flock without a shepherd, coming like an attack of wild wolves
from the desert. It was impossible for any one to breathe freely, or to be quiet, but
everything was forced together, from one end of heaven to the other, as though by a staff
or a thunderbolt. If a man was crossing the sea, he let slip a sacrifice ; if he was
journeying by land, he sacrificed four-footed beasts. If he were hollowing a cave or
digging a piece of land, he threw down a sacrifice to the powers below, and many, by way
of buying off their own death, buried some of their own stock while still alive. At any
rate, Amistra, the wife of King Xerxes, sent fourteen boys down to Hades alive every year
on her own behalf, by covering them with a mound, by way of appeasing the demons of the
earth. Stakes and goads and snares had filled the world everywhere; neither air nor land,
island nor sea were inopportune for their plottings ; but a girdle of guile had encircled
the inhabited world, a dark veil of ignorance had enveloped it, and it was not possible
for a man to live without trouble and fear. Life was full of suspicion, conditions were
unreal, the very fact of chance was affected.

104 Since therefore the world was full of disorder, and the greater part of life was
devoted to demons, he proclaims to those who wish for a brighter221 life, that they must
loathe the table of demons, lest perchance they should at all corrupt the habit of the
soul by their fellowship. And again, perceiving how impossible it was for any one who was
clothed with flesh to renounce the daily life of the body, he gives permission by way of
dispensation, and solemnly counsels them to respect the common market of the shambles and
to get their victuals from it. For the matter did not call for trouble, and involved no
blame for meddling with such things, seeing that those who undertook the business of the
shambles were the ministers of a general and public means of diet. But there were certain
servants of temples, picked out and separated from the rest, who in some kind of mystery
poured out libations to images and sacrificed with a kind of mystic witchcraft. From these
he bids them keep away, and not to touch them at all.

105 But he destroys the ignorant bounds of Greek belief, cuts their doctrine in pieces,
and makes their judgment void, when he says, "An idol is nothing in the world." For the
Greeks found out the naming of idols, as the serpent found out the naming of gods; but the
judgment of truth does not lay down such an opinion at all. Therefore it is impossible
that the theory or standard of idols should be preserved in the world. For the making of
images is reasonably spoken of as images, not as idols. These figures, fashioned from
gold, silver, bronze, and iron, are silver and gold, but not idols. And the dead bodies of
living creatures exist as dead bodies, not as idols. Souls that are loosed from bodies are
rightly souls, but not idols. But the representations in statuary of those who are called
heroes are images, not idols. And the things that are skilfully painted in colours on
tablets, are the delineation of bodies, but certainly not idols. And the things that are
called appearances of visions are phantoms and shadows of dreams, but they are not idols.
So the great Apostle speaks truth when he says, "An idol is nothing in the world." Unless
perchance some one is mad enough to wish to call the elements idols, but he is refuted as
he says it; for fire, water, air, and earth are not idols, but properly fire, water, air,
and earth.

106 To what then do those men sacrifice who pay respect to idols ? To demons, not to
idols; but he does not wish them to be partakers of demons and partakers of Christ. Those
who sell food in the shambles do not act as butchers for demons, but for the common life
of men, and the end they set before them is not witchcraft but profit, which neither ruins
nor corrupts the man who eats. This is the answer to your problem, which you may readily
be learning. CHAPTER XXXVI. Objection based on S. Paul's words about virginity (1 Tim. iv.
1, and 1 Cor. vii. 25). In his epistles we find another saying like these, where he
praises virginity, and then turns round and writes, "In the latter times some shall depart
from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, forbidding to marry and commanding to
abstain from meats" (1 Tim. iv. 1 and 3). And in the Epistle to the Corinthians he says,
"But concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord" (1 Cor. vii. 25). Therefore he
that remains single does not do well, nor will he that refrains from marriage as from an
evil thing lead the way in obedience, since they have not a command from Jesus concerning
virginity.222 And how is it that certain people boast of their virginity as if it were
some great thing, and say that they are filled with the Holy Ghost similarly to her who
was the mother of Jesus ?

107 But we will now cease our attack on Paul, knowing what a battle of the giants he arms
against him by his language. But if you are possessed of any resources for replying to
these questions, answer without delay. CHAPTER XLIII. Answer to the objection based on S.
Paul's words about virginity (1 Tim. iv. 1, and 1 Cor. vii. 25). [Here, as always, the
context must be studied. Often in Paul's writings a phrase by itself may suggest what he
did not mean, as when he says, "On whom he will he hath mercy, and whom he will he
hardeneth," a statement which must be taken in conjunction with his words about Him "that
willeth that all men should be saved." In this passage (from 1 Corinthians) about virgins,
it is not clear at once why he should say, "I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give
my judgment as one that hath obtained mercy," seeing that he had Christ speaking within
him. The explanation is as follows:---

108 Virginity is a difficult and unnatural state, and so it is left to the individual to
choose it. If Christ forced it on people by a command, they might say that the fault was
His if it led to a fall. In simpler matters Christ does give a command through Paul, such
as theft, adultery, slander, etc. The wisdom of all this is obvious, and to make virginity
a free choice only exalts its position. There is praise for the man who does as he is
commanded, but for this act of free-will beyond what is obligatory there is a higher
glory.223 Note that Paul's words show a humble reverence for what he speaks of, for he
gives his opinion "as one that hath obtained mercy," not as an Apostle, nor as "judging
angels" (but here the virgins are angels in his judgment). When he says that "There shall
arise certain having their Conscience seared with a hot iron," 224 it is because he knew
that such heretics would attract men by guile in recommending so excellent a thing as
virginity,225 and thus using a branding-iron of godliness for their own deceitful
purposes. These "seared" heresiarchs are like makers of counterfeit coin, washing over
their worthless creed with the fine gold of virginity.226 They are "seared" because they
know neither the dew of the Spirit nor the water of baptism, but are scorched at the
Chaldean furnace.227 They insult creation and abuse the creatures of God which He meant to
be received with thanksgiving.228]

109 Representatives of these have spread abroad in the children of the Manichaeans.229
Such heresies does the country of the Pisidians contain, and of the Isaurians; Cilicia
also, and Lycaonia and all Galatia. Their names it is irksome to repeat; for they are
called Encratites and Apotactites, and Eremites,230 not Christians. They are not seekers
of protection from the grace of heaven, but rebels and wanderers from the faith of the
Gospel, though, by their abstention from meats, they say that they raise the citadel of
godliness. At the head of their chorus doubtless stands Dositheus,231 a Cilician by race,
who confirms their teaching in the course of eight whole books, and magnifies his case by
the splendour of his language, saying again and again that marriage is an illegal act, and
quite contrary to law. Here are his words, "Through union the world had its beginning ;
through abstention from it,232 it would fain have its completion." He says that the
tasting of wine and the partaking of flesh is disgusting and loathsome altogether, thus
indeed ruthlessly lifting up a cruel branding-iron for those that delight 233 in him. By
such reasoning all creation is accursed according to him, all life is under suspicion ard
hurtful to everybody. Wherefore such men have come into conflict with the Divine, by
insulting the beauty of the things that have been created; and nowhere have they benefited
the common weal in anything, even though they do teach men to observe virginity, and set
self-control as the highest point in life.

110 The Apostle therefore, knowing all this, protected the Church's doctrine before the
time came, to prevent its admitting the attempts of heretical branding-irons. Here you
will please conclude the discussion of all these questions. If there is anything which
perplexes you again, we will meet and have another discussion, at the convenience of our
leisure, with readiness on the part of him who comes off best.234


APOCRITICUS
===========

APOCRITICUS continued

BOOK IV

1 Proem (introducing the first ten questions by the Philosopher). WHEN a large number of
points had been raised by the judgment of my Greek opponent, and we had made clear the
obscurity that was in them by means of much sweat and labour and toil, the philosopher
plainly marked out, so to speak, this fourth contest, for which, even with your help,
Theosthenes,235 we scarcely took heart.236 But what argument it contained I must now
relate. When no small company was again gathered together, but a large and distinguished
one, as though his intention was purposely to perplex us by the sight of so many persons,
he began to rend in pieces the apostolic judgment, to the accompaniment of much laughter,
saying as follows:--- THE CHRISTIAN (Introduction to the answers of Macarius to the
objections of Chapters 1 to X.) After all this boasting and terribleness of speech, the
ears of those who stood by were full of fear, and the understanding of our chosen
witnesses was contracted. We, perceiving the canon of the New Testament thus trampled
underfoot, were smitten in mind and sick in soul, and troubled in every bodily sense, so
that we almost said, "Lord, save us, we perish." Encircled by so great a storm of cunning
devices, but encouraged by some unseen assistance, we stood facing the hurricane which
came down upon us, making the Holy Spirit our ally against the face of it. Then, like men
rowing in a boat, we began to ply the oars of our tongue and hastened to smite the first
of the waves.

2 CHAPTER I. Objection based on S. Paul's saying that "the fashion of this world passeth
away" (1 Cor. vii. 31). 3 What does Paul mean by saying that the fashion of the world237
passes away? And how is it possible for them that have to be as though they had not,238
and they that rejoice as though they rejoiced not, and how can the other old-wives' talk
be credible ? For how is it possible for him that has to become as though he had not ? And
how is it credible that he who rejoices should be as though he rejoiced not? Or how can
the fashion of this world pass away ? What is it that passes away, and why does it do so?
For if the Creator239 were to make it pass away He would incur the charge of moving and
altering that which was securely founded. Even if He were to change the fashion into
something better, in this again He stands condemned, as not having realised at the time of
creation a fitting and suitable fashion for the world, but having created it incomplete,
and lacking the better arrangement. In any case, how is one to know that it is into what
is good that the world would change if it came to an end late in time ? And what benefit
is there in the order of phenomena being changed ?

4 And if the condition of the visible world is gloomy and a cause for grief, in this, too,
the Creator hears the sound of protest,240 being reduced to silence by the sound of
reasonable charges 240 against Him, in that He contrived the parts of the earth in
grievous fashion, and in violation of the reasonableness of nature, and afterwards
repented, and decided to change the whole. Perchance Paul by this saying teaches him that
has, to be minded as though he had not, in the sense that the Creator, having the world,
makes the fashion of it pass away, as though He had it not. And he says that he that
rejoices does not rejoice, in the sense that the Creator is not pleased when He looks upon
the fair and beautiful thing He has created, but, as being much grieved over it, He formed
the plan of transferring and altering it. So then let us pass over this trivial saying
with mild laughter.

5 CHAPTER XI. Answer to the objection based on S. Paul's saying that " the fashion of this
world passeth away " (1 Cor. vii. 31). [Truly there is a "passing away" for the cloud of
your cunning imagination as well as for the fashion of the world ! "The fashion of the
world" may be understood in many ways. For example, it may mean our transitory life, or
the bodily variation in the different ages of men. Or, again, as "fashion" means
"appearance," it may be used of a man's shadow, which disappears as soon as the sun goes
in. Even so is "the fashion of the world" a passing appearance. "The fashion of the world"
also refers to the deceitfulness of things human, be they honours or kingdoms or what you
will. In a day a man may pass from a palace to a dungeon, and in this sense he that hath,
and that rejoiceth, must be as he that doth not. (Of course there are also changes of the
opposite kind, such as from the dunghill to luxury.) We may find instances of such
"passing away" in Croesus, dethroned by Cyrus, and in Cyrus, conquered by Tomyris. Or look
on Babylon, the capital of Assyria, once so fair and of such enormous proportions,241 then
desolated by the Persians, and now not preserving a trace of its former greatness. Or the
once all-powerful Macedonian nation, now absorbed in the Roman Empire. And it is
superfluous to record how many local rulers have evaporated like smoke, or how many women
who were queens have perished,242 or of how many famous men the glory has departed.

6 The change in "the fashion of the world" is clearly seen in the seasons. The spring with
all its beauty yields to scorching summer. Soon the time of ripe fruit hastens on to
autumn, and then comes the winter, in which we are now,243 to take away our joy. Yes, all
things change, even as the sea never maintains a perpetual calm. If you wish to make out
that things do not change, you must also show that they are uncreated, for it is only that
which has no beginning that can be without an end. And if you think human things do not
"pass away," you necessarily make them everlasting! Why, even an uncivilised Scythian
would tell you the difference between what is uncreated and lasting, and what is created
and passing away. Paul therefore rightly added : "Let not him that rejoiceth rejoice," for
the object of his rejoicing soon passes. Even day and night are uncertain; the day may be
bright or stormy, and there is no fixed hour at which the night begins, but sometimes it
is ten hours long, sometimes twelve.

7 CHAPTER II. Objection based on the saying of S. Paul that "we which are alive shall be
caught up in the clouds" (1 Thess. iv. 15-17). 8 Let us consider another wise remark of
his, astounding and perverted, wherein he says, "We which are alive and remain, shall not
go before them that are asleep unto the coming of the Lord, for the Lord himself shall
descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of
God; and the dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive shall be caught up
together with them in a cloud, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with
the Lord" (1 Thess. iv. 15-17).244 Here is a thing that indeed rises in the air and shoots
up to heaven, an enormous and far-reaching lie. This, when recited to the beasts without
understanding, causes even them to bellow and croak out their sounding din in reply, when
they hear of men in the flesh flying like birds in the air, or carried on a cloud. For
this boast is a mighty piece of quackery, that living things, pressed down by the burden
of physical bulk, should receive the nature of winged birds, and cross the wide air like
some sea, using the cloud as a chariot. Even if such a thing is possible, it is monstrous,
and apart from all that is suitable.

9 For nature which created all things245 from the beginning appointed places befitting the
things which were brought into being, and ordained that each should have its proper
sphere, the sea for the water creatures, the land for those of the dry ground, the air for
winged creatures, and the higher atmosphere for heavenly bodies. If one of these were
moved from its proper abode, it would disappear on arrival in a strange condition and
abode. For instance, if you wanted to take a creature of the water and force it to live on
the dry land, it is readily destroyed and dies. Again, if you throw a land animal of a dry
kind into the water, it will be drowned. And if you cut off a bird from the air, it will
not endure it, and if you remove a heavenly body from the upper atmosphere, it will not
stand it. Neither has the divine and active Word of God done this, nor ever will do it,
although He is able to change the lot of the things that come into being. For He does not
do and purpose anything according to His own ability, but according to its suitability He
preserves things, and keeps the law of good order. So, even if He is able to do so, He
does not make the earth to be sailed over, nor again does He make the sea to be ploughed
or tilled;

10 nor does He use His power in making virtue into wickedness nor wickedness into virtue,
nor does He adapt a man to become a winged creature, nor does He place the stars below and
the earth above. 11 Wherefore we may reasonably declare that it is full of twaddle to say
that men will ever be caught up into the air. And Paul's lie becomes very plain when he
says, "We which are alive." For it is three hundred years since he said this,246 and no
body has anywhere been caught up, either Paul's or any one else's. So it is time this
saying of Paul became silent, for it is driven away in confusion. CHAPTER XII. Answer to
the objection based on S. Paul's words that "we which are alive shall be caught up in the
clouds" (1 Thess. iv. 15-17). [We must act as reasoning beings, and look for a mystic
meaning in the words. He means that at Christ's second coming the godly will be caught up
from the corruption of this life. Just as the water in the sea is heavy, and yet is drawn
up into the air in clouds, so shall man be drawn up by angelic might. For the "cloud,"
which is sometimes high and sometimes near the earth, signifies the angels, who both rise
to heaven and descend to earth in the course of their service. For this we may refer to
Abbakum,247 drawn up by a cloud from Judaea, and carried and set down over the Babylonian
pit, or to the angels which Jacob saw ascending and descending. The prophets also show
angels to be clouds, as when Isaiah says (xv. 6), " I will command the clouds not to rain
upon the vine," i.e. the angels are not to rain visions upon Israel. Again Daniel says
(vii. 13) that Christ will come "with the clouds of heaven," while Christ said He would
come and all the angels with Him (Matt. xxv. 31).

12 Also the Psalms speak of "Clouds and darkness round about him" (Ps. xcvii. 2), where
His judgment-seat is the severity of the law, which will be combined with the grace of the
Gospel (cf. Ps. civ. 3). Also the Gospel says, "He shall send forth his angels and gather
the elect from the four winds of heaven " (Mark xiii. 26, 27). That it was the Apostle's
habit to allegorise thus, may be seen from such pasages as "The night is far spent, the
day is at hand." At the end of the world, it is the trumpet of angelic voices which will
sound, and give man the power to rise, just as the horses of fire, which were really
angels, took up Elijah. With regard to your argument that everything must remain in its
own element, mark that it is not by remaining in themselves, but in something different,
that created things are preserved. You cannot keep fire in fire, but in the air. What is
wet is kept in what is dry, as water in a vessel, etc. The same applies to things light
and heavy, and to soul and body.

13 And mark further that things are only what they are, relatively to something else. For
example, there would be no test of an unrighteous man if there were no righteousness. So
it is not strange that angels should draw men up just as clouds draw water. (For the
identification of men with water, see Isaiah xvii. 13, " Behold many nations as water.")
There is no falsehood in Paul declaring that "We shall be caught up," although the
resurrection did not take place in his day, for he is very fond of identifying his own
humanity with that of the whole race. CHAPTER III. Objection based on S. Matthew's words
that the Gospel should be preached in all the world (Matt. xxiv. I4).248 We must mention
also that saying which Matthew gave us, in the spirit of a slave who is made to bend
himself in a mill-house, when he said, "And the gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in
all the world, and then shall the end come."249 For lo, every quarter of the inhabited
world has experience of the Gospel, and all the bounds and ends of the earth possess it
complete,250 and nowhere is there an end, nor will it ever come. So let this saying only
be spoken in a corner!

14 CHAPTER XIII. Answer to the objection based on S. Matthew's words that the Gospel
should be preached in all the world (Matt. xxiv. 14). [The word "end" may be used in more
senses than one; for example, the end of war is peace, and the end of ignorance is
knowledge. And so the end of wickedness is godliness. This is exactly the end which has
come about through the preaching of the Gospel. So that they who once in their ignorance
served idols' temples, now in the light of knowledge serve God as temples of the Holy
Spirit. And therefore, in this sense, an "end" has come to the tragic side of the world.
But if we take the ordinary meaning of "end," we may say, first, that it is even now close
at the doors; and secondly, that the Gospel has not yet been preached everywhere. Seven
races of the Indians who live in the desert in the south-east have not received it;251 nor
the Ethiopians who are called Macrobians,252 dwelling in the south-west, at the mouth of
the ocean. These may be described as "Having laws that no one should wrong or be wronged
by another, drinking milk and eating flesh, living for something like a hundred and fifty
years, and never diseased or weakly until the end." Then, of course, there are in the west
both the Maurusians and those who dwell beyond the great northern river Ister, which is
gathered from five-and-thirty streams, and, carrying countless merchant vessels on its
broad and constant stream, shuts off the country of the Scythians, where twelve tribes of
nomad barbarians live, of whose savage state Herodotus tells us, and their evil customs
derived from their ancestors. But the Gospel must " be preached for a witness unto all
(nations)" before the end comes.

15 When all men have heard it, then great will be the punishment of those who reject it.
And so God in His mercy delays the revolution of time which brings the end. This He does
without real alteration of His will. Even the human mind can now make a triangle into a
square and a square into a triangle without altering the size, and therefore God can,
without changing the sum total of time, make one day to be a thousand years, and a
thousand years to be one day.253 So we must find no difficulty in this lengthening of the
time. It is for us and for our benefit that the end has not yet come.] CHAPTER IV.
Objection based on the divine assurance given to both S. Paul and S. Peter, and their
martyrdom in spite of it. Let us look at what was said to Paul, "The Lord spoke to Paul in
the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, for I am with thee, and no man shall set
on thee to hurt thee" (Acts xviii. 9-10). And yet no sooner was he seized in Rome than
this fine fellow, who said that we should judge angels, had his head cut off.254 And Peter
again, who received authority to feed the lambs, was nailed to a cross and impaled on
it.255 And countless others, who held opinions like theirs, were either burnt, or put to
death by receiving some kind of punishment or maltreatment. This is not worthy of the will
of God, nor even of a godly man, that a multitude of men should be cruelly punished
through their relation to His own grace and faith, while the expected resurrection and
coming remains unknown.

16 CHAPTER XIV. Answer to the objection based on the divine assurance given to both S.
Paul and S. Peter, and their martyrdom in spite of it. [In each case the martyrdom came
after the struggle of life was over, and the great work of bringing souls to Christ in
many lands had been fulfilled. Such an end to their life meant a higher fame. The highest
honour is for soldiers who defend their country against the enemy to the death. So, after
having marshalled the faithful all over the world into Christ's army, and stayed the
fierceness of the enemy from the rest, they won an unfading crown, and encouraged many to
win it likewise. A violent death was a seal upon their life, and proved the greatness of
their zeal.256 During their work both Peter and Paul were many times protected by their
Lord from the plots of the Jews, but when the seeds of their faith had taken root, He
granted them the final glory of martyrdom. In thus treating His soldiers, God acted as a
wise general, for many were hostile, and might have ascribed their works to magic had they
died an ordinary death, or vanished from before tribunals.257 To conquer torments by
enduring to the end was their best answer to these.

17 Some paltry critics are prepared to find fault with the saints in either case. If they
are protected from death, these would assert that they would never have endured to the
end. If they face it to the end, they would say that it proved they were not really
righteous men. And so God, in His love for His saints, sometimes rescues them from death,
as in the case of Daniel and the three children, and sometimes lets them witness by their
death that they are neither cowards nor hypocrites, as in the case of Peter and Paul.]
CHAPTER V. Objection based on Christ's words that many should come in His name, saying, I
am Christ (Matt. xxiv. 4, 5). And there is another dubious little saying which one may
manifestly take hold of, when Christ says : "Take heed that no man deceive you; for many
shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many." And behold! three
hundred years have passed by, and even more, and no one of the kind has anywhere appeared.
Unless indeed you are going to adduce Apollonius of Tyana,258 a man who was adorned with
all philosophy. But you would not find another. Yet it is not concerning one but
concerning many that He says that such shall arise.

18 CHAPTER XV. Answer to the objection based on Christ's words that many should come in
His name, saying, I am Christ (Matt. xxiv. 4, 5). [You only speak thus from ignorance. I
can tell you of many men who in Christ's name deceived many, and finally deceived
themselves to their ruin.] 19 At once then I can tell you of Manes in Persia, who imitated
the name of Christ, and corrupted by his error many a satrapy and many a country in the
East, and up to this day pollutes the world by creeping over it with his injurious
seed.259 And another is Montanus in Phrygia, who, bearing this name, underwent in the name
of the Lord an ascetic and unnatural course of life, revealing himself as the abode of a
baneful demon, and feeding on his error through all the land of Mysia as far as that of
Asia. And so great was the power of the hidden demon which lurked within him, that he very
nearly tainted the whole world with the poison of his error. And why should I tell you of
Cerinthus and Simon, or Marcion or Bardesanes,260 or Droserius261 or Dositheus the
Cilician,262 or countless others whose number I shrink from reckoning. All these and those
who affected them, appropriating to themselves the name of Christianity, wrought
unspeakable error in the world, and have taken numberless spoils and captives. Moreover,
as these are Anti-christs, or contrary to God, their followers are no longer willing to
bear the name of Christian, but like to be called, after the name of their leaders,
Manichaeans, Montanists, Marcionists, Droserians, and Dositheans. Do you see the baneful
armies of many Antichrists terribly inflamed against Christ and the Christians, and then
do you say that none of the things has come of which the Saviour prophesied? Do you behold
the armed array of those contrary to God, and then do you set aside the Saviour's
prediction ? It is not right to do so, but rather to assent to what was said by Him. So
much for this objection.]

20 CHAPTER VI. Objection based on the saying about the Day of Judgment in the Apocalypse
of Peter.263 By way of giving plenty of such sayings, let me quote also what was said in
the Apocalypse of Peter. He thus introduces the statement that the heaven will be judged
together with the earth. "The earth shall present all men to God in the day of judgment,
itself too being about to be judged, together with the heaven which contains it." No one
is so uneducated or so stupid as not to know that the things which have to do with earth
are subject to disturbance, and are not naturally such as to preserve their order, but are
uneven; whereas the things in heaven have an order which remains perpetually alike, and
always goes on in the same way, and never suffers alteration, nor indeed will it ever do
so. For it stands as God's most exact piece of workmanship. Wherefore it is impossible
that the things should be undone which are worthy of a better fate, as being fixed by a
divine ordinance which cannot be touched.

21 And why will heaven be judged ? Will it some day be shown to have committed some sin,
though it preserves the order which from the beginning was approved by God, and abides in
sameness always ? Unless indeed some one will address the Creator, slanderously asserting
that heaven is deserving of judgment, as having allowed the judge to speak any portents
against it which are so wondrous and so great.264 CHAPTER VII. Objection based on the
similar words in Isaiah about the heaven being rolled up as a scroll (Isa. xxxiv. 4). And
it 265 makes this statement again, which is full of impiety, saying : "And all the might
of heaven shall be dissolved, and the heaven shall be rolled together as a scroll, and all
the stars shall fall as leaves from a vine, and as leaves fall from a fig tree." And
another boast is made in portentous falsehood and monstrous quackery : "Heaven and earth
shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away " (Matt. xxiv. 35). For, pray, how could
any one say that the words of Jesus would stand, if heaven and earth no longer existed ?
Moreover, if Christ were to do this and bring heaven down, He would be imitating the most
impious of men, even those who destroy their own children. For it is acknowledged by the
Son that God is Father of heaven and earth when He says : "Father, Lord of heaven and
earth" (Matt. xi. 25). And John the Baptist magnifies heaven and declares that the divine
gifts of grace are sent from it, when he says : "A man can do 266 nothing, except it be
given him from heaven" (John iii. 27). And the prophets267 say that neaven is the holy
habitation of God, in the words : "look down from thy holy habitation,268 and bless thy
people Israel" (Deut. xxvi. 15).

22 If heaven, which is so great and of such importance in the witness borne to it, shall
pass away, what shall be the seat thereafter of Him who rules over it? And if the element
of earth perishes, what shall be the footstool of Him who sits there, for He 269 says:
"The heaven is my throne, and the earth is the footstool of my feet." So much for the
passing away of heaven and earth. CHAPTER XVI. Answer to the two objections based on the
words of the Apocalypse of Peter and of Isaiah concerning the passing away of heaven and
earth. [It is plain that the passing away of heaven and earth is through no fault of
theirs, and equally plain that it must be accepted as a scriptural fact. For even if we
pass over the Apocalypse of Peter,270 we are brought to the same thing by the other two
passages---by Isaiah xxxiv. 4 : "The heavens shall be rolled together as a scroll, and all
the stars shall fall, as leaves fall from a vine, and as leaves fall from a fig tree"; and
by Matthew xxiv. 35: "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away."

23 All the rest of creation was created, not for its own sake, but for man's sake. Man
alone was created for his own sake, that he might glorify the wisdom of Him who made him.
Not that such glorifying adds to God's glory, any more than for a man to warm himself adds
to the warmth of the fire. So man gives God nothing new, but makes himself part of God by
his union with the Godhead.271 So the world was like a great house made for man to live
in. But soon he failed to be what the Creator made him, and in utter folly fell and was
corrupted with regard to divine things. God therefore resolved to send him to another
place through death, in order that, after a separation from the flesh which covered him,
he might again bring it to incorruptibility. So, when the master was removed from the
house, that house was obliged to undergo what had not been intended for it. Just as it is
right for the keeper of a vineyard only to let his tent remain until the fruit is plucked,
and then he says farewell to his tent, and also to the beauty of the vineyard, so must the
beauty of heaven and earth be lost, as soon as the reasoning essence272 of man, which
abides in the world as in a tent, departs to its own appointed place, when the fruit of
righteousness has everywhere been plucked.273

24 Thus the world's splendour will be of no more use when man is gone. And yet as man will
pass through death into a better and incorruptible state, so will it be with all the
world. It will be like a damaged silver vessel, which the artificer melts down, and then
makes a new and better one of it. It passes away, but the . "Logos"274 of it remains with
the artificer. Just so Christ says His "Logos" 275 will remain when heaven and earth have
passed away. Therefore all created things will in this way have a second and a better
beginning.276 There is a deep meaning in the prophet's words "as leaves fall from a vine
or a fig tree." For the fall of the leaves looks like the end of the life of the tree, but
it is really the advance to something better. His purpose in choosing out these two
particular trees may be either because, owing to careful husbandry, they only cast their
leaves once (a type of God's care for His universe), or because, in speaking of the world
passing away because of man's sin, it is appropriate to mention the fig, which was the
first mark of Adam's fall, in the apron which he made; and the vine, which marked Noah's
shame.

25 There is also a mystic meaning in his words, "The heaven shall be rolled up as a
scroll." For the heavenly book of Christ's earthly life was now closed to the disciples,
and will only be opened again afresh when man is freed from the decay of this life. You
ask where God's seat will be when His throne and His footstool have passed away. The
prophet's words were really meant to make us realise the greatness of One whose relation
to the great universe was such. They do not suggest that God will be affected by the
change of these things. Indeed, there are many passages in the Psalms (e.g. cii. 25-27) to
prove that God's seat is for ever, and certainly He had a habitation before heaven and
earth were created. The Psalmist compares them to an old garment rolled up and changed;
such indeed is the work of the heavenly fuller.

26 Yet another allegory underlies the words. Heaven and earth may mean man, in his twofold
nature. His soul is the throne of God the Word, and his body, which Christ took, is His
footstool. To this mystery the Baptist refers in his words about the latchet of His shoe
(Mark i. 7), and the Psalmist when he says, "Fall down before his footstool, for he is
holy" (Ps. xcviii. 5). Although the Word said He would dwell in men and walk in them (2
Cor. vi. 16, from Lev. xxvi. 11, 12), yet men have so sinned that they have fallen like
stars, and are no longer fit to be His habitation. Accordingly, there must be a new
beginning, "a new heaven and a new earth" (Isa. lxv. 17).] CHAPTER VIII. Objection based
on the comparisons of the grain of mustard seed, etc. (Matt. xiii. 31-33 and 45, 46). Let
us touch on another piece of teaching even more fabulous than this, and obscure as night,
contained in the words, "The kingdom of heaven is like unto a grain of mustard seed" ; and
again, "The kingdom of heaven is like unto leaven"; and once more, "It is like unto a
merchant seeking goodly pearls." These imaginings do not come from (real) men, nor even
from women who put their trust in dreams. For when any one has a message to give
concerning great and divine matters, he is obliged to make use of common things which
pertain to men, in order to make his meaning clear, but not such degraded and
unintelligible things as these. These sayings, besides being base and unsuitable to such
matters, have in themselves no intelligent meaning or clearness. And yet it was fitting
that they should be very clear indeed, because they were not written for the wise or
understanding, but for babes.

27 CHAPTER IX. Objection based on Christ's words about revealing these things unto babes
(Matt. xi. 25).277 If indeed it was necessary to express that other utterance, as Jesus
says, "I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things
from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes," and as it is written in
Deuteronomy (xxix. 29), "The hidden things for the Lord our God, and the manifest things
for us," 278 therefore the things that are written for the babes and the ignorant ought to
be clearer and not wrapped in riddles. For if the mysteries have been hidden from the
wise, and unreasonably poured out to babes and those that give suck, it is better to be
desirous of senselessness and ignorance, and this is the great achievement of the wisdom
of Him who came to earth, to hide the rays of knowledge from the wise, and to reveal them
to fools and babes.

28 CHAPTER XVII. Answer to the two objections (Chaps. VIII and IX) based on the
comparisons of the grain of mustard seed, etc. (Matt. xiii. 31, etc.), and Christ's words
about revealing these things unto babes (Matt. xi. 25). [Great things are rightly compared
with the small things of everyday life. This is just what philosophers do, for to get a
conception of our enormous earth in its relation to heaven, they compare it to a mere
point, a grain of millet. And even heaven itself was embraced by Aratus of Cilicia 279 in
so feeble a thing as a small circle. Why then should not Christ similarly compare the
kingdom of heaven to "leaven" ? For it is the small leaven that fits large quantities of
meal for man's food, and this is the way the kingdom affects human society. The woman who
took the meal is obviously creation, and the "three measures" of it are either present,
past, or future; man's body, soul, and spirit; or the three dimensions.

29 So again with the "grain of mustard seed" ; it is hot and pungent, useful both for
cleansing and for seasoning food, and also of surprising growth. The kingdom has its
counterpart in all this, for it cleanses from evil, warms the understanding, and when sown
in the world it uplifts men to holiness. Therefore Christ chose, not a sacred bean like
the Greeks,280 but a mustard seed, to show the cleansing power of the kingdom. The "pearl"
likewise is chosen to show its preciousness. The pearl has a watery dwelling at first,
which suggests the lowly dwelling of the Godhead in flesh. Then afterwards the heavenly
pearl brings its heavenly brightness to all who obtain it through their good works. The
sayings were thus quite clear, and were for those who were babes only in wickedness, and
not in knowledge of the mysteries. It is against the wisdom of this world that Christ
closed His heavenly doctrines.281]

30 CHAPTER X. Objection based on the saying about the sick needing a physician, and not
the righteous (Matt. ix. 12 ; Luke v. 31). It is right to examine another matter of a much
more reasonable kind (I say this by way of contrast), "They that are whole need not a
physician, but they that are sick." Christ unravels these things to the multitude about
His own coming to earth. If then it was on account of those who are weak, as He Himself
says, that He faced sins, were not our forefathers weak, and were not Our ancestors
diseased with sin ? And if indeed those who are whole need not a physician, and He came
not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance, so that Paul speaks thus : "Jesus
Christ came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief" (1 Tim. i. 15); if then
this is so, and he that has gone astray is called, and he that is diseased is healed, and
the unrighteous is called, but the righteous is not, it follows that he who was neither
called nor in need of the healing of the Christians would be a righteous man who had not
gone astray. For he who has no need of healing is the man who turns away from the word
which is among the faithful, and the more he turns away from it, the more righteous and
whole he is, and the less he goes astray.

31 CHAPTER XVIII. Answer to the objection based on the saying about the sick needing a
physician, and not the righteous (Matt. ix. 12; Luke v. 31). [It is quite plain that in
dividing sick and whole, righteous and sinners, Christ is referring to the two kinds of
reasonable beings. The "whole"and the "righteous" are the angels, whose pure and
uncorruptible nature requires no call to repentance. The "sick" and the "sinners" are the
race of, men, whose glory was at first equal to the angels, but they fell into the
sickness of sin.282 The Word in pity came down to call and heal them, as we see in His
words: "Behold, thou art made whole, sin no more" (John v. 14). He actually mingled
Himself with them and with their life, in order to draw 'hem upward, so that He might
rejoice over those on earth as well as those in heaven.

32 His call began directly man had fallen, with the cry, "Adam, where art thou ?" It was
extended to Cain, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Moses and the prophets. The angels were already
close to Him, so there was no need to call them, but He called men, whb were fallen far
away. Had men obeyed God's first commands, the Creator would not have become a physician
and come down to call them back from disobedience. As it was, He had to cry to one : "What
hast thou done?" (Gen. iii. 9); to another, "Come out from thy land" (Gen. xii. 1), etc.,
calling them to be as Himself. It is a mistake to suppose that He only called men during
His earthly life. Had it been so, He would have said: "I am not here now to call the
righteous," etc. But the aorist tense "I came" leaves His coming quite undefined, so that
it extends from Adam and the Patriarchs onwards.

33 And if some have refused the call, the fault is in their own choice. The heavenly sun
is like the earthly, whose brightness is for all, and yet some who are drunken remain in
the darkness. Let us now be at peace, unless you have some other cause of perplexity to
bring forward.] CHAPTER XIX. Objection based on the saying: "But ye were washed, but ye
were sanctified" (1 Cor. vi. 11). The Philosopher.283 He, as though roused from some
condition of detachment from the earth, directed against us a saying from Homer, speaking
thus with no little laughter: "Rightly did Homer order the manly Greeks to be silent, as
they had been trained: he published abroad the wavering sentiment of Hector, addressing
the Greeks in measured language, saying, 'Stay, ye Argives; smite not, ye Achaean youths;
for Hector of the waving plume is resolved to speak a word.'" Even so we now all sit in
quietness here; for the interpreter of the Christian doctrines promises us and surely
affirms that he will unravel the dark passages of the Scriptures.

34 Tell therefore, my good sir, to us who are following what you have to say, what the
Apostle means when he says, "But such were some of you" (plainly something base), "but ye
were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus
Christ, and in the Spirit of our God" (1 Cor. vi. 11). For we are surprised and truly
perplexed in mind at such things, if a man, when once he is washed from so many
defilements and pollutions, shows himself to be pure ; if by wiping off the stains of so
much weakness in his life, fornication, adultery, drunkenness, theft, unnatural vice,
poisoning, and countless base and disgusting things, and simply by being baptised and
calling on the name of Christ, he is quite easily freed from them, and puts off the whole
of his guilt just as a snake puts off his old slough. Who is there who would not, on the
strength of these, venture on evil deeds, some mentionable and others not, and do such
things as are neither to be uttered in speech nor endured in deeds, in the knowledge that
he will receive remission from so many criminal actions only by believing and being
baptised, and in the hope that he will after this receive pardon from Him who is about to
judge the quick and the dead? These things incline the man who hears them to commit sin,
and in each particular he is thus taught to practise what is unlawful. These things have
the power to set aside the training of the law, and cause righteousness itself to be of no
avail against the unrighteous. They introduce into the world a form of society which is
without law, and teach men to have no fear of ungodliness ; when a man sets aside a pile
of countless wrongdoings simply by being baptised. Such then is the boastful fiction of
the saying.

35 CHAPTER XXV. Answer to the objection based on the saying: "But ye were washed, but ye
were sanctified" (1 Cor. vi. 11). The Christian.284 The Greek, by importing such terrible
language into his questionings, seemed to be mocking us and casting us into the confusion
of perplexity. But we, earnestly imploring in our heart the aid of Him who reveals the
deep things of darkness, and makes clear the knowledge of man by His teaching, faced in
due season each of the arguments he had spoken. We addressed the band of them thus : "What
great themes and how mightily obscure are they in the way you have set them before us !
But accept the plain answer to them, since it is Christ that brings you this
interpretation through our means. Hearken then first to the first point, and to the second
expressed in the second discourse, then to the third likewise, and the fourth and fifth,
and again to the sixth question at issue, along with the seventh." 285

36 We must therefore speak first of the saying uttered by the Apostle : "And such were
some of you; but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name
of our Lord Jesus Christ and in the spirit of our God." [If the sinful creature is
sometimes pitied and freely forgiven by his Creator, it is only what we see in things
human. The law may decide that a wrongdoer is to be punished, but the king whose law it is
may overrule it by his pardoning grace, even though the man does not deserve it, A
reprieve from death has often been given thus. Such grace does not conform to the letter
of the law, for, if it did, it would not be grace. There are already many things that
God's grace gives us which we have not deserved, such as the light of the sun. Rightly
then does he give sinners freedom from their sin, as a father pitying his children. But
His deed is made to shine forth as a gift of grace, that it may not be ascribed to their
own doing. The law does not join in its Master's gift of grace, but punishes the sin; and
the Lord does not stoop to the level of the law, but simply forgives it.

37 A true illustration of all this has just occurred. It is not a story of long ago, for
it happened only yesterday. Certain obvious criminals, by supplicating the king during his
royal progress, obtained a reversal of their sentence, and were let off without any
punishment, while certain others, who did not approach him, were condemned, in spite of
their obvious innocence of a share in the crimes committed.286 Why then should the Apostle
be blamed in what he says to those who have been "washed" and freed from the penalty that
was theirs under the law? Note that to the words "Ye were washed" he adds "in the name of
the Lord." Just as a signature carries weight either in the army or the law-court if it is
in the king's hand, and not if it is in men's own, just so the water only has the power to
cleanse from the stain of evil when it has been marked by the name of Christ.]

38 For the naming of the Saviour Jesus, that mystically takes place upon the water, makes
it no longer common water, but causes it to be set apart, and indescribably potent to wash
away not only that which shows on the visible body, but the very hidden part of the
conscience. It is able to furnish the reason with weapons like an army, and to fill with
life the man who is washed in it, so that he no longer fears the threatening of the law,
which was hanging over the heads of those who are liable to it. For he flees for refuge to
the Master of the law Himself, and receives from Him the whole armour of grace, and is
thus able to pierce the battle-line of the passions. See then the defence and the array
which follows, see the flash of light given by the Apostle's teaching. He does not say at
once "Ye were sanctified," but he puts first "Ye were washed"; for first a man is washed
and then he is purified, that is to say, sanctified. For as soda when put in water wipes
out the dirt, so the name of Christ, when wrapped in the waters, cleanses him who comes to
them from his fall, and reveals him shining with the bright light of grace. Then after the
sanctification it completes his justification, when every unrighteous deed has been put
off.

39 He says 287 that this does not befall those who are in a state of salvation in any
other way than "in the name of the Lord and the Spirit of God. In a way that is inspired
and altogether fitting, he laid down the dogma that grace is supplied to the faithful from
the Trinity, when he said it was in the name of the Lord and the Spirit,288 and not only
Spirit, but God's Spirit. For he thus names the Godhead of the Three, by saying, not "in
the names" but "in the name. For there is one name of God both upon the Father and the Son
and the Holy Spirit, and God is one in three Persons, and is so named. The Father does not
receive the believer without the Son, nor does the Son bring any one to the Father apart
from the Spirit. For behold the mystic sense in which he said, "But ye were washed, but ye
were sanctified, but ye were justified. For the man whom Jesus has washed, is sanctified
by the Spirit. And the Father justifies him whom the Spirit has sanctified. This is not
because Christ in washing him cannot sanctify, nor that the Spirit in sanctifying has not
power to justify, nor that the Father in justifying is too weak to wash or sanctify
whomsoever He wills. For the Father is sufficient both to wash and to sanctify and to
justify all things, and the Son and the Holy Spirit likewise.

40 But it is fitting that the Son, as Son, should adopt men as sons, and that the Holy
Spirit, as Spirit, should sanctify them, and that the Father should justify him that
receives sanctification, in order that the name of the three Persons may be known in one
essence.289 The Apostle was instructed in this opinion by the Gospel, where it says, "Go
and make disciples of all the nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the
Son and of the Holy Ghost" (Matt, xxviii. 19), and so he welcomes at the laver of baptism
the name of the Trinity, saying, "But ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were
justified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God." 41 [If men
ever use the gift as an opportunity for sinning, it is not the fault of Him who gives the
grace, any more than it is the fault of one who gives a dinner, if the guests get drunk at
it. You speak of men afterwards going on still in their evil ways; but if they do, they
cut themselves off from the blessings which their baptism has brought, and receive no
pity, but cause harm to themselves by their very treatment of the gift.] CHAPTER XX.
Objection based on the Monarchy of God.290 But let us make a thorough investigation
concerning the single rule 291 of the only God and the manifold rule of those who are
worshipped as gods. You do not know how to expound the doctrine even of the single rule.
For a monarch is not one who is alone in his existence, but who is alone in his rule.
Clearly he rules over those who are his fellow-tribesmen, men like himself, just as the
Emperor Hadrian was a monarch, not because he existed alone, nor because he ruled over
oxen and sheep (over which herdsmen or shepherds rule), but because he ruled over men who
shared his race and possessed the same nature. Likewise God would not properly be called a
monarch, unless He ruled over other gods; for this would befit His divine greatness and
His heavenly and abundant honour.

42 CHAPTER XXVI. Answer to objection based on the Monarchy of God. [As you have taken an
image to express the rule of one God over many, the first point in my answer must be the
matter of similarity in name.292 It is quite wrong to suppose that because things bear the
same name they must be identical in reality. For example, the name of "warm" is given both
to the fire and to the man who is warmed by it, but it is only the fire that is so by
nature. He who has warmed himself is also warm, but only relatively.293 So God alone is a
god absolutely; the others are only such relatively,294 although the name of "God" may be
given to "gods many and lords many." God rules not as having the same name as other gods
and therefore as one of them, but as supreme, and without being one of them. He is
uncreate, and they are creatures, whom He has made, and it is thus that He rules over
them. He does not grudge them the name of god if they simply draw their divinity from
nearness to Him ; it is when they turn away from Him that they fall into darkness.

43 The case of Hadrian is not a parallel, for as man he cannot be master of his fellow-men
(who are like himself), but only as having the added power of tyrant. Bat God's is not a
tyrannical rule over those who are like Himself, but a loving rule over His inferiors. We
may liken Him to the sun, which gives things light and beauty till they themselves are
bright, and yet receives nothing back from them. Just so God makes the angels shine with a
reflected Godhead, though they have no part in His actual deity. And so the right thing to
do is to worship Him who is God absolutely. To worship one who is merely such relatively
is as great a mistake as to hope to get heat and light from a red-hot iron instead of from
the fire itself, for the metal will soon resume its own nature. Such is the case of the
man who worships an angel or any other spiritual being except the one true God.

44 As the sun gives light to all, and yet loses none, and as the teacher imparts his
teaching and yet retains his wisdom, so does God give all things and yet lack none, and so
did power go out from Christ to heal the sick, and yet it remained within Him.] CHAPTER
XXI. Objection based on the immortal angels (Matt. xxii. 29-30), and the finger of God,
with which He wrote on the tables of stone (Exod. xxxi. 18). 45 At any rate, if you say
that angels stand before God, who are not subject to feeling and death, and immortal in
their nature, whom we ourselves speak of as gods, because they are close to the Godhead,
why do we dispute about a name ? And are we to consider it only a difference of
nomenclature ? 295 For she who is called by the Greeks Athene is called by the Romans
Minerva; and the Egyptians, Syrians, and Thracians address her by some other name. But I
suppose nothing in the invocation of the goddess is changed or lost by the difference of
the names. The difference therefore is not great, whether a man calls them gods or angels,
since their divine nature bears witness to them, as when Matthew writes thus: "And Jesus
answered and said, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God; for in the
resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels in
heaven" (Matt. xxii. 29-30). Since therefore He confesses that the angels have a share in
the divine nature,296 those who make a suitable object of reverence for the gods, do not
think that the god297 is in the wood or stone or bronze from which the image is
manufactured, nor do they consider that, if any part of the statue is cut off, it detracts
from the power of the god.

46 For the images of living creatures and the temples were set up by the ancients for the
sake of remembrance, in order that those who approach thither might come to the knowledge
of the god when they go; or, that, as they observe a special time and purify themselves
generally,298 they may make use of prayers and supplications, asking from them the things
of which each has need. For if a man makes an image of a friend, of course he does not
think that the friend is in it, or that the limbs of his body are included in the various
parts of the representation ; but honour is shown towards the friend by means of the
image. But in the case of the sacrifices that are brought to the gods, these are hot so
much a bringing of honour to them as a proof of the inclination of the worshippers, to
show that they are not without a sense of gratitude. It is reasonable that the form of the
statues should be the fashion of a man, since man is reckoned to be the fairest of living
creatures and an image of God. It is possible to get hold of this doctrine from another
saying, which asserts positively that God has fingers, with which He writes, saying, "And
he gave to Moses the two tables which were written by the finger of God" (Exod. xxxi. 18).

47 Moreover, the Christians also, imitating the erection of the temples, build very large
houses,299 into which they go together and pray, although there is nothing to prevent them
from doing this in their own houses, since the Lord 300 certainly hears from every place.
48 CHAPTER XXVII. Answer to the objection based on the immortal angels (Matt. xxii.
29-30), and the finger of God, with which He wrote on the tables of stone (Exod. xxxi.
18). 49 Further, we will state the proposition in due measure concerning the angels and
their immortality, and how in the kingdom of heaven "they neither marry nor are given in
marriage, but are as angels in heaven. Christ, wishing to show the blessedness of those
who have been granted to dwell in the heavenly place, and the misfortune of those who
dwell amid the corruption of the earth, and have received their condition through the
unclean growth of the flesh, being begotten and begetting and departing quickly like
leaves, conveys the following meaning: "Those who have been thought worthy to enter into a
life which knows no destruction, embark on a course which is worthy of kings, and is such
as the angels have. They are rid of physical union, they no longer experience death, nor
even birth, and are shut off from earthly embraces and bonds. He said this in order that
any man who was well disposed, on hearing of a rational existence in heaven, which is
associated with the Word of immortality, might adapt his life to the imitation of them,301
and in his deeds would zealously affect their merit, refraining from marriage and fleeing
from the symbols of corruption. And in the end he would pass through the door of death,
and rise, with earthly weights removed, to the hall of the blessed, that is, of the
angels.

50 He does not however represent them by fashioning images of them,302 as you yourself
declare, nor does he speak to what is a shadow and rejoice in that which his imagination
has created, associating with things soulless and material as if they were possessed of
life, delighting in dead visions of forms, bringing his supplication to a dumb thing which
he has moulded, deciding that the divine lurks in stone and wood, imagining that such
matter as cannot be held at all, is held by bronze and iron, and picturing in a dead
vision and without any sense that he is catching that which cannot be caught.303 51 And
again, if it be true that angels have sometimes appeared in human form, yet they were not
really that which appeared, but that which they were was invisible. And if any one
fashions a picture or a representation in bronze, he does not make that which it really
is, nor does he enclose its nature therein. [As for God being so material as to have
"fingers," etc., Scripture does not mean that He can be divided into limbs and parts of a
body. This is not meant to refer to His nature, but He is thus spoken of in order that men
may understand. To suppose that God has material fingers and other parts because man must
conceive of Him thus, is no more true than that it is a real lion that a man has seen when
he has beheld one in a dream. Similarly the angels who appeared to Abraham were not really
of the human form and behaviour they appeared to be, as is sufficiently proved by the way
they consumed the food offered them. So Abraham made no image of them, except in the
mindful tablets of his mind.]

52 CHAPTER XXII. Objection based on the Incarnation of the Word. But even supposing any
one of the Greeks were so light-minded as to think that the gods dwell within the statues,
his idea would be a much purer one than that of the man who believes that the Divine
entered into the womb of the Virgin Mary, and became her unborn child, before being born
and swaddled in due course, for it is a place full of blood and gall, and things more
unseemly still. CHAPTER XXVIII. Answer to the objection based on the Incarnation of the
Word. 53 If it seems to you far preferable that the Divine should be pleased to dwell in a
statue, and not have been made flesh in Mary on account of the humiliation of such an
experience, listen more fully to the mystery of the doctrine, how that the all-sufficient
and creative Word, though He be great and powerful and far removed from feeling, yet has
not feared to face all the things that are a cause of shame among ourselves. For He is
without feeling in that wherein He is not ashamed to be born like men who are subject to
feeling. He is without defilement in that wherein He receives no corruption through
wickedness. Therefore the Word is made flesh, not lowering Himself to the disease or
humiliation of the flesh, but leading the things of the flesh to His own immortality. For
just as the sun when it descends into wetness does not receive a sense of wetness, and is
not found to be muddy, but dries up the wetness of the mud, keeping the water away from
itself altogether, and not having its rays affected, even so God the Word, who is the Sun
of the world of mind, though descending to the flesh, draws up no sickness therefrom, and
is not found either overcome by its passions or falling by reason of the weakness of its
evil nature.

54 On the contrary, by leading it up from its slippery places, and dragging it up out of
its misfortunes, He set it in a divine blessedness that was allotted to it, giving it
warmth when it was wasting away, and holding it together when it was being dissolved by
its sins. The result was to make it irresistible and invincible and able to conquer the
assaults of its defects, so that the flesh might retain its nature and yet disown the
accusation which that nature involves, preserving its limits and yet rejecting the
confusion which those limits cause. This is the reason that He worked out the fulfilment
of the dispensation, not in any other thing, but in the flesh. Nor did He do this in flesh
of any unique kind, but in human flesh, and moreover in that of a virgin. This was in
order that He might show that it was from the virgin earth that He took the flesh and made
it in the beginning, as the dwelling-place of mind and reason and soul, and in like manner
He now prepared a temple for Himself from a maid and virgin, without needing the hand and
art of man. Pray, which is the more precious of the two---soil, or a virgin? Man or mud ?
Surely man is superior to mud, and a virgin more precious than soil.

55 If, therefore, God is not ashamed to take soil from the earth, but works in muddy
material and fashions man from it, how will He delay to take man from man, or how will He
hesitate to wear flesh from a virgin ? Will He not set aside all lingering and delay, and
take hold of that compound which is more precious than the earth, and make from it an
image that bears His Godhead, in the birth of the Only-begotten ?304 It is as dwelling in
this image that He shakes the world by the beauty of His virtue, and flashes light upon
all by the grace of His gift. 56 Prometheus, whose story is well known among yourselves,
fashions man, and there is no shame at all about it. And Zeus makes in Athena a woman who
came to life, and you approve of the myth and magnify the fact, without seeing anything
shameful in it or reckoning it a misfortune, and not enquiring into the question of hidden
parts. And yet, if there is really any shame about it at all, it is much more shameful to
fashion parts and conceal them with certain coverings, than to pass through them for the
sake of the dispensation and the word that brings profit.305 For he who makes a building
and then turns round and refuses to live in it, stands self-accused, and is an implacable
judge of himself, because he did not reckon that there was any question of shame when he
was making it; but after its completion, he slanders the result of his own labours, by
judging the work on which he has lavished his care to be unfit to dwell in. So the Deity,
in making man, incurs the charge of injustice, if He is ashamed to dwell in him, and
refuses to take His portion from him. For by so doing He has made the workmanship of His
own exertion to be of no value at all, and has slandered all His own wisdom by ignoring
it, because He made a representation of His own glory, and then decided that it was
shameful to dwell in it.

57 CHAPTER XXIII. Objection based on the saying: "Thou shalt not revile gods" (Exod. xxii.
28). I could also give proof to you of that insidious name of "gods" from the law, when it
cries out and admonishes the hearer with much reverence, "Thou, shalt not revile gods, and
thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people." For it does not speak to us of
other gods than those already within our reckoning, from what we know in the words, "Thou
shalt not go after gods" (Jer. vii. 6); and again, "If ye go and worship other gods"
(Deut. xii. 28). It is not men, but the gods who are held in honour by us, that are meant,
not only by Moses, but by his successor Joshua. For he says to the people, "And now fear
him and serve him alone, and put away the gods whom your fathers served" (Josh. xxiv. 14).
And it is not concerning men, but incorporeal beings that Paul says, "For though there be
that are called gods, whether on earth or in heaven, yet to us there is but one God and
Father, of whom are all things" (1 Cor. viii. 5). Therefore you make a great mistake in
thinking that God is angry if any other is called a god, and obtains the same title as
Himself. For even rulers do not object to the title from their subjects,306 nor masters
from slaves. And it is not right to think that God is more petty-minded than men. Enough
then about the fact that gods exist, and ought to receive honour.

58 CHAPTER XXIX. Answer to the objection based on the saying: " Thou shall not revile gods
" (Exod. xxii. 28). [So we must be afraid to hold such an opinion, but we must confess
that God took our flesh, and not think of Him as dwelling in statues.307 Nor must we call
the four elements gods, nor deify the stars, even though the name of their motion may
suggest it.308 It is the charioteer and not the horses that receives the crown of victory,
and the honour must be all for God who guides the stars. Even though statues were actually
to talk, we must not give them honour. The words of Moses, "Thou shall not revile gods,"
are spoke of men, not gods. What he means is that those may be called "gods" to whom the
word of God has come, just as those are called warm whom the fire has warmed.309 It is
only men's folly that has imagined God to be in images. Moses does not mean supernatural
gods in this sense, for no one would uselessly revile such a god, which had no
consciousness whereby to perceive his abuse. The Deity is no more interfered with by men
bearing His name, than a man would be by a dog being called after him. To call mean things
" gods" does God Himself no harm, it is only mocking the name. God is not angry at it, but
it only brings harm on those who do it.]

59 CHAPTER XXIV. Objection based on the resurrection of the flesh.310 60 Let us once again
discuss the question of the resurrection of the dead. For what is the reason that God
should act thus, and upset in this random way the succession of events that has held good
until now, whereby He ordained that races should be preserved and not come to an end,
though from the beginning He has laid down these laws and framed things thus? The things
which have once been determined by God, and preserved through such long ages, ought to be
everlasting, and ought not to be condemned by Him who wrought them, and destroyed as if
they had been made by some mere man, and arranged as mortal things by one who is himself a
mortal. Wherefore it is ridiculous if, when the whole is destroyed, the resurrection shall
follow, and if He shall raise---shall we say ?---the man who died three years before the
resurrection, and along with him Priam and Nestor who died a thousand years before, and
others who lived before them from the beginning of the human race. And if any one is
prepared to grasp even this, he will find that the question of the resurrection is one
full of silliness. For many have often perished in the sea, and their bodies have been
consumed by fishes, while many have been eaten by wild beasts and birds. How then is it
possible for their bodies to rise up? Come then, and let us put to the test this statement
which is so lightly made. Let us take an example.

61 A man was shipwrecked, the mullets devoured his body, next these were caught and eaten
by some fishermen, who were killed and devoured by dogs; when the dogs died ravens and
vultures feasted on them and entirely consumed them. How then will the body of the
shipwrecked man be brought together, seeing that it was absorbed by so many creatures?
Again, suppose another body to have been consumed by fire, and another to have come in the
end to the worms, how is it possible for it to return to the essence which was there from
the beginning ? 62 You will tell me that this is possible with God, but this is not true.
For all things are not possible with Him ; He simply cannot bring it about that Homer
should not have become a poet, or that Troy should not be taken. Nor indeed can He make
twice two, which make the number four, to be reckoned as a hundred, even though this may
seem good to Him. Nor can God ever become evil, even though He wishes; nor would He be
able to sin, as being good by nature. If then He is unable to sin or to become evil, this
does not befall Him through His weakness. In the case of those who have a disposition and
fitness for a certain thing, and then are prevented from doing it, it is clear that it is
by their weakness that they are prevented. But God is by nature good, and is not prevented
from being evil; nevertheless, even though He is not prevented, he cannot become bad.

63 And pray consider a further point. How unreasonable it is if the Creator shall stand by
and see the heaven melting, though no one ever conceived anything more wonderful than its
beauty, and the stars falling, and the earth perishing ; and yet He will raise up the
rotten and corrupt bodies of men, some of them, it is true, belonging to admirable men,
but others without charm or symmetry before they died, and affording a most unpleasant
sight. Again, even if He could easily make them rise in a comely form, it would be
impossible for the earth to hold all those who had died from the beginning of the world,
if they were to rise again. CHAPTER XXX. Answer to the objection based on the resurrection
of the flesh. [Do not raise an uproar against me, for there is no doubt that the
resurrection is a difficulty. I will speak simply, and not with any flowery language which
might deceive, like a base coin washed over with gold.]

64 First of all we may fitly consider the following point: has that which is created come
into being from what existed already or not? If it was from what had an existence, there
was no sense in attaching a beginning to it. But if such a beginning has to be attached,
the reason is quite plain (i.e. that it was made from nothing). But if, from being
nothing, God has given it an existence, what kind of essence312 did He grant to that which
had none just before? For He who brought into being that which was not, will be all the
more likely to preserve that which came into existence, even when it is dissolved, and to
think it deserving of a better conclusion to be added. For it is the property of a nature
that is unbegotten to change for the better the existence of the things that are begotten,
and to lead to a renewal the things which He has created in time, and to wipe off with
grace the things which were stained with the poison of wickedness, and to consider the
things which were exhausted as worthy of a second beginning and a kind of remaking. For
the world, after again receiving a better form and covering, does not dissolve its being,
but on the contrary, it rejoices in being clothed with a fairer beauty than that which it
received before.

65 It befits the Divine alone to remain in a state of sameness, but for creation it is
suitable that it should suffer change and alteration. Therefore the present life and order
is our guide, leading us like children to the future assembly of immortality, and
preparing us to face the glory that will lead us upward. For our present life is like a
womb containing a babe, for it holds down the whole being of things in obscurity, in the
forgetfulness of ignorance, where the light does not penetrate. The whole of what is
growing must rise from the present age as from the membrane which holds it in the womb,
and must receive a second mode of life in the light of the abiding place which is
inviolable. 66 You would like to think that corruption goes on without end, that it is
born in foulness and dies in filth, that it begets and is begotten and is covered in
forgetfulness, that evil flourishes and calamity increases, that it melts through want and
grows thin through poverty, suffering ill by day and sleeping by night, eating in luxury
and then again in bitterness weighed down with satiety, and suffering in scarcity ; a
state alike of slavery and mastership, the rich man standing up and the poor man lying
down, the old man falling and the young man rising, the breasts of women growing and the
babe receiving suck, sorrow being brought by care and disease by toil, the life of the
country hated and the life of the city welcomed, equality being shunned and that which is
unequal being sought after, the nature of things troubled by much anomaly, cast down in
winter and burning in summer, brightened by the flowers of spring in their season, and
nourished by the fruits of autumn, digging the earth and working its clods . . . making a
tragedy of existence and a comedy of life. . . . And that the hateful covering of these
things should never pass away, even late in time, nor their dark robe disappear ; that the
soul should never be free from the inhuman earth; that lamentation should never be silent;
. . . that the violence of tyrants should never die; . . .

67 that the toil of those that groan should never be lightened, nor the tears of the
mourners comforted ; that the virtues of those who have mastered themselves should never
shine forth, nor the boasting of the proud be quenched ; that the deeds of the unrighteous
should never be punished, nor the success of the righteous be seen ; that there should be
no judgment of the cunning of quackery and no honour for the guilelessness of the sincere;
. . . that the earth should never be freed from pollutions,313 nor the sea have rest from
navigation ;314 that the world should not be turned round like a wheel and preserve its
essence while changing its form ; that everything in the whole world should not receive a
renewal apart from the things which transcend it, nor receive a genuine newness of life;
that the order of things should never put off its disorder, nor cast aside the
unseemliness which it has now, but retain its grievous garb beyond the limits of time, and
be yet more exhausted by its calamities !

68 For that which appears to be brought down upon the world as wholly a ruin and a
destruction is really the beginning of immortality and the starting-point of salvation.
For a second beautifying of life will make it a success, when rational nature shall a
second time receive in the resurrection the word of a beginning which will be
indissoluble. It is for the sake of man that the whole suffers change, seeing that it was
also for his sake that at the outset it was deemed worthy of a beginning. Man was made on
his own account, not on account of any other being, but heaven and earth and the things
that appertain to them are created on man's account, and when he receives a change and
alteration, the whole must be changed and wiped out along with him. Think of an architect
who builds a house to begin with, and then when it has grown weak in course of time and
come to an end by a fall, he raises it up again and considers it worthy of better
workmanship and comeliness, not troubling himself which stone was laid first in the
beginning or which was second or third in the building ; but he erects it by setting in
the last stones among the first and the first among the last, and the middle ones
haphazard, not in the least disturbing the plan of the erection thereby, nor causing the
arrangement of his workmanship to be found fault with;

69 but, by applying suitable adornment to the house and decorating the form of its
appearance, he receives abundant praise for his skill. Just in the same way God became the
maker of reasoning beings like an architect making a house, and created man in the
beginning, and built him as the sacred abode of divine power, composed of many kindred
races like stones. And after he has been made for many ages and seasons, and has fallen by
many experiences of sins, and in the end is altogether undone and destroyed, He will raise
him up again, and will bring nature together with skilful understanding and wise
authority, and will gather together the things that have been scattered, allowing none of
the things that have fallen to perish; and, even though He place the first among the last
in His arrangement, and bring those at the end into the first rank of merit, He will not
at all disturb what He has done, but will grant that setting forth of the resurrection
which is suitable to each.

70 And even if it is as you say, and Priam or Nestor died a thousand years ago, while some
other man may die three days before the resurrection, none of them when he rises again
will feel either measureless grief or abundance of joy therefrom, but each of them will
receive what is suitable to him in accordance with his own deeds, and he will not have
either blame or praise for the arrangement of the resurrection, neither for its speediness
nor again for its tardiness, but it will be his own manner of life that he will either
delight in or find fault with. For with God a period of a thousand years is reckoned as
one brief day (cf. 2 Peter iii. 8),315 and again the brief space, if He thinks fit,
becomes the stretching out of countless ages. Therefore these are the words of petty folk,
when they say, "If He is going to raise up the man who died three days before in like
manner as the man of a thousand years before, He does a very great injustice."

71 [For in ancient times men lived to be five hundred or more, and the man who died just
before the resurrection may have had a sorry life and not lived to be thirty. It is
doubtless in accordance with a divine plan that the former should sleep the longest, and
the latter should receive speedier consolation. As for your childish objection based on
the shipwrecked man who was eaten by fishes and they by men, the men by dogs, and the dogs
by vultures, making it impossible for his resurrection to take place, your words are like
those of a man dreaming in a drunken sleep.] 72 For you suggest that He who makes the fire
would not have the power to work in the way that fire does, in bringing about the
resurrection. For when there is silver and gold lying in the soil, or lead and tin, bronze
and iron, as it were hidden away somewhere, fire, by burning the soil and heating the
material, brings out the silver and gold, etc., so as to separate them, allowing none of
their essence to perish, unless there is something earthy in them anywhere which admits of
destruction. If then the power of fire is so strong and has such a drastic effect that it
brings out pure material from some other material, and preserves the essence of each
undestroyed, even though the gold has fallen into countless cavities, and is dissolved
into endless fragments and scattered into mire or clay, in heaps of earth or of dung; and
if the fire, when applied to all, preserves the gold and expels the substance of the parts
that are destructible, what are we to say about Him who ordained the nature of the fire ?
Pray would He not have the power without even an effort to change man, His rational
treasure more precious than gold, who is contained in matter of various kinds, and to set
before Him safe and sound those who have perished by land or sea, in rivers or in lakes,
those who have been eaten by wild beasts or birds, those who have been dissolved into fine
dust that cannot be measured ? Will He be found to be less effective than the fire? And
will He be impotent by the arguments you have adduced ?

73 As for that strange phantasy which has come into your head, that God cannot do all
things, you think to shape it into plausibility by means of your arguments, but it is
really like a prop without foundation, and does not stand. How shall we make it clear to
you that God has power to do all things ? Shall it be from the divine essence itself, or
from the sense of fitness ? Or shall we test the question from both of the two, and
expound to you first, if that is what you like, the meaning of the point at issue as
judged from the inviolable nature itself? For instance, if God is able to make that which
has been made to be not made, that which is created necessarily changes into that which is
uncreated. But if we grant this, it follows that we may argue that there are two uncreated
things; or rather, nothing is created, but the whole is uncreated. From such reasoning
much that is fabulous results, for in this way even that which is uncreated will be
created. But when that which is uncreated comes under the head of the created, the
argument about the created does not stand. For who will be the maker of the created, if
the uncreated does not exist?

74 Akin to this is the question whether God, who is uncreated, can make Himself created.
As some say that it is impossible for the uncreated to become created, He cannot do so.
And since He is righteous, He will grant justice by avenging the downtrodden. For if He
were not to do this, His power would manifestly be nothing but slackness and folly, that
He should make all things and penetrate them by a law of creation, and then that He should
despise them, giving no honour to that which welcomed virtue in this life, and no judgment
to that which gave heed to wickedness during the course of existence; but that He should
allow that which is good and its opposite to be plunged alike in forgetfulness, neither
crowning the virtue as virtue nor laying bare the wickedness, . . . but simply allowing
human nature to be tossed about in silence, as though it had no existence, and making no
investigation of either the wickedness in it or the virtue. Such a belief as this does not
suit with the divine providence, nor does this idea accord with the immortal nature. On
the contrary, it is altogether different, and quite strange and foreign to the attitude of
Him who is inviolable 316 and far removed from it, that God should thus have no care for
the things of His own creation, standing by and watching the destruction of the theory of
His creative workmanship, and paying no heed when men depart into obscurity.

75 We conclude therefore that He will raise up all things, and will grant them a second
existence. He will judge the world for the things wherein it has sinned, sparing those who
have believed in Him sincerely, and punishing those who were not willing to receive Him,
nor reverencing the mystery of His appearing. All the colts that are signed with the
king's letter and mark are deemed worthy of a royal stable and manger; and even though
they be feeble in body and ineffective in strength and sluggish in running, and though
they be not like the rest in condition, yet because of that which is marked on them317
they are precious and honourable. But all those that have not the royal branding, even
though they may be nimble and swift, and impossible to overtake, and though they be of
good racing ancestry, and of high renown, are nevertheless expelled from the royal stables
(and this illustration is not a myth or the narrative of a story-teller, but a genuine
record, and a true relation of known facts). Just in the same way all who were sealed with
the sign of salvation, who engraved the almighty Name on the tablet of their soul, all who
judged their confession towards God more potent than their own sins, these have escaped
the danger of the judgment to come, and sailed without harm past what may be called
Charybdis, gazing with the eye of faith on the common light of their salvation and the
abundant redemption of Him who came to earth.

76 For as the man who had put on a breastplate strong and thick and that cannot be loosed
from his shoulders, is unwounded in war, and is not taken prisoner when terrors stand
round about him, even so the man who has put on the confession of Him who is mightier than
he, has no fear of the threatening of universal judgment. For as the fire does not consume
that which is called "inviolable,"318 and does not burn the sword but brightens and
tempers it, so those who are dipped in the inviolable Name will never be affected by fire
or by judgment, which will flee before the Name which is named upon them. 77 If a man has
an eye that is able to see, the sun fills it with abundant light when it is opened, but
when the eye is shut it commits it to darkness. The sun itself does nothing wrong, and
does not harm his vision; but the man who is possessed of sight has brought his own
penalty. He is not wronged by the sun's rays, but he made darkness for himself out of
those things in which he might have shown himself to be co-operating with the light, by
receiving a proof of light in his seeing the sun, and by having a proof of darkness in his
not seeing it, he himself being in both cases his own arbiter and judge. Even thus a man
who believes in God and trusts in Him, who may be termed the divine light of the mind, is
found to be a partner of God in whom he believes, shunning the darkness of ignorance and
want of knowledge, and nourished by the brightness of heavenly doctrines, being himself
aware of salvation beforehand through beholding the divine, and having in his own
possession, as a great and sufficient preservation of his faith, the remedy of salvation.

78 But the man who is disabled by the blindness of wilful unbelief, and, turning away from
the brightness of the light in which all may share, moves in the darkness like some
creature swimming in the depths of the sea, showing no fulfilment of the good deeds of
virtue, receives no praise even though he be wise apart from the light. And even though he
co-operate with those who are near him, he receives no dignity; and even if he does what
is righteous but does not take the light as test and judge, his labours are subject to
blame, and he does not escape from accusation. And even though his soul be trained in
natural righteousness, hating plunder and refraining from theft, not breaking through the
rights of other men's marriages, not despising or insulting his neighbour, but fighting
for his fatherland, enduring ills on behalf of his kindred, and showing all kinds of
excellences in his deeds, he is without sanctification and does everything to no purpose,
since he does not accept the mastership of Him who perishes not, as the judge of all that
is done by him.

79 For as beauty has no praise apart from the beauty of the light, and a reckoning does
not receive its completion apart from the measuring rule of the things that are measured,
even so right action and all the virtue and ordering of men's deeds, when it does not
accept as test and judge the unsleeping eye of that gaze which beholds all things, is like
a pearl hidden in the mud, the beauty of which is not seen in the light but is concealed
in a rubbish heap.319 For tell me, who will crown or reward the restraint of the man who
has self-control ? Who will honour the soldier with pay after his deed of valour? Who will
deem worthy of rewards the man who has contended in the games ? Is not his running, merely
considered in itself, a matter of blame? Is not the success of the man who has done his
soldiering to no purpose apart from his general ? Is not the contest of him who has the
mastery of himself a pitiable thing without one to crown him ? Is not the tribute of
subjects of no benefit without a king? Even thus the issue of every kind of righteousness
is stripped of the reward of the good, if it be not done in the name and to the honour of
the Creator.

80 And, on the other hand, any man who believes that there is One who is potent to behold
and judge his deeds and activities, even though he be full of guilt, and the servant of
unholy practices, and though he have set himself to be a follower of abominable deeds, by
bringing the examination of his own deeds before the eyes of the Creator (just as the sick
man discloses the affections of his body to a sympathetic physician), he is freed from all
grief and trouble, and is rid of the countless stripes of his transgressions. For the
Saviour is able to sa--- . . . 81 (Here the Athens MS. ends.)


APOCRITICUS
===========

APOCRITICUS continued

BOOK V

1 [Fragment quoted in Greek by F. Turrianus (De la Torre), Dogmaticus de Justificatione,
ad Germanos adversus Luteranos, Romae, 1557, p. 37.] 320 The subject is Faith and Works,
and Turrianus says that Magnetes writes as follows concerning the faith of Abraham :---
For having believed through good works, he was well-pleasing to God, and therefore was
considered worthy of the friendship of Him who is higher. By doing these things he caused
his faith to shine brighter than the sun. And together with his faith he works what is
right, wherefore he is beloved of God and honoured. For, knowing that faith is the
foundation of success, he roots it deep, building upon it the multitude of mercies. For,
joining each of the two things with a kindred bond, he raises on each a lofty rampart, by
acquiring a faith which receives the testimony of works. Nor again does he allow the works
to be base, or sundered from the faith, but knowing that faith is a seed which produces
abundant fruit, he brings together all things that are brought in contact with the seed,
earth, ploughman, wallet, yoke, plough, and as many things as the husbandman's skill has
devised. For as the seed is not sown apart from these, and reason completes none of the
things mentioned above apart from the seed, so faith which in some sense stands for
mystical seed, is unfruitful if it abides alone, unless it grow by means of good works.
And in like manner the linking together of good deeds is a useless thing and altogether
incomplete, unless it have faith woven in with it. Wherefore, in order that it may reveal
Abraham as making the grace of his works to shine forth from faith, the divine Scripture
says, "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness" (Gen. xv.
6).321

2 You see how faith made preceding good deeds of virtue to be reckoned for righteousness,
just as the sowing makes the land to bring forth fruit. For as a light makes the quality
of the oil to shine forth when put in a lamp, so faith, being as it were put into a lamp,
made the virtue of Abraham's works to give a brilliant light. For Abraham, as a natural
result of his teaching, welcomed what was just and equal in social life, and showed
himself serviceable to his neighbours, and without guile, living to avoid evil both in
giving and in receiving, giving consolation without stint to those who needed it; in a
word, he refrained from evil 322 practices. But even if these things were good in
appearance and respected, yet no one reckoned them, no one set virtue under its right
heading, for no one had the power to do so. save God only, and he did not yet believe. But
when Abraham believed God, these things, experiences of this kind that were good, were
reckoned unto Abraham for righteousness.

3 Turrianus ends the above quotation with the words "Hactenus Magnetes," but there are
strong reasons for thinking that he is still reproducing the substance of the Apocriticus
in the words that follow. (For the arguments which make this probable, see J.T.S. vol.
viii. No. 32, July 1907, pp. 559-560.) After referring to the above three parables of the
building, the seed, and the lamp, he adds (in Latin):--- There is yet a fourth parable,
and a very apt one, as it seems to me---namely, that of the lump and the leaven, showing
how faith is like the lump, while good and spiritual works are like leaven. For bread is
unpleasant without leaven, and difficult for digestion and nutrition; and again, leaven
alone without the lump is altogether useless, but when it is added to the lump it makes it
pleasant and firm, wholesome and easy of digestion. Even so love, when we walk according
to God's commands, is like leaven in binding and permeating the whole lump of faith, that
is to say, by making it firm and fermenting it, it renders it wholesome and useful. Thus
the lump of faith without the leaven of love and good works is neither useful nor a
wholesome food for the soul, nor is it pleasing to God ; nor again is love fitting,
however wide it be, without the lump of faith. But it is the combination and mingling of
the two that is wholesome. This new mixture of faith and good works is pleasing to God,
without the old leaven, that is to say, without the corruption of concupiscence which is
in the world.323

4 END

FOOTNOTES

Macarius Magnes: Apocriticus. -- Footnotes

1. τῶν ἀποκριτικῶν πρὸς Ἕλληνας λόγων. But the full title of the work is first given as
The Apocriticus or Monogenes to the Greeks of Macarius Magnes, concerning the questions
and solutions in the Gospel. 2. The full title is again first given, in somewhat different
form, as The Apocriticus or Monogenes to the Greeks of Macarius Magnes, concerning the
questions and answers in dispute in the New Testament. 3. Macarius replies to two
questions in one answer. 2 4. The heading gives it thus as two separate chapters, although
there is but one chapter in the text in the case of both question and answer. 5. See
Nicephorus, Antirrhetici Libri, ap. Pitra, Spicilegium Solesmense, tom. i. p. 303 et seq.
6. 2 Turrianus, Dogmaticus de Justificatione ad Germanos adversus Luteranos, Romae, 1557,
p. 37 et seq. 7. 1 See p. 166, n. 1. 8. 2 See p. 31. 9. 1 See F. Turrianus, Adversus
Magdeburgenses, Colon. 1573, ii. 3, p. 165; i. 5, p. 21, and ii. 13, p, 208. 10. 2 See
Migne, Patr, Graec. X. p. 1343 et seq. His opinions are summarised by Pitra, Spicil.
Solesm. i. p. 545. 11. 3 Macarii Magnetis quae supersunt, ex inedito codice edidit, C.
Blondel, Klincksieck, Paris, 1876. It is this which has been used in the translation which
follows, and reference is occasionally made to its pages. 12. 4 De Macario Magnete et
scriptis ejus, Klincksieck, Paris, 1877. 13. 1 Lactantius, Div. Instit. v. 2. 14. 2
Möller, Schärers Theol. Lit. Zeit. 1877, p. 521 ; Zahn, Zeitschrift fär Kirchengeschichte,
B. ii. p. 450 et seq., 1878; Wagenmann, Jahrbächer fär Deutsche Theol. B. xxii. p. 141,
1878. On such authority, Dr. Salmon simply states it as a fact in the article on Macarius
in the Dict. Christ. Biog. 15. 3 See J.T.S. of April 1907 (vol. viii. No. 31), p. 404 et
seq., Macarius Magnes, a Neglected Apologist, and July 1907 (vol. viii.

3 No, 33, p. 546 et seq.). 16. 1 Kritik des Neues Testaments von einen griechischen
Philosophen der 3 Jahrhunderts, etc. (Texte und Untersuchungen, etc. xxxvii. 4, Leipzig,
1911). 17. 2 J.T.S. April and July 1914 (vol. xv. Nos. 59 and 60), The work of Porphyry
against the Christians, and its reconstruction. 18. 3 Georg Schalkhausser, Zu der
Schriften des Makarios von Magnesia, Leipzig, 1907. 19. 4 Op. cit. pp. 39 and 12. 20. 1
See p. 95, n. 2. 21. 2 Corpus Inscript. Lat. t. 3, No. 133, ap. Duch. p. 20. 22. 1 Apocr.
iii. 1. 23. 2 Euseb., In Hieroclem, in Gottfriedus Alearius's edition of Philostratus,
Lipsiae, 1709, p. 459. 4 ἀφανισθῆναι φησὶν αὐτόν should be compared with ἀφανὴς ἐγένετο of
the Apocriticus. 24. 3 Div. Instit. v. 3. 25. 4 Migne, Patr. Graec. xxii. pp. 797-800, ch.
2. 26. 5 For details, and for further points in this connexion, see J.T.S. of April 1911,
p. 377 et seq. 27. 1 e.g. Apocr. iii. 30, p. 125, 1. 6, and iii. 36, p. 131, 1. 9. It is
argued that such remarks are merely interpolations, but sometimes (as in iv. 19) the
personal introduction gradually shades off into the words of the objection. 28. 2
Lactantius, De Mortibus Persecutorum, xvi. 29. 3 See e.g. Apocr. ii. 12, and the Preface
to iii. for the heathen's attitude, and iii. 10 for his own. 30. 4 Apocr. iv. 3, p. 160,
l. 6, and iv. 5, p. 163, l. 4. 31. 1 Apocr. ii. 15, p. 24. 32. 2 Ibid. iv. 13. 33. 3 Ibid.
iv. 25 : ἵνα τριῶν ὑποστάσεων ἐν οὐσίᾳ μιᾷ γνωρισθῇ τὸ ὒνομα ; but this is not identical
with the later stereotyped phrase

5 μία οὐσία ἐν τρισὶν ὑποστάσεσιν. 34. 4 For a discussion of the whole subject, see J.T.S.
of July 1907, p. 553 et seq. See also below, pp. xxviii, 141, 142, and 155. 35. 1 Apocr.
iii. 9; Greg. Nyss., Or. Cat. chs. xxi.-xxvi. 36. 2 Rufinus, Comment, in Symb. Apost. §
14. 37. 3 Holl., Amphil. p. 91 et seq. 38. 4 J. T.S. April and July 1907. 39. 5 Some
scholars have regarded "The Blessed Magnesian" as simply a nom deguerre, or as suggesting
an anonymous author, while others have simply written of him as Magnetes. 40. 1 He is
condemned, particularly with regard to the non-eternity of punishment, of being a follower
6 τοῦ δυσσεβοῦς καὶ ἀποπλήκτου ’Ωριγένους, Nic., op. cit. ; cf. Apocr. iv. 16, p. 187, 1.
32. 41. 2 Apocr. iii. 16, p. 96, and iii. 24, p. 108 et seq. 42. 3 Nic., op. cit., στολὴν
ἱερέως ἀμπεχόμενον. 43. 4 Lumper (ap. Migne, Patr. Lat. v. p. 343) suggests that our
author was confused with the Macarius of the Oak, and "hinc fortasse sive fraude, sive
ignorantia, Episcopi titulum addiderit librarius, Magnetis vetustioris opus exscribens."
44. 1 p. xv. 45. 2 Apocr. iii. 40, p. 138, 11. 21, 22 46. 3 Ibid. v. 15, and iii. 43, p.
151 47. 4 Ibid. v. 17, p. 191, I. 17 48. 5 Ibid. ii. 8, p. 66, 1. 19. 49. 6 Ibid. iii. 24.
50. 7 Ibid. v. 14, p. 182. 51. 8 Ibid. i. 17, p. 29, 1. 12. 52. 1 No less than twenty-four
of that name are given in the Diet. Christ. Biog. 53. 2 His outlook is more Alexandrian
than Antiochene, but had he belonged to Egypt, it is to that part of the world, and not to
Syria, that he would have pointed for an example of the growth of monasticism. 54. 1
Apocr. iv. 25. 55. 1 C. I. Neumann, Jul. Imp. Lib. contra Christ, quae supersunt, pp.
14-23, Lips. 1880. 56. 2 Patrologie, 1894, p. 550. 57. 3 Lactantius, Div. Instit. v. 2.
58. 1 e. g. Apocr. iv. 24, p. 204, 1. 21. 59. 2 M. R.

7 James, Two Lectures on the Newly-discovered Fragments, Camb. 1892. 60. 3 Of Apocryphal
books, Macarius quotes Bel and the Dragon (Daniel xii. 34) in iv. 12, p. 174, and refers
to 2 Esdras xiv. 21-25 61. 1 See J.T.S. of July 1907, pp. 561-562. 62. 2 See Burkitt,
Evangelion da-Mepharreshe, vol. i. p. 449. 63. 3 Apocr. iv. 15, pp. 126 and 127, n. 1. 64.
4 Duchesne, op. cit. p. 37. Also D.C.B., art. "Linus." 65. 5 For a discussion of the
question, I must refer to what I have written in J.T.S. of April 1907, pp. 408-409. He
certainly does not follow Origen's resolve not to use allegorical explanations in
answering a pagan (Contra Cels. ii. 37). 66. 1 See p. 19, and J.T.S, of July 1907, pp.
550-551. 67. 2 J.T.S. of July 1907, pp. 548-549. 68. 3 See J.T.S. of Jufy 1907, pp.
569-571. 69. 1 Georg Schalkhausser, Zu der Schriften des Makarios von Magnesia, Leipzig,
1907, being No. 4 of vol. xxxi. in Texte und Untersuchungen, etc. 70. 1 See Introd., p.
xviii. 71. 1 Or Beronice, which is equivalent to Veronica. Her name is also recorded in
the Acta Pilati (see ch. vii. in Tischendorf, Evang. Apocryph. p. 277). 72. 2 All the
other records, viz. Euschius, Sozomen, Philostorgius, and Joannes Malalas, say that the
statue was at Paneas.

8 Nor is this contradicted by Macarius. 73. 3 κατόρθωμα, one of the favourite words of
Macarius, thus linking this fragment of Book I with the rest. 74. 4 σωτηρίου κρασπέδου,
perhaps "The hem of the Saviour's garment." 75. 5 The statue is minutely described by
Eusebius, H.E. vii. 18. Sozomen (H. E. v. 21) savs that Julian took it down and put up his
own instead, but the Chronicle of Malalas (ed. Dindorf, p. 329) says it was still in
existence in a church at Paneas, in about A. D. 600. 76. 1 For the well-known story, see
the Acts of Paul and Thecla. 77. 1 It is remarkable that a writer apparently connected
with Asia Minor should thus refer to Syria. For the suggestion that it is a reference to
his opponent's connexion with it, see Introd. p. xv. 78. 2 With the reference to Antioch,
compare the mention of Edessa, another city of Syria, in Bk. I, ch. vi. 79. 3 The contrast
is expressed thus: ἄλλοι ταῖς ἑταίραις συνεῖναι σπουδάζαυσιν, ἕτεροι ταῖς μονηρίαις
θέλουσι συναυλίζεσθαι. 80. 4 This passage scarcely justifies the argument which has been
drawn from it, that a development of monasticism is here implied, such as only took place
in the latter part of the fourth century. For there is no actual mention of the developed
coenobitic life. 81. 5 Macarius, as a faithful follower of Origen, frequently adds to his
first explanation a mystical one of this kind. Indeed, when in difficulty for a plain
answer, he resorts to it at once, e.g.

9 in Bk. III, ch. xxv. 82. 6 Μονογενής, the alternative title of Macarius' book, appears
here for the first time, and is used three times in the chapter. See Introd. p. xxiv. 83.
1 οὐκ ἐν ὑποστάσει οὐσίας γενόμενος. In the light of other passages in Macarius, there is
a special interest in his use of these words. See Introd., p. xviii. 84. 1 νεανίσκος τις
εὐπροσώπῳ σχήματι τοῦ Σωτῆρος ἔμπροσθεν δικαιοπραγίας ἐζωγράφει πολίτευμα. Or does 10
εὐπροσώπῳ σχήματι mean "in specious form"? 85. 2 Reading ἐνεδοίασας instead of ἐνεδοίασα.
86. " Literally, good by nature ( φύσει ) and good by position ( θέσει ). 87. 1 The same
illustration is used in iv. 26, of the relation of God to the gods of heathenism. 88. 2
Reading ἀγαθός instead of ἀγαθόν. 89. 1 σκεῦος οὖν μεστὸν. In the Christian's answer the
reading is similar but not identical. 90. 2 παραθήσομαι, as some MSS. 91. 3 ὠνείδισάς;
This is the reading of Codex Bezae. 92. 1 δυσθανατοῦντα. The point of the saying is not
quite plain. It would be more in keeping with the sentence to read δὶς θανατοῦντα, i. e,
"one who died twice." 93. 1 The Hellenic point of view is remarkable, which classes the
Romans with the Jews as βάρβαρον ἒθνος. 94. 2 Reading ὑπογέιων instead of ὑπεργέιων. 95. 1
τὴν ἀποκλεισθεῖσαν εἲσοδον τῶν περιβόλων λάβῃ τῆς κάθαρσεως. 96. 2 Blondel here suspects
the omission of a whole line in the MS. 97. 3 There is a play on the words πληγή, a blow,
πηγή, a spring. 98. 1 These words seem to suggest a time of persecution as then present.
See Introct., p. xvii. 99. 2 This is a literal translation of the puzzling words
ουσωπηθεὶς λιπαρῶς πρὸς αὐτὸν ἅπερ φιλο͂ι πολλάκις γίνεσθαι παρ’ ὀφθαλμόν τοιαῦτα. 100. 1
This statement is one of the indications that these words were written when Diocletian had
subdivided the Empire, and there was an Augustus and a Caesar both of East and West. 101.
2 The argument varies strangely according as first one reading is taken, "cast outside" (

11 ἔξω ), and then the alternative, "cast down" ( κάτω ). Macarius in his answer at once
notices the variation of reading, and argues, like his opponent, from both. 102. 1 lit. "a
single windfall." 103. 2 Man is termed ὁ κόσμος τοῦ κόσμου. 104. 1 This is the favourite
patristic translation of the words Ψευστής ἐστι καὶ ὁ πατὴρ αὐτοῦ. (He is a liar and the
father of it. The whole argument turns on this questionable interpretation. 105. 1 ὑμεῖς
ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ διαβόλου ἐστε. This is another ambiguity, and Macarius makes it fit with
his argument by a translation which cannot now be accepted. 106. 2 αντιθέυς. 107. 1 This
is the friend to whom the book is dedicated. In the Proem to Book IV he is said to have
helped to win the victory for Macarius by his support. 108. 2 The style of the questions
is quite different from that of the answers. But whereas in the latter it is sometimes
diffuse and somewhat turgid, the questions are in simpler and more direct language. The
diction is, however, not without a strength of its own. Harnack says that this mixed style
is modelled on Plato, Plutarch and Diodorus (op. cit. p. 97). 109. 1 Apollonius of Tyana
is said by Eusebius to have been the hero whom Hierocles set up in opposition to the
claims of Christ. Born at the beginning of the Christian era, he became a philosopher of
the Neo-Pythagorean School.

12 He was an ascetic, and after travelling in the East and studying Oriental mysticism, he
returned to Europe as a magician. He set up a school at Ephesus. His life, written by
Philostratus, is full of fictitious stories. He was accused of treason by both Nero and
Domitian, but is said to have escaped in each case by miraculous means. Further details of
his escape from Domitian are given in the answer of Macarius in ch. viii. p. 66, 1. 19.
See p. 55. That his opponent regarded him as a hero is plain from Bk. iv. 25. (See p.
127.) 110. 1 Reading κακόν instead of καλόν. 111. 2 κατὰ κρίσιν. 112. 1 MS. κεφάλαιος.
Some word like κεπάταιος is what seems to be wanted. 113. 2 κεραίας. 114. 3 See note on
iii. 1. 115. 1 ἀπαθής. Cp. II, xvi. p. 27. 116. 1 ὑφ’ ἐν. 117. 2 ὁ δοκῶν πεπονθέναι. This
expresses one side of the Christological views then current, but not the side which
recommended itself to later theology. See iii. 9 for a fuller treatment of the current
theory of the Atonement which explained the humility of the Passion as a cheating of the
devil, by concealing the real power of the Redeemer, and luring him to do his worst. 118.
3 The MS. gives τί γὰρ μεῖζον ; κατελθεῖν κ.τ.λ. The use of this last word for returning
from below is so unexpected that the correct emendation may perhaps be

13 τί γὰρ μεῖζον ; κατελθεῖν ἤ ἀπελθεῖν κ.τ.λ. 119. 1 Reading ἵνα μὴ παρέλθῃ ὑμᾶς (MS.
ἡμᾶς ) ὁ πειρασμός. Possibly παρέλθῃ is to be translated "overcome you," but it looks as
if the sentence had been confused with the παρελθεῖν in the previous one. Macarius in his
answer only faces the general issue, and so does not mention this strangely incorrect
quotation, which should of course have been ἵνα μὴ εἰσέλθητε εἰς πειρασμόν. 120. 1 The
same simile is found in Gregory of Nyssa, but it is not peculiar to him, for it is also in
Rufinus and Amphilochius. See Introd., p. xix, for a discussion of the bearing of this on
the date of Macarius. 121. 1 μονογενής, the alternative title of the Apocriticus, In this
same answer Christ has already been referred to as ὁ Μονογενὴς καὶ μόνος ἀγωνιστής. 122. 2
Or, Ogygian. 123. 3 Job xli. 1 : "Canst them draw out leviathan with a hook ? " 124. 1 It
is curious that Macarius offers examples from the prophets and Psalms, but not from the
law. 125. 1 The Synoptic criticism is interesting, but he should of course have said "two
demoniacs." 126. 2 Such passages are quoted freely, and not much stress can be made on the
omission of the word " Legion." 127. 1 There is no negative in the MS. A μὴ seems to be
required, unless

14 οὐ γὰρ is omitted before ἐχρην, as Harnack does. (Op. cit., p. 36.) 128. 2 It seems
best to read this sentence as a question. 129. 3 Blondel suggests τῆς ἐνορίιον ἐλάσαι τὸν
δαίμονα instead of MS, τὴν ἐνορίαν ἐλάσαι τοῦ δαίμονος. 130. 1 It is interesting to find
that Macarius falls into the same mistake as his opponent, without seeming to discover it.
131. 1 Macarius here uses the fourth-century word to express "person," viz. ὑπόστασις,
keeping οὐσία for "nature." This passage naturally has some bearing on the one in which
the words are given their technical use in speaking of the Trinity. See Introd. p. xviii.
132. 2 Viz "human nature," as he explains further on. 133. 3 This explanation has been
translated in full, not for its intrinsic value, but as indicating an interesting line of
synoptic criticism. 134. 4 MS. χονευόμενοι. Blondel reads χωνευόμενοι. 135. 1 However far-
fetched such a suggestion may sound, recent researches into the spirit world make it
impossible to dogmatise on the impossibility of such happenings. 136. 2 σεδετον. MS.
σεδεθρον, evidently formed from the Latin "sedeo." 137. 1 τὸ χαῖρον. This can scarcely be
right. Probably the right reading is

15 τὸν χοῖρον, i.e. "we seek the swine." 138. 1 He omits the word for "eye." 139. 1
Macarius follows his opponent in omitting the word "eye." But he does not follow him in
using S. Mark's and S. Matthew's word for needle ( ῥαφίς ), but quotes S. Luke's ( βελόνη
). 140. 2 There is a gap in the MS., and a later hand suggests the insertion of "abundant
wealth" ( πλοῦτος ὁ πόλυς ), which would therefore be the subiect of the verb "casts."
141. 1 These were called in by the parties in a suit to support their case, and gave their
services without fee. 142. 2 The word is a technical one, connected with legal procedure.
143. 3 The word ἑστία signifies hearth or altar, but the allusion seems to be to the
public table ( 16 κοινὴ ἑστία ) at which ambassadors and others were entertained. 144. The
word used in Hebrews xii. 23. 145. 1 The MS. reads δεκάτῃ, but this is plainly a confusion
with the following sentence. 146. 2 σκηνὴν σεσοφισμένην. 147. 1 This would mean 10 p.m.
instead of after 3 a.m. This is a somewhat unfortunate concession to the objector. 148. 1
He here follows the Septuagint. 149. 1 The quotation is abbreviated, and "always" is
omitted. Macarius gives it correctly in his answer. 150. ἅπαξαπλῶς τὸν ἄνθρωπον θεὸν
ἐργασάμενος. 151. 1 He compares them to Christomachi, for whom see Introd. p. xviii. 152.
2 Μονογενής, the alternative title of the Apocriticus, occurs four times in a few
sentences. 153. 1 Macarius speaks of His death as ὁ μυστικὸς θάνατος τῆς οἰκονομὶας. 154.
2 The following paragraph introduces the next seven questions which are given in sequence.
155. 1 See note on p. 125 156. 1 The following paragraph introduces the answers to a
sequence of seven questions. It should be noticed that the introduction shades off into
the actual answer; cf. iv. 19. 157. 1 λόγῳ τῆς ἀρχαιότητος. This can mean "in the language
of simplicity," for it is difficult to see the reference to "the language of antiquity."
Is it "by His ancient word," as parallel to "His creative word " in the clause that
follows, viz. λόγῳ δημιουργίας? 158. 2 The MS omits the words for "corn and." 159. 1
κλῆσιν, which one would like to translate "invocation." but the phrase in the previous
paragraph, "which is named the body of God" (

17 θεοῦ σῶμα χρηματίσαν ), suggests the translation given in the text. 160. 1 He inserts
the word φάρμακον into the text, which Macarius accepts without comment. The whole
quotation is a loose one, and the clauses are in their wrong order. 161. 1 Macarius, as
belonging to the East himself, only gives details of Polycarp in the list of fathers he
mentions, as the others were of the Western Church. The facts here recorded are to be
found in the Vita Polycarpi. 162. 1 There is little doubt that this is the right reading,
for it accords with what is related in the Vita Polycarpi. The MS. reading is not χήρας
but χεῖρας, before which διὰ must be inserted if it is to be translated, i.e. "supporting
his life by means of his hands." 163. 2 i. e. Baptism. 164. 3 The use of the singular
suggests that the subject is "God" rather than "the faithful." 165. 1 This is another case
of a text apparently quoted from memory, which Macarius in his answer accepts as it
stands, though he still further alters its last words. The truth is that two passages are
combined.

18 Ἄρθητι καὶ βλήθητι εἰς τήν θάλασσαν is from Matt. xxi. 21, which is substituted for
Μετάβηθι ἐντεῦθεν ἐκεῖ, καὶ metabh&setai of Matt. xix. 20. 166. 1 The addition to the text
of "from the temple" is by way of explanation. 167. 1 A series of four attacks on S. Peter
begins here. 168. 2 Reading Τί γάρ in place of the MS. εἰ γάρ. It may be noted that the
next sentence begins with 19 εἰ γάρ, and there may have been some confusion. 169. 3 As a
matter of fact, the blessing upon Peter comes a few verses before the rebuke. 170. 4
Θυμέλη is properly the platform where the leader of the chorus stood, but here it is
evidently a spectator's seat. 171. 1 Contrary to his custom elsewhere, Macarius does not
deal separately with this objection, but answers it along with the preceding one, by a
very brief paragraph at the end of chapter xxvii. The fact that his opponent again alludes
to the saying about "seventy times seven" in the next objection (chapter xxi.), may have
made Macarius postpone mention of it until he dealt with that objection. But if so, he
forgot it when the time came. It is one of the few instances in his book of his passing
over one of his opponent's points. 172. 1 Macarius echoes the word which his opponent had
used at the beginning of his objection. 173. 2 In thus laying stress on the difference
between πέτρος and πέτρα, Macarius supports the view that Peter is not here identified
with the rock of the Church. It appears yet more plainly at the end of this chapter that
the "rock" was the truth of Christ's divinity, on which the Church is founded. 174. 1 Such
is the sane and reasonable explanation which Macarius gives of this highly controversial
question. 175. 2 See note on the earlier part of the chapter.

20 The interpretation of the whole paragraph by Macarius is a valuable contribution to the
literature of the subject. 176. 1 Thus briefly does he answer another objection of his
opponent, as contained in chapter xx. 177. 2 It is at this point that the attack on S.
Peter begins. Harnack (op. cit. p. 103 et seq. considers that the opponent's work was here
divided into two, a division which Macarius has quite obscured. He does not show why a
book of excerpts from the fifteen books of Porphyry should have been thus divided, but he
affords valuable though unintentional support to the theory that the work is the two books
of the Philalethes of Hierocles. In this case this might well mark the beginning of the
Second Book. As the beginning and end are lost, Harnack reconstruct? the two parts as
follows : the first part as containing x + 10 + 13 questions, and the second part 9+16 + x
(p. 105 n. 1). 178. 1 Thus briefly and in parenthesis does he answer what his opponent had
said about the injunction of "seventy times seven. See note on the heading of chapter xx.
This answer is excellent as far as it goes, but scarcely covers all the objection. 179. 2
The quotation, as often, seems to be from memory, as the reading is

21 τί ὅτι ἔδοξεν ὑμῖν instead of sunefwnh&qh. 180. 1 The opponent here shows considerable
knowledge both of Christian methods of exegesis, and of the language of the Epistles. 181.
2 This is mentioned again in Bk. IV. ch. iv when he says, "Peter, though he received
authority to feed the iambs, was nailed to the cross and impaled." Macarius in his answer
accepts the fact. 182. 3 This seems to have been a Christian tradition, as he states it
unhesitatingly. Macarius tacitly refutes it by saying that the crucifixion was at Rome.
183. 4 It will be noticed that he puts a new and impossible sense in the words,
necessitating the change of αὐτῆς (i. e. the church) into αὐτοῦ. 184. 1 This was a
favourite subject of attack, and it will be remembered that the theory of a permanent
cleavage between Peter and Paul has been built upon it. 185. 2 It is strangely unfair thus
to imply that one passage follows after the other. The objector scarcely ever resorts to
such subterfuges. 186. 1 In his anxiety to whitewash S. Peter from all charges, Macarius
here may be said to overstate his case, for he fails to consider S. Paul's point of view.
187. 2 He misses the chance of scoring a point, for he might have pointed out the
unfairness of the objection. 188. 3 The text adds the curious suggestion that they were
consequently called

22 στόλοι (expeditions) : ους ἐξαποστέλλοντε στόλους ἐκάλουν. 189. 1 Before the next
sentence the MS. has Ἕλλην in the margin, as a new heading, in order to mark the place
where the actual objection begins. For the support thus claimed for the theory that
Macarius is merely borrowing from a book, and himself turning it into a discussion, see
Introd., p. xvii. 190. 2 Phil. iii. 2, i.e. a mere meaningless cutting. 191. 3 Gk.
παραπάλλιον. 192. 4 The MS. gives καθηκεύων, which must be corrupt. The word, oddly
enough, has just occurred in the previous answer of Macarius (ch. xxix. p. 122, 1. 2,
καίπερ καθηκεύων τοῖς ’Ιουδαίοις πολλά. Foucart suggested πιθηκεύων in both places, as
equivalent to πιθηκίζω (to play the ape), Arist. Vesp. 1290). But this requires the
further emendation of 23 πάντας to πᾶσι in the present instance. πάντας has just occurred
in the same line, which may have caused the mistake. 193. 5 The speaker takes this in the
moral sense, as meaning " lawless," as is clear from what follows. 194. 1 The MS. ὑποπύρος
may be altered to ὑποπήρον. 195. 2 After all, he only deals with seven objections instead
of eight at the previous bout, but only four of them were against S. Peter, and all the
eight are here attacks on S. Paul. 196. 3 The words τῷ πόνῳ πυρούμενος are taken as part
of the quotation in Blondel's edition, but there is no need to do this. 197. 1 It will be
noticed that Macarius makes no attempt to argue from the special case of Timothy. 198. 2
He omits the words, "In this city." 199. 3 Surely this is a slip for "a Jew." 200. 1 Or,
more literally, " a foster-brother of that which is false." 201. 2 lit. " Festering
beneath the surface." 202. 3 Such is the strangely inadequate three-fold answer given to
the objection. The play upon the word 9Pw&mh is quite characteristic of patristic
interpretation. Macarius does not seem to have grasped that a Jew could be a Roman
citizen. 203. 1 The quotations are abbreviated, πάντως is omitted after

24 δἰ ἡμᾶς, and the middle clause of v. 7 is wanting. Macarius, however, makes use of the
latter in his answer. 204. 1 The clause, "Who planteth a vine and doth not eat of the
fruit thereof? was omitted by his opponent from I Cor. ix. 7, but here Macarius plainly
refers to it. 205. 2 No answer is here given to the difficulty about God not taking care
of oxen, but there is a brief word of explanation at the end of the next answer (ch. xl.
p. 107, 11. 12-17). 206. 3 This is quite different from the text of Galatians, "to every
man that is circumcised. Perhaps the "one thing" comes from James ii. 10. Macarius accepts
the quotation as it stands, and repeats it. 207. 1 This spontaneous introduction of a
Persian measure of distance is a proof that the writer was near that part of the world.

25 His subsequent suggestion of a city with so many gates indicates that there were large
cities in his district. 208. 2 He chooses the example given by Christ Himself in John vii.
22-23, but can scarcely have that passage in mind, for it decides the difficulty. 209. 1
Macarius had ignored this part of the previous objection, and here his reference to the
quotation can scarcely be called an answer to the difficulty raised, which seems to have
proved too much for him. 210. 2 This is evidently a slip, as it is unlikely that he placed
the Corinthian before the Roman Epistle. 211. 3 This correct translation must be given,
rather than "sting," as Macarius develops the idea of a goad in his answer. 212. 1 The
above summary is in a very abbreviated form, but it will be seen that, unlike some of his
defence of S. Paul, his line of argument is excellent, and is a sound interpretation of S.
Paul's own attitude towards the law. 213. 1 The verse is quoted in an abbreviated form.
214. 2 The full translation of this answer is given, as its language is curious and
interesting. 215. 3 The answer at once makes obvious what the objection failed to state
explicitly—namely, that S. Paul's inconsistency lies in his contradiction of the decision
in Acts xv. that the Gentile converts were not to eat things offered to idols. 216. 1 This
is an attempt to render καίπερ Ἑλλήνων ὡς ἐπὶ τὸ πλεῖστον τῶν μακελλευόντων τότε
γνωριζομένων. 217. 2

26 ἴυλξι of the MS. must be for ἴυγξι. 218. 3 σφαζομένων is the addition of a later hand
in the margin, and scarcely seems to supply the sense required. 219. 1 This was a book by
Porphyry, called περί τῆς ἐκ λογίων φιλοσοφίας. It is lost, but is mentioned by Fabricius,
v. p. 744. See Introd., p. xiv., for the argument which the reference to this book
affords, as against Harnack's belief that the writer of these objections is Porphyry
himself. 220. 2 For this see Euseb., Praepar. Evang. iv. 8, 9. 221. 3 εὐαγέστερον—perhaps
"purer." 222. 1 The word applies to men as well as women, and it is the masculine plural
which is here used, but the translation "virginity" best accords with the words which
follow about the Blessed Virgin. 223. 1 Macarius reflects the attitude of his age in
regarding virginity as a cause of "merit." 224. 2 I Tim. iv. 2. This is the passage quoted
in the objection, but v. 2 was then omitted, and only vv. 1 and 3 given. (

27 ἀναστήσυνται is not S. Paul's word, but is incorrectly borrowed from the ἀποστήσονται
of the previous verse. These are the men who should "forbid to marry" and therefore
commend virginity. 225. 3 Our apologist is on the wrong track, but it leads to many things
of interest to us. 226. 4 This sentence represents the previous paragraph, but best fits
into the argument here. 227. 1 This seems to refer to the fiery furnace of Nebuchadnezzar.
228. 2 He is referring to the further words of I Tim. iv. 3, "abstaining from meats," as
well as "forbidding to marry." 229. 3 The followers of Manes are first found in Asia
Minor, as here stated ; their system being founded on the theory of a god of good and a
god of evil, which was to be found in the religion of Persia. For a further mention of
Manes see Bk. IV. ch. xv. 230. 4 The Encratites (as the name implies) were the Gnostics
whose contempt for matter showed itself in their strict asceticism, while the name
Apotactites suggests the licentious tendencies of the Antinomian Gnostics, who showed
their contempt in the opposite way. The Eremites were ascetics of the deserts. 231. 5
Dositheus cannot be the head of the Samaritan sect mentioned by Hegesippus (ap. Euseb.,
H.E. iv. 22) and represented in the Clementine writings as the disciple of John the
Baptist.

28 Macarius is alone in mentioning him (see also iv. 15, p. 128, 1. 24), which shows that
this list is not a copy of that of Epiphanius, as Salmon suggested, D.C.B., art.
"Macarius." 232. 6 ἐγκράτεια, the word from which Encratite is derived. 233. 1 τερπομένοις
is the reading suggested by Blondel for MS. προμένοις or ποθομένοις. 234. 2 If σὺν
εὐμαρείᾳ τοῦ κρείττονος is to be so rendered. 235. 1 Theosthenes seems to have been the
friend to whom he dedicated the Apocriticus, as well as his supporter during the
disputations. If the whole situation is a fictitious one, the name may have been suggested
by that of Theophilus in S. Luke's dedication. Cf. Proem to Book III. 236. 2 Possibly this
is a reminiscence of the Homeric use of the words, as in the passage 29 θάρσει τόνδε γ’
ἄεθλον (Od. 8. 197). 237. 1 He leaves out the word "this," in which Macarius follows him.
238. 2 He is quoting the verses which precede the words about the world passing away, but
lie omits the word "wives" after "them that have," and is led thereby to make the strange
suggestion that God is the subject, and what He has is the world. 239. 3 δημιουργός, a
familiar name as the world-maker of the Gnostic systems. 240. 1 It is impossible to
reproduce his metaphor. Both words suggest that musical instruments are played so loudly
as to make speaking impossible, viz. καταψάλλεται and καταυλούμενος. 241. 1 Details of the
measurements of the city are given, which suggest that the writer was familiar with that
part of the world. 242. 2 The obvious reference seems to be to Zenobia, Queen of Palmyra,
and her defeat by Aurelius. This would be a matter of recent history to the opponent of
Macarius, if he dates from the beginning of the fourth century. Does it suggest that the
answer was of the same date ? 243. 3 This is a very natural touch, and it is more easy to
connect it with an actual disputation than merely with the writing of a book. 244. 1 He
places too late the words "unto the coming of the Lord' and omits "and remain" after the
second occurrence of "we which are alive." "Cloud" for "clouds" is another unimportant
inaccuracy. 245. 2 He does not intend to substitute an impersonal power for the Creator;
indeed, further on he attributes creation to the Word of God. 246. 1 See Introd., p. xvii.
247. 1 The story is taken from the Apocryphal part of Daniel, viz. xiv. 34-36 (Bel and the
Dragon). The LXX gives the name as

30 Αμβακούμ, in A.V. Habbacuc. 248. 1 The abbreviated form of the quotation is tacitly
accepted by Macarius in his answer. 249. 2 It is very remarkable that, wherever it is
possible, the attack is made on Christ's followers, and not on Himself. Here it is only
the Evangelist who is blamed for words which are attributed to Christ. See Introd., p. xv.
250. 3 The previous objection has stated that only 300 years have passed, so that this
cannot have been written later than the early part of the fourth century. To speak thus is
therefore an exaggeration, as Macarius shows in his answer. But it is very significant
that a heathen should regard Christianity as universally spread, even before it became a
lawful religion. 251. 1 The way he locates these races gives some clue to the place of
writing. See Introd., p. xxi. 252. 2 These are also referred to in iii. 15 (see p. 79).
Their name implies that they were "long-lived." 253. 3 This is probably a reference to 2
Peter iii. 8, but not necessarily so, as it may refer only to Ps. xc. 4. It is curious
that elsewhere Macarius ignores 2 Peter when its use was to be expected. See Introd., p.
xxv. His very involved statement comes to this in the end, but it begins with the awkward
words

31 οὕτως ἔτη τὴν ἡμέραν ἐργάζεται χίλια καὶ την ἡμέραν οὐ πολλὰς ἀλλ’ ἔχειν μίαν ἥμέραν.
254. 1 He thus echoes the Christian tradition that S. Paul was beheaded at Rome, but he
shows the same desire to put his martyrdom at an impossibly early moment as in the case of
S. Peter. 255. 2 In iii. 22 he uses similar language about S. Peter's crucifixion, which
he strangely places within a few months of his being charged to feed the lambs. 256. 1 He
adds that they also beat thereby the seed of the dragon, for by being beheaded Paul lured
the serpent to greediness for blood and milk, while Peter beat him with his cross. For the
legend of milk flowing from S. Paul's wound, see Introd., p. xxvi. 257. 2 Apollonius of
Tyana is here intended. He was mentioned by name, and this same incident referred to, in
iii. 8. See also below, in the next objection. 258. 1 See note on iii. I. p. 52. 259. 2
Harnack has used this as an argument for the late date of the Apocriticus. But as early as
A. D. 290 the Manichaeans had so spread in Africa that the Proconsul of Africa was ordered
to burn the leaders with their books. 260. 3 The Syrian Gnostic, who was born at Edessa in
A. D. 155. 261. 4 Droserius appears in the dialogue called Adamantius (Pseudo-Origen). In
Bk. IV. Droserius is made to suggest the Valentinian origin of evil, and is answered by
Adamantius. 262. 5 Dositheus appears again in a similar list in iii. 43, p. 115, l. 16,
where interesting details are given. He is not otherwise known to us. 263. 1 Macarius in
chapter xvi. combines this question with the next in his answer. 264. 1 This is an attempt
to translate οὐρανὸν . . . ὡς τὸν κριτὴν ἀνασχόμενον κατ’ αὐτοῦ τινα τερατεύεσθαι οὕτω
θαυμασρὸν, οὕτω μεγάλα (reading

32 θαυμαστά ). 265. 2 He seems to think he is again quoting from the Apocalypse of Peter,
though the word used is neuter. He gives no hint that he is quoting the Old Testament, but
Macarius passes over the reference to an Apocryphal book in the previous question, as of
doubtful authority, and proceeds to quote this as from Isaiah. 266. 3 This is a
misquotation for "receive." 267. 4 The quotation is really from the law. 268. 5 He
strangely omits the very word most needed, i. e. "heaven." 269. 1 As he has made no
previous reference to Isaiah, it would seem that the words are attributed to God. 270. 2
With this cursory mention Macarius passes on from the words of that Apocryphal book, as
quoted in the first objection he is answering (chapter vi.), and proceeds to Isaiah's
similar words, adduced without acknowledgment in chapter vii. It is evident that he
regarded this Apocalypse as quite outside the canon. 271. 3 ἑαυτὸν ἀποθεοῖ κοινωνῶν τῆ
θεότητι. 272. 1 λογικὴ οὐσία. 273. 2 This excellent passage well carries on the simile
suggested by Isaiah. 274. 3 This is in accordance with the Platonic theory of ideas, λόγος
is perhaps best rendered "rationale," but the original word must be kept for the sake of
the play on the words in this sentence. 275. 4 This is a strangely forced interpretation
of the passage in Matt.

33 xxiv. 35. 276. 5 In this statement he passes in his philosophising from Platonism to
Origenism. 277. 1 All the answer which Macarius gives to this objection is contained in
the last paragraph of chapter xvii., which is his answer to the previous objection of
chapter viii. 278. 2 Eng. Vers. " The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but
those things which are revealed belong unto us." 279. 1 Aratus was a Cilician astronomer.
See Introd., p. xxi, 280. 2 A reference to the Pythagoreans. 281. 1 In this last brief
paragraph Macarius answers a further objection, thus curtailing his own chapters for the
second time in Book IV. 282. 1 Thus does Macarius run away from the point, and content
himself with an allegorical interpretation. 283. 1 The following paragraph introduces the
next six questions. 284. 1 The following paragraph is an introduction to the next six
answers. 285. 2 It is only here that Macarius plainly refers to his method of arrangement,
taking a number of objections to answer at the same time. The average number is seven, but
this is not always strictly adhered to. The odd thing is that in this case the number of
questions answered consecutively is only six. 286. 1 Macarius refers elsewhere to the
Emperor as βασιλεύς. Apparently there had just been a "royal progress" in the East in his
locality. It may be only a bit of sham realism, or an event which occurred when Macarius
was writing his book ;

34 but on the face of it, it seems to give some support to the theory of a real dialogue.
287. 1 The passage which begins here, and continues to the end of the paragraph (268 words
in the Greek) is the only one where the inner doctrines of the Christian Creed are
expounded. It is either a later interpolation, or an exception to the usual style of the
book. In the latter case, it is not easy to reconcile with an early date for Macarius. See
Introd., pp. xviii and xxviii. 288. 2 It is to be noted that he here misquotes his text,
and assists his argument by reading 35 τοῦ πνεύματος instead of ἐν τῷ πνεύματι, thus
making "in the name of" refer to Him as well as to Christ. 289. 1 This is the seemingly
Post-Nicene phrase which has inclined so many critics to assign a late date to Macarius.
But see Introd., p. xviii. n. 3, and p. 155 n. 1. The theory that the passage is a later
interpolation is supported by the subject of the next objection. Could Macarius have
chosen anything more unfortunate than the Three Persons to lend on to a defence of the
Monarchy of God ? 290. 1 This objection and the next, and also the answers contained in
chapters xxvi., xxvii., and xxviii. are quoted by Nicephorus, in his Antirrhetica, and are
to be found in D. Pitra's Spicil. Solesm. t. I. p. 309 et seq. See Introd., pp. x, xi,
xxvii. One interest of Nicephorus lies in the difference of his text from the Athens MS.
The most notable in this chapter occurs in the first sentence, where he omits the words

36 τοῦ μόνου θεοῦ καὶ τῆς πολυαρχίας. 291. 2 The word Monarchia ( μοναρχία ) seems to
require translating thus, in order to bring it into contrast with the Polyarchia (
πολυαρχία ) which follows. 292. 3 ἐξ εἰκόνος ἡμῖν . . . τὸν λόγον κρατύνειν ἐσπούδασας.
The mention of an "image" at the beginning of this answer may possibly have attracted the
attention of Nicephorus to the passage. For it is on the question of image worship that he
introduces it as supporting his own attitude. 293. 1 The same illustration is used in ii.
9. 294. 2 θέσει, in contrast with φύσει, philosophic terms by which he expresses his
argument. Literally, "by position" and "by nature." See ii. 9. 295. 1 These first
sentences are placed by Nicephorus under the objection of the previous chapter. It is to
be noted that the matter of naming was mentioned there, and answered by Macarius, whereas
his answer to this question is silent on this point. It is therefore possible that
Nicephorus preserves the right order. 296. 2 An ancient reader was unable to restrain
himself, and wrote in the margin of the MS., "This is not true." 297. 3 Blondel gives
Θεός, not θεός, in this passage. 298. 1 There may be something wrong about τὸ λοιπὸν
καθαρεύοντας. Nicephorus reads

37 τῶν λοιπῶν. 299. 2 This statement has been taken as proof that the author wrote after
the beginning of the new encouragement of Christianity shown by Constantine. For during
the period that it was an unlawful religion (till A.D. 312), there were not the larger
churches, which began to be built immediately afterwards. But the force of the argument is
weakened by the many reasons there are for believing that the philosopher's date is
earlier. 300. 3 τοῦ κυρίον is an addition by Nicephorus. It scarcely sounds like the
language of the objector, but a subject of some sort is wanted. 301. 1 Blondel's edition
follows Nicephorus in reading αὐτῶν, and prints λόγῳ earlier in the sentence, and not
Λόγῳ. The MS. reads αὐτῷ, which would refer to "the Word." As here translated, αὐτῶν, and
also ἐκέινων in the following clause, of course refer to the angels. 302. 2 Nicephorus is
answering the Iconoclastic party, who were utterly opposed to the use of Christian images.
They had garbled the words of Macarius to suit their purpose, taking the words

38 οὐ μὴν εἰκόνας ἐκείνων τυπώσας τῷ σχήματι κ.τ.λ., and referring them to Christian
images, and omitting the words just before them. Nicephorus (op. cit. p. 322) shows that
Macarius is only speaking from the Greek point of view, as the words ὡς φὴς αὐτός prove,
and that he would not be answering his opponent if they referred to Christian images. 303.
1 θηρᾶν τὸ ἀθήρατον. This is more likely than the ἀθέατον of the text of Nicephorus,
showing that the latter is only occasionally a guide to the true reading. 304. 1 θεοφόρον
ἄγαλμα μονογενῶς ἐργάσεται. If μονογενῶς is not to be connected with the name which the
author uses as the sub-title of his book, it may only mean "by an unique birth." Could it
mean "by a birth that is single " ? 305. 1 The passage beginning with the mention of
Prometheus and ending here, is quoted by Nicephorus, Antirrhet., loc. cit. 306. 1 He means
that even men sometimes have the title. He might have quoted, as our Lord did, " I said,
ye are gods" (John x. 34). If it can be used by men concerning each other, it can be used
of higher beings. 307. 2 He here continues the thoughts of his last chapter. 308. 3 There
is a play on words here ; the stars run ( θέωσιν ) but are not

39 θεοί in consequence ( τούτους μὴ θειάσωμεν ). 309. 4 See chapter xxvi. init. 310. 1 The
title of the chapter uses the phrase, so familiar in early creeds, "Resurrectio carnis."
And although his opponent calls it "the resurrection of the dead," the former phrase is
used in his answer as well as in the title of it. 311. 1 ὑπόστασις. 312. 1 Reading τίνα
for τίς ( ὑπόστασιν ἐχαρίσατο ;). This passage is an example of the fact that Macarius
does not ordinarily use this word as meaning "person." See Introd., p. xviii, and p. 142
n. I. 313. 1 μιασμάτων—perhaps in the sense of "noxious mists." 314. 2 An unexpected word;
perhaps it should be ναυαγίας, "shipwreck." 315. 1 See p. 125, n. 3. 316. 1 τῆς ἀχράντου
περιωπῆς. 317. 2 διὰ τὸν χαρακτῆρα. 318. 1 ἀμίαντον. It cannot be translated asbestos, as
it is repeated in the

40 ἀμίαντον ὄνομα of the next clause. 319. 1 There appears to be an intentional
alliteration in οὐκ ἐν φωτὶ, ἀλλ’ ἐν φορυτῷ. 320. 1 This quotation also appears in Latin
form in his Adversus Magdaburgenses, lib. iv. ch. 7. 321. 1 τὸ προλαβὸν κατόρθωμα. Like
the fragment of Book I., the language is here linked with that of the rest of Macarius by
the use of his favourite word, which occurs three times in this fragment. 322. 2 Turrianus
gives φάβλων, but his Latin rendering "pravis" shows it to have been φαύλων. 323. 1 It is
uncertain what form of attack Macarius is here answering. It does not seem. likely that he
is simply dealing with the quotation from Genesis about Abraham's faith. And if the
argument centres in the difference between the teaching of S. Paul and S. James on faith
and works, it would be a return to the earlier objections of a detailed kind, whereas the
latter part of Book IV. leads us to expect objections of a more general and doctrinal
character. It would seem therefore as if Hierocles had gone on to attack the inner
teachings of Christianity, and such difficulties within the faith as the reconciliation of
justification by faith with the stress laid upon good works. If this conclusion is
correct, it shows us that the scope of the Apocriticus was wider than is supposed or its
title would suggest, and the dialogue is seen to have had a much broader doctrinal range
than the discussion of passages in the New Testament. Internal evidence supports the
genuineness of the fragment. The allegorical and Origenistic style of explanation is quite
Macarian, and so is the language. His favourite word

41 κατόρθωμα occurs no less than three times. END


SERMONS OF ASTERIUS OF AMASEA
=============================

SERMONS OF ASTERIUS OF AMASEA c. AD 350–410

Bishop of Amasea and preacher.

SERMON 1 -- THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS

I — THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS

1 There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared
sumptuously every day: And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his
gate, full of sores, And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's
table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar
died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was
buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off,
and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and
send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am
tormented in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime
receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted, and
thou art tormented.

2 And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which
would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from
thence.----Luke 16: 19-26.

I — THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS

3 OUR God and Saviour does not lead men to hate wickedness and love virtue by negative
precepts alone, but also by examples he makes clear the lessons of good conduct, bringing
us both by deeds and words to the apprehension of a good and godly life. As he has often
told us by the mouths of both prophets and evangelists, nay, even by his own voice also,
that he turns away from the overbearing and haughty man of wealth, and loves a kindly
disposition, and poverty when united to righteousness; so also in this parable, in order
to confirm his teaching, he brings effective examples to attest the word, and in the
narrative of the rich man and the |20 beggar points out the lavish enjoyment of the one,
the straitened life of the other, and the end to which each finally came, in order that
we, having discerned the truth from the practices of others, may justly judge our own
lives.

4 There was a rich man who was clothed in purple and fine linen. By two brief words the
Scripture ridicules and satirizes the prodigal and unmeasured wastefulness of those who
are wickedly rich. For purple is an expensive and superfluous color, and fine linen is not
necessary. It is the nature and delight of those that choose a well-ordered and frugal
life to measure the use of necessary things by the need of them; and to avoid the rubbish
of empty vainglory and deceptive amusement as the mother of wickedness. And that we may
see more clearly the meaning and force of |21 this teaching, let us note the original use
of clothing; to what extent it is to be employed when kept within rational limits. 5 What,
then, says the law of the Just One? Sheep God created with well-fleeced skins, abounding
in wool. Take them, shear it off, and give it to a skilful weaver, and fashion for
yourself tunic and mantle, that you may escape both the distress of winter, and the harm
of the sun's burning rays. But if you need for greater comfort lighter clothing in the
time of summer, God has given the use of flax, and it is very easy for you to get from it
a becoming covering, that at once clothes and refreshes you by its lightness. And while
enjoying these garments, give thanks to the Creator that he has not only made us, but has
also provided for us comfort and security in living; but if, rejecting the sheep and the
wool, the needful provision |22 of the Creator of all things, and departing from rational
custom through vain devices and capricious desires, you seek out fine linen, and gather
the threads of the Persian worms and weave the spider's airy web; and going to the dyer,
pay large prices in order that he may fish the shell-fish out of the sea and stain the
garment with the blood of the creature,----this is the act of a man surfeited, who misuses
his substance, having no place to pour out the superfluity of his wealth. For this in the
Gospel such a man is scourged, being portrayed as stupid and womanish, adorning himself
with the embellishments of wretched girls.

6 Others again, according to common report are lovers of like vanity; but having cherished
wickedness to a greater degree, they have not restricted their foolish invention even to
the things already mentioned; |23 but having found some idle and extravagant style of
weaving, which by the twining of the warp and the woof, produces the effect of a picture,
and imprints upon their robes the forms of all creatures, they artfully produce, both for
themselves and for their wives and children, clothing beflowered and wrought with ten
thousand objects. Thenceforth they become self-confident. They no longer engage in serious
business; from the vastness of their wealth they misuse life, by not using it; they act
contrary to Paul and contend against the divinely inspired voices, not by words, but by
deeds. For what he by word forbade, these men by their deeds support and confirm. When,
therefore, they dress themselves and appear in public, they look like pictured walls in
the eyes of those that meet them. And |24 perhaps even the children surround them, smiling
to one another and pointing out with the finger the picture on the garment; and walk along
after them, following them for a long time. On these garments are lions and leopards;
bears and bulls and dogs; woods and rocks and hunters; and all attempts to imitate nature
by painting. For it was necessary, as it seems, to adorn not only their houses, but
finally also their tunics and their mantles.

7 But such rich men and women as are more pious, have gathered up the gospel history and
turned it over to the weavers; I mean Christ himself with all the disciples, and each of
the miracles, as recorded in the Gospel. You may see the wedding of Galilee, and the
water-pots; the paralytic carrying his bed on his shoulders; the blind man being healed
with the clay; the woman with the bloody issue, taking hold of the |25 border of the
garment; the sinful woman falling at the feet of Jesus; Lazarus returning to life from the
grave. In doing this they consider that they are acting piously and are clad in garments
pleasing to God. But if they take my advice let them sell those clothes and honor the
living image of God. Do not picture Christ on your garments. It is enough that he once
suffered the humiliation of dwelling in a human body which of his own accord he assumed
for our sakes. So, not upon your robes but upon your soul carry about his image.

8 Do not portray the paralytic on your garments, but seek out him that lies sick. Do not
tell continually the story of the woman with the bloody issue, but have pity on the
straitened widow. Do not contemplate the sinful woman kneeling before the Lord, but, with
contrition for your |26 own faults, shed copious tears. Do not sketch Lazarus rising from
the dead, but see to it that you attain to the resurrection of the just. Do not carry the
blind man about on your clothing, but by your good deeds comfort the living, who has been
deprived of sight. Do not paint to the life the baskets of fragments that remained, but
feed the hungry. Do not carry upon your mantles the water-pots which were filled in Cana
of Galilee, but give the thirsty drink. Thus we have profited by the magnificent raiment
of the rich man. 9 What follows must not, however, be overlooked; for there is added to
the purple and fine linen, that he fared sumptuously every day. For of course both the
adorning of one's self with useless magnificence, and serving the belly and the palate
luxuriously, belong to the same disposition. Luxuriousness, then, is a thing hostile to
|27 virtuous life, but characteristic of idleness and inconsiderate wastefulness, of
unmeasured enjoyment and slavish habit. And though at first blush it may seem a simple
matter, it proves upon careful investigation to include manifold, great and many-headed
evils. Luxuriousness would be impossible without great wealth; but to heap up riches
without sin is also impossible; unless indeed it happens to some one rarely, as to Job,
both to be abundantly rich, and at the same time to live in exact accord with justice. The
man who will give himself to luxury, then, needs first a costly home, adorned like a
bride, with gems and marbles and gold, and well adapted to the changes of the seasons of
the year. For a dwelling is required that is warm, comfortable in winter, and turned
toward the brightness of the south; but open toward the north in the summer, that |28 it
may be fanned by northern breezes, light and cool. Besides this, expensive stuffs are
demanded to cover the seats, the couches, the beds, the doors. For the rich carefully
adorn all things, even things inanimate, while the poor are pitiably naked. Moreover,
enumerate the gold and silver vessels, the costly birds from Phasis, wines from Phoenicia,
which the vines of Tyre produce in abundance and at a high price, for the rich; and all
the rest of the wasteful equipment which only those who use it can name with
particularity.

10 Now luxury, steadily increasing in elaborateness, even mingles Indian spices with the
food; and the apothecaries furnish supplies to the cooks rather than to the physicians.
Then consider the multitude that serve the table,----the table-setters, the cupbearers,
the stewardesses and the musicians that go before them, women musicians, |29 dancing
girls, flute-players, jesters, flatterers, parasites,----the rabble that follows vanity.
That these things may be gained, how many poor are robbed! how many orphans maltreated!
how many widows weep! how many, dreadfully tortured, are driven to suicide! Like one who
has tasted some Lethean stream, the self-indulgent soul absolutely forgets what it itself
is, and the body to which it has been joined, and that some day it shall be released from
this union, and again at some future time inhabit the reconstructed body. But when the
appointed time shall come, and the inexorable command separates the soul from the body,
then also shall come the recollection of things done in the past life, and vain
repentance, too late! For repentance helps when the penitent has power of amendment, but
the possibility of reform being |30 taken away, grief is useless and repentance vain.

11 There was a certain beggar named Lazarus. The narrative describes him not simply as
poor, destitute of money, and of the necessaries of life, but also as afflicted with a
painful disease, emaciated in body, houseless, homeless, incurable, cast down at the rich
man's gate. And very carefully the narrative finally works up the circumstances of the
beggar to signalize the hard-heartedness of him who had no pity; for the man that has no
feeling of pity or sympathy for hunger or disease is an unreasoning wild beast in human
form, deliberately and wickedly deceiving men; nay more, he is less sympathetic than the
very beasts themselves; since, at least, when a hog is slaughtered, the rest of the drove
feel some painful sensation and grunt miserably over the freshly spilled |31 blood; and
the cattle that stand about when the bull is killed indicate their distress by passionate
lowing. Flocks of cranes also when one of their mates is caught in the nets, flutter about
him and fill the air with a sort of grieving clamor, seeking to release their mate and
fellow. And how unnatural that man, endowed with reason and blessed with culture, who has
also been taught goodness by the example of God, should take so little thought of his
kinsman in pain and misfortune!

12 So the suffering but grateful pauper lay without feet, or else certainly he would have
fled from the accursed and haughty man, and sought another place instead of the
inhospitable gate, which was closed against the poor; he lay without hands, having not
even a palm to stretch forth for alms; his very organs of speech were so impaired that his
voice was hoarse and harsh; in fact, |32 he was quite mutilated in all his members, the
wreck of a foul disease, a pitiable illustration of human infirmity. Yet not even such a
list of misfortunes moved the haughty man to attention, but he passed the beggar as if he
were a stone, deliberately filling up the measure of his sin; for, if accused, he could
not utter this common and specious excuse, "I did not know: I was not aware: I did not
notice the beggar howling. For the beggar lay before his gate, a spectacle as he went in
and out to make the condemnation of the proud man inevitable. He was even denied the
crumbs from the table; and while the rich man was bursting with fulness, he was wasting
away with want. Therefore it would have been fair and right to have made the Canaanitish
Phoenician woman the teacher of the |33 misanthropic man of wealth, saying those things
that are written: "Haughty wretch, even the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their
masters' table, and did you not think your brother, one who belongs to the same race,
worthy of that bounty?

13 But the dogs were carefully fed, the watch-dogs by themselves and the hunting-dogs by
themselves, and they were deemed worthy of a roof, and beds and attendants were carefully
allotted to them; but the image of God was cast on the earth uncared for and trampled on,
----that image which the great Builder and Maker of all fashioned with his own hand, if
one regards Moses as having given credible testimony to the genesis of man. 14 Now if the
story of Lazarus had ended at this point, and the nature of things were such that our life
was truly represented by |34 the inequality of his career with that of the rich man, I
should have cried aloud with indignation,----that we who are created equal, live on such
unequal terms with men of the same race. But since that which remains is good to hear, do
you, poor man, who groan over the past, take courage from the sequel, when you learn the
blessed enjoyment of your fellow in poverty. For you will find that the just Judge renders
exact judgment, so that the man who has lived a life of ease groans, and he who has had
hardship finds luxury, each receiving his due reward.

15 And it came to pass that the beggar died and was carried away by the angels into
Abraham's bosom. Do you see who they were who ministered to the poor and just man, and who
took him to heaven? For angels were his body-guard, looking upon him gently and mildly,
and betokening by |35 their manner the attendance and relief that awaited him. And he was
taken and placed in the bosom of the patriarch, a statement which affords ground for doubt
to those who like to question minutely the deep things of the Scriptures, for if every
just man, when he dies, should be taken to the same place, the bosom would be a great one
and expanded to an endless extent, if it were intended to accommodate the whole multitude
of the saints. But if this is absolutely impossible----for the bosom can scarcely embrace
one man and hardly two infants,----the thought presents itself to us that the material
bosom is the symbol of a spiritual truth; for what is it that is meant? Abraham, he says,
receives those who have lived an upright life. Then tell us, wonderful Luke,----for I will
address you as though visibly present,----why, when there were many just men, even older
than Abraham, |36 did you withhold this distinction from his predecessors, passing in
silence over Enoch, Noah and many others who were like these in their manner of life? But
perhaps I understand you, and my judgment does not go wide of the mark.

16 For Abraham was a minister of Christ, and, beyond other men, received the things of the
revelation of Christ, and the mystery of the Trinity was adequately bodied forth in the
tent of this old man when he entertained the three angels as wayfaring men. In short,
after many mystical enigmas, he became the friend of God, who in after time put on flesh
and, through the medium of this human veil, openly associated with men. On this account,
Christ says that Abraham's bosom is a sort of fair haven, and sheltered resting-place for
the just. For we all have our salvation and expectation of the life to come, in Christ,
who, in his |37 human descent, sprang from the flesh of Abraham. And I think the honor in
the case of this old man has reference to the Saviour, who is the judge and rewarder of
virtue, and who calls the just with a gracious voice, saying: "Come, ye blessed of my
Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you. And it came to pass that the beggar died.
Two sides of the beggar's life are indicated: on the one hand is shown his poverty, and on
the other his modesty and the humility of his character. Let not, therefore, the man who
is without substance, in want of money, and clothed in pitiable garb appropriate to
himself the praise of virtue, nor think that want will secure for him salvation.

17 For not he who is poor from necessity is commended, but he is held up to admiration who
of his own accord moderates his desires. For the poverty of |38 those who are in extreme
want, and have at the same time an unmanageable or incorrigible disposition, leads to many
evil deeds of daring. Whenever I have come near a ruler's judgment-seat, I have seen that
all housebreakers and kidnappers, thieves and robbers, and even murderers, were poor men,
unknown, houseless and hearthless. So that from this it is clear that the Scripture
accounts that poor man happy who bears his hardships with a philosophic mind, and shows
himself nobly steadfast in the face of his circumstances in life, and does not wickedly do
any evil deed to gain for himself the enjoyment of luxury. Such a man the Lord describes
even more clearly in the first of the beatitudes, where he says: "Blessed are the poor in
spirit. So, not every poor man is righteous, but only one who is like Lazarus; nor is
every |39 rich man to be despaired of, but only one who has the disposition of him that
neglected Lazarus; and in real life we easily find witnesses of this truth. For who is
richer than was the godly Job? Nevertheless his great prosperity did not divorce him from
righteousness nor, to speak briefly, did it estrange him from virtue. Who is poorer than
was Iscariot? His poverty did not secure salvation for him;

18 but while associating with the eleven poor men who loved wisdom, and with the Lord
himself, who for our sakes voluntarily became poor,he was carried away by the wickedness
of his covetous disposition and finally was guilty even of the betrayal. 19 It is also
worth while to examine intelligently how each of these men when dead was carried forth.
The poor man when he fell asleep had angels as his guards and |40 attendants, who carried
him, full of joyful expectation, to the place of rest; and the rich man, Christ says, died
and was buried. It is not possible in any respect to improve the declaration of the
Scriptures, since a single sentence adequately indicates the unhonored decease of the rich
man. For the sinner when he dies is indeed buried, being earthy in body, and worldly in
soul. He debases the spiritual within him to the material by yielding to the enticements
of the flesh, leaving behind no good memorial of his life, but, dying the death of beasts,
is wrapped in unhonored forgetfulness. For the grave holds the body, and Hades the soul,
----two gloomy prisons dividing between them the punishment of the wicked. And who would
not blame the wretched man for his thoughtlessness?----since when he was on earth he
prided himself, held his head high, exulted over all who lived about him and |41 were of
the same race, deeming those whom he chanced to meet hardly better than ants and worms,
and vainly boasting of his short-lived glory.

20 But when he dies, and like a scourged slave is deprived of those usurped possessions of
which in his folly he thought himself master, he is as deeply humiliated as he was
previously highly exalted, and, uttering complaints like a lamenting old woman, calls
loudly and vainly on the patriarch, saying, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send
Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am
tormented in this flame. He seeks mercy, which he had not given when he had the power of
benefiting another, and demands that Lazarus shall come down into the fire to him to help
him. He prays that he may suck the finger of the leper slightly moistened in water. Such
is |42 the thoughtlessness of those who love the body. This is the end of those who love
wealth and pleasure. It therefore becomes the wise man who is provident of the future, to
consider the parable as a sort of medicine, preventive of sickness; and to flee the
experience of like evil, preferring the sympathetic and philanthropic disposition as the
condition of the life to come. For the Scripture has presented the admonition to us
dramatically in the persons of particular characters in order to impress upon us by a
concrete and vivid example the law of good conduct, so that we may never think lightly of
the precepts of the Scripture as terrifying in word only, without inflicting the
threatened punishment.

21 I know that most men, snared by such fancies, take the liberty of sinning. But the
Scripture before us teaches quite the contrary, that neither any confession of |43 the
justice of the judgment lightens the punishment, nor does pity for the one in torment
lessen the penalty ordained; if indeed it is necessary that the Scripture attest the word
of the patriarch. For after the manifold supplications of the rich man, and after hearing
countless piteous appeals, Abraham was neither moved by the laments of the suppliant, nor
did he remove from his pain the one who was bitterly scourged; but with austere mind he
confirmed the final judgment, saying that God had allotted to each according to his
desert. And he said to the rich man, Since in life you lived in luxury through the
calamities of others, what you are suffering is imposed upon you as the penalty of your
sin. But to him who once had hardships, and was trampled on and endured in bitterness life
in the flesh, there is allotted here a sweet and joyful existence. |44 And besides, he
says, There is also a great gulf which prevents them from intercourse with one another,
and separates those who are being punished from those who are being honored, that they may
live apart from each other, not mixing the rewards of good and evil deeds. And I suppose
the parable to be a material representation of a spiritual truth.

22 For let us not imagine that there is in reality a ditch digged by angels, like the
trenches on the outer borders of military camps, but Luke by the similitude of a gulf has
represented for us the separation of those who have lived virtuously and those who have
lived otherwise. And this thought Isaiah also stamps for us with his approval, speaking
somewhat thus: Is the hand of the Lord not strong to save, or is his ear heavy that it
cannot hear? But our sins stand between us and God. 23 [Footnotes renumbered and moved to
the end] 1. Luke 16: 19. 2. 1 Corinthians 7: 31, 3. 1 Timothy 2: 9, 10. 4. The disease of
Lazarus is here represented as leprosy. 5. Matthew 15:27. 6. Matthew 25: 34. 7. Matthew
5:3. 8. 2 Corinthians 8:9. 9. Isaiah (59: 1, 2) Lxx.

SERMON 2 -- THE UNJUST STEWARD

II — THE UNJUST STEWARD

1 And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward;
and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And he called him, and
said unto him, How is it that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for
thou mayest be no longer steward. Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do?
for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed. I am
resolved what to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive me into
their houses. So he called every one of his lord's debtors unto him, and said unto the
first, How much owest thou unto my lord? And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he
said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty.

2 Then said he to another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures of
wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore. And the lord commended
the unjust steward, because he had done wisely: for the children of this world are in
their generation wiser than the children of light. And I say unto you, Make to yourselves
friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into
everlasting habitations. He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in
much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. If therefore ye have not
been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches?
And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man's, who shall give you that
which is your own? ----Luke 16: 1-12.

II — THE UNJUST STEWARD

3 I HAVE often said to you in my discourses, that there is one fictitious and false
conception prevalent among men, which multiplies their transgressions, and diminishes the
good which we ought, each of us, to do. And this false conception is, that all that we
have to enjoy in this life we possess as lords and masters. And on account of this notion
we do fiercely fight and war and contend for it and protect it to the uttermost as a
precious possession. Now the truth of the matter is not so, but quite otherwise. For none
of those things which we have received is our own, nor do we as absolute possessors and
lords dwell in this life as in a house of our own; but |48 as sojourners, and strangers,
and wanderers, and when we do not expect it, we are led whither we would not go. And when
it seems good to the Lord we are deprived of the possession of our wealth. Wherefore the
enjoyment of this perishable life is very liable to change. He who is to-day glorious, is
to-morrow an object of pity, eliciting compassion and help. He who is now prosperous and
flourishing in wealth, suddenly finds himself poor, without even bread to support life. In
this respect especially does our God surpass mortals, in that he is always the same, and
in the same state, and possesses life and glory and power inalienable.

4 Why I have thus begun my discourse, is perhaps already perceived by those who are
attentive and intelligent. Luke has fashioned us a parable that, by way of preface, was
just now read to us, in which he |49 describes the steward of other men's goods as
groaning and troubled, because, being luxurious and extravagant, he has heard from the
master of the money and property, the words, "Give an account of thy stewardship and
depart, for I will not suffer thee to revel in my possessions, as though they were thine
own." Now this is not the narrative of a thing that really took place, but the fiction of
a parable, which by obscure sayings inculcates moral virtue. Know then, that each one of
you is an administrator of what belongs to another; cast off then the pride of authority,
and put on the humility and prudence of a steward, accountable for his acts. Be always
waiting for your Lord, to whom with fear you must render a strict account. For you are a
sojourner who has received the privilege of only a temporary and fleeting use of the
things in your possession. |50 And if you are in doubt about this, observe what happens,
and be taught by experience, that trustworthy teacher.

5 You possess an estate, having either inherited it from your fathers, or obtained it by
some exchange. Call up therefore in memory and count over, if you can, all who have
occupied it before you. And direct your mind also to the time to come, and think how many
are to occupy it after you. Then tell me who owns it, and to whom does it especially
belong; those who have had it, or those who now have it, or those who in the future are to
have it? For if some one should in some way or other call them all together, the owners
would be found more numerous than the clods. And, further, if you wish to see exactly what
our life is like, call to mind if ever in summer, while traveling, you have seen a
flourishing tree extending far enough |51 in breadth and height to serve with its shadow
the purpose of a shelter. You were glad to come under its shade, and there you remained as
long as possible. And when it was necessary to move on, even as you were thinking of
setting off again, another wayfarer appeared. And you took up your luggage while he laid
his down and appropriated all your conveniences, the. bed of leaves, the fire, the shade
of the tree, the water flowing by. And he began to recline and rest, while you resumed
your walk. He, too, enjoyed the place and then left it. And that one tree was, in a single
day, the temporary lodging-place for perhaps ten strangers. And that which was enjoyed by
all belonged to but one owner. And thus also the abundance of our life here delights and
supports many, while it belongs to God alone, who has imperishable and indestructible
life. |52

6 You can call to mind an inn where, when traveling, you have put up. There, as you
brought nothing with you, you were provided with many things, bed, table, drinking-cups, a
plate and other dishes of all sorts. But perhaps before you had used them as long as you
wished, another came, panting, covered with dust and hard after you, forcing you from the
inn and demanding as though they were his own the things that really belonged to neither
of you. 7 Such, brethren, is our life, and, if anything, it is still more transitory than
the things I have mentioned. And I wonder at the way men say, "my estate," and "my house,"
and thus appropriate by an idle syllable things which are not theirs, and, with two
deceptive letters, clutch things belonging to others. For as on the stage no one actor has
exclusive right to any given character, but any actor may assume |53 it, so is it in the
case of the earth and its material things. Men one after another put them on and off like
garments. Tell me, is there anything more enduring than a kingdom? And yet, consider the
palaces, search for the royal robes. You will find that many of these have covered the
bodies of several successive kings. And in like manner also the crowns, and the clasps,
and the girdles----all an unstable heritage, a property common to them all, passing over
from those who go to those who remain. And of what worth are the possessions of
magistrates, the canopy, the silver chariot, the golden wand? Do not these things always
attend the magistrate, yet never the same one long, but each for a little season? For as
the bier receives now one form, now another, so also the insignia of office pass from one
magistrate to another. Hence, too, the apostle has uttered very many calls |54 to us
indicative of this thought. "For the fashion of this world passeth away"; and the phrase,
"As having nothing, and yet possessing all things"; and again, "Who use it as not abusing
it." For all these sayings have this one intent, that it becomes us to live as creatures
of a day, awaiting the signal for our departure.

8 And that you may clearly see that you are subject to the laws and ordinances of the
Lord, to which it is incumbent on you strictly to conform, first, learn from self-
observation that both your body and soul are wholly subject to the commands of virtue, and
you are not master even of yourself, but it behooves you to act as a steward both in word
and deed, and in every movement of your life. You have received from the Creator a body
composed of many members and endowed with five senses for |55 the needs of life. And not
even these are free and independent, but each is subject to law. And first, the eye is
commanded, "Look upon nature and behold what it is right to see: the sun, illuminating all
the world; the moon, shining upon the gloom and dusk of night; the stars also giving us of
themselves no great or independent light, but reflecting the beauty they receive. Behold
the earth, hairy with plants and herbs"; the sea when it lies fixed in perfect calm,
spread out like a level plain. For the sight of these and similar things benefit us. But
other sights, which through the eye introduce harm into the soul, shun and flee, and put a
veil over your eyes that you may not see. For it is better to darken the sense of sight,
when it affords occasion for "the deeds of darkness. On this |56 account, the Lord said to
us through Matthew in the lesson of yesterday:

9 "Every one that looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her
already in his heart. And it is better to cut out the eye than that it should look upon
things inordinate and lustful. And the ear also has been forbidden to listen to anything
that is evil. But it is right that it be alert to hear whatever is good, that it may
transmit to the soul profitable words. But if any evil companion, ready to deal out plague
and destruction approach it, and be on the point of pouring into it filth, one should flee
from him as from a venomous beast. Let the tongue also, together with the mouth, exercise
discretion. Let it say what is right; but let it refrain from forbidden things----
reproaches, slanders, unjust accusation, evil speaking against the |57 brethren, blasphemy
against God; and let it utter those things that are of good report, and pious; let it
counsel good works, and let every man repeat the words of the sacred Psalmist: "I said, I
will set a watch over my ways, that I sin not with my tongue: again, "With their tongues
they deal treacherously: and again, "Why gloriest thou in evil, O man mighty in iniquity?
All the day has thy tongue discoursed injustice; as a sharpened razor thou hast wrought
deceit. Let the tongue taste profitable things. Let the nose also exercise discretion, not
always scenting luxury, nor drawing into the head fragrant odors of costly perfumes. For
against such things Isaiah vehemently inveighs.

10 Let the hand, too, remember the commandments, that it touch not all things
indiscriminately. Let |58 it be outstretched in almsgiving, not in plundering. Let it keep
its own, not wickedly seize the things of others. Let it in beneficent visitation touch
the bodies that are feeble and distressed, not those that are lustful and devoted to
fornication. 11 This discourse has shown us that we are not our own masters, but stewards,
for whoever is subject to laws and ordinances is a bond-servant and subject of the
lawgiver. And if the members of our body are not free from authority, but regulated with
reference to their functions, by the will of the Lord, what should be said to those who
think that they have, without accountability, the possession of gold and silver and land
and all other things? O man, nothing is your own. You are a slave and what is yours
belongs to your Lord. For a slave has no property that is really his own. |59 For naked
you were brought into this life. What you have you have received by the dispensation of
your Lord; whether you inherited it from a father, since God has so commanded,----for
parents, he says, shall divide their possessions among their children, or have acquired
affluence by marriage,----for marriage also and the things connected with it are ordained
by God, or by trade and agriculture and other agencies, God cooperating in them.

12 You see, then, it has been made evident that you have received things which are not
your own. Let us now further observe what is incumbent on you, and what kind of control
you have over them. Give to the hungry, clothe the naked, heal the afflicted, do not
neglect the needy nor the outcast at the corners of the streets. Do not be anxious about
yourself, nor stop to |60 consider how you will live to-morrow. If you do these things the
Scripture says that you shall be honored by the Lawgiver. But if you do not heed the
command, you shall be severely punished. These things I do not regard as characteristic of
one who is irresponsible and lives in independence. But on the contrary, these numerous
and repeated commands suggest to me a man strictly governed, subject to a master's laws,
and rigidly accountable for his conduct as an administrator. But we, living how
heedlessly, neglect the wretched and the poor, while they die in misfortune; and vying
with each other in lavishness, spend our money on vanities, supporting a multitude of
prodigal flatterers, and trailing after us hordes of ill-starred parasites; again,
scattering our wealth to gladiators, and for wild beasts, and giving for horse-breeding
|61 regardless of expense; and again, spending our abundance on jugglers and actors and
persons equally worthless. And we have a fruitless experience, and one bordering on
madness; for from expenditure that brings uncounted gain, and eternal salvation, we
resolutely withhold our money, refusing to part with even a few obols; but where the
expenditure is the occasion of sin and of countless pains and of the fiery punishment
itself, of our own accord we let it flow. Prodigality anticipates the request, and opening
all our doors, we lavish our wealth on those that are without. But this is not the mind of
servants waiting for their lord, but of lusty, unbridled youths given over to revels.

13 But if you wish, my hearer, to see a steward administering with fear and wise
discretion the things committed to him, open the book of David; find those words |62 where
one inquiring concerning the appointed time of his end, says to God, "Lord, make me to
know my end, and what is the number of my days, that I may know what I lack." You see in
these words, as an image in a mirror, the attitude of the one who prays; you see that he
is very fearful; he foresees that which is to come, and, expecting judgment, is concerned
about the appointed time, that the signal for his departure may not find him unprepared.
And he seeks to number and know how many days still remain to him, in order that he may
zealously fulfil his task before his Lord comes. Now if we carefully compare what the
dying man experiences, and what the man who is cast out of his stewardship endures, we
shall find that the end of each one of us is like that of a steward. |63

14 For the dying man turns over his control of affairs to others, just as the steward does
his keys; the latter on being cast out of an estate, the former on being cast out of the
world. Deeply grieved, the steward retires from his own labors----from the estate rich in
vineyards, gardens, houses. What then do you think the dying man experiences? Does he not
bewail his possessions? Does he not piteously survey his house as, against his will, he is
torn from it, and forced in spite of his attachments, to go far from his treasures and
storehouses? And when he comes to the appointed place, when he hears the words, "Render
the account of your stewardship, show how you have obeyed the commandments, how you have
treated your fellow servants, whether properly and kindly or, on the contrary, grievously
and tyrannically, smiting, punishing, and withholding the alms that mercy |64 dictates,"
then if he shall be able to render the master gracious, by showing that he has been a
faithful servant, it shall be well with him. But if he cannot thus render him gracious
there will remain for him not simply beating with rods, or the dark prison, and iron
fetters, but fire unquenchable and eternal darkness, never illumined by a ray of light,
and gnashing of teeth as the Gospel has plainly taught us.

15 If indeed you are never to be cast out of your present possessions on the ground that
they belong to another, revel in the world and with every sense let pleasure be
unrestrained. But if these things are to be brought to an end and we are to enjoy them for
no long time, let us, brethren, fear our removal hence, and live during the time of our
sojourning as the Lord has commanded. Let us not be led away as prisoners for debt; |65
but let us go as free men, taking with us an approving conscience, and such an account of
our conduct as will not be condemned by the Lord. 16 That rich man whose land brought
forth abundantly, was a wicked steward of the earthly life, since in the abundance of his
fruits he purposed nothing useful, but, enlarging the belly's desire and the broad and
vast pockets of greed, designed all for his own enjoyment, saying, "I will pull down my
barns, and build greater, and will say to myself, Thou hast much goods laid up; take thine
ease, eat, drink, and be merry." But while he was yet speaking, the death angel stood at
his side, to conduct him from the earth. A dreadful fellow slave was come to drag him from
his stewardship; and what profit was there in his plan for the gratification of his
selfish desires? Now |66 this has been vividly portrayed for our admonition.

17 And what does experience teach us? Do not the events of each day loudly proclaim the
truth of the parable? Do we not see the man in health at midday, dead ere the appearance
of the evening star? And the man strong at evening, not alive to greet the beams of dawn?
And another departing this life while eating? And who is so foolish as not to perceive at
a glance that daily, now one, now another, we are being removed from our stewardship here?
But the good and faithful steward, whose conscience approves his own administration of his
stewardship, is of Paul's opinion. For Paul, though the Lord did not urge him, was in
haste to go to his Master, and longed for his release, and of his own accord resigned his
stewardship, saying somewhere, "Wretched man that I am! who |67 shall deliver me from the
body of this death," and again, "But for me it is well to depart and be with Christ." But
one who is earthly in mind, and really akin to the clods, being confounded at the change
which overtakes him, utters such lamentations as did the man of the parable, "What shall I
do, because my Lord takes away the stewardship from me? I cannot dig, to beg I am
ashamed." The lamentation of an idle and pleasure-loving man! For to weep at his
departure, and to lament the sensuous enjoyments of the flesh, is proof that one is
engrossed in his estate; and to be incapable of toil is the mark of an idle and supine
life. For if he had been accustomed to industry, he would not have hesitated to dig.

18 But further, to carry out the meaning of the parable, after removal to the eternal |68
world there is no longer place for importunity. And therefore let no one of them there
say, "I cannot dig." For even if he could, no one would give him the opportunity. To this
life belongs the obedience of the commandments, and to the life to come the reward. So
that if you have done nothing here, it will be useless for you to think of digging, since
you will have left the vines behind. Nor will you benefit yourself at all by entreating.
And we have a notable example of this in the story of the foolish virgins, who were
delayed for lack of oil, and shamelessly asked it from those who were wise. But they got
no help, and turned away unsuccessful; the narrative showing that, at the bridegroom's
appearing, no one may use another's oil, that is, another's rectitude, for his own
benefit. For each one is |69 clothed with his own conduct as with a garment, whether it be
splendid and costly, or mean and like a beggar's cloak. But to put off this garment is not
possible, nor to remove it and exchange it for another, nor to beautify and adorn it by
the gift or loan of another in the time of judgment, but each one remains such as he is in
truth, whether poor in good deeds or rich.

19 But what can we say concerning the remission of debts which the unjust steward
contrived, that he might through his fellow servants secure relief for himself from the
hardships of his downfall? For it is not easy to convert this into allegory consonant with
Scripture, but after long reflection something like this occurred to me: All of us who
busy ourselves about the rest to which we are destined, by giving what is another's, work
to our own advantage; now by what is another's I mean what |70 belongs to the Lord. For
nothing is our own, but all things belong to him. When, therefore, any one anticipating
his end and his removal to the next world, lightens the burden of his sins by good deeds,
either by canceling the obligations of debtors, or by supplying the poor with abundance,
by giving what belongs to the Lord, he gains many friends, who will attest his goodness
before the Judge, and secure him by their testimony a place of happiness. Now they are
called witnesses, who have secured for their benefactors favor from the Judge, not because
they inform him of anything, as though he were ignorant, or did not know, but in the sense
that what has been done for them relieves those who have helped them from the punishment
of their sins. For just as the blood of Abel was said to cry unto God, in like manner the
good |71 deed, too, shall be said to testify on behalf of the upright in our Lord, Christ
Jesus. Now to him be glory forever and ever. Amen.

20 [Footnotes renumbered and moved to the end] 1. 1 Corinthians 7: 31. 2. 2 Corinthians 6:
10. 3. Aristotle, De Mundo 5:11. 4. Romans 13: 12; Ephesians 5: 11. 5. Matthew 5: 28. 6.
Matthew 18:9. 7. Psalm 38: 2 (Lxx); 39: 1. 8. Psalm 5:10 (Lxx); 5:9. 9. Psalm 51:3, 4
(Lxx); 52:1, 2. 10. Isaiah 3: 18 ff. 11. Proverbs 19:14. 12. Matthew 6: 34. 13. Psalms
39:4; 38:5 (Lxx). 14. Matthew 13:42, etc. 15. Luke 12:18, 19. 16. Romans 7: 24. 17.
Philippians 1:23. 18. Matthew 25: 1ff. 19. Genesis 4: 10.

SERMON 3 -- AGAINST COVETOUSNESS

III — AGAINST COVETOUSNESS

1 Texts Quoted by Asterius in the Body of his Discourse No servant can serve two masters:
for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and
despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.----Luke 16: 13. For this ye know, that
no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any
inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God----Eph.5:5. For the love of money is the
root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and
pierced themselves through with many sorrows.----1 Tim. 6 : 10. And he said unto them,
Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of
the things which he possesseth. And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a
certain rich man brought forth plentifully:

2 And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to
bestow my fruits? And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build
greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods. And I will say to my soul,
Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be
merry. But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee:
then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? So is he that layeth up
treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.----Luke 12: 15-21.

III — AGAINST COVETOUSNESS

3 CHRISTIANS and sharers of a heavenly calling, you country folk, and all who come from
the towns, you who in concord have gathered at the present feast, ----for by a general
address I embrace you all,----has each one of you thoughtfully considered and realized why
we are assembled? And why are martyrs honored by the construction of notable buildings and
by these annual assemblies, and what end did our fathers have in view when they ordained
the things we see, and left the established custom to their descendants? Is it not evident
to one who concentrates his thought |76 on this subject even for a short time, that these
things have been given permanent form to rouse us to pious emulation, and that the feasts
constitute public schools for our souls, in order that while we honor the martyrs, we may
learn to imitate their sturdy piety; that lending the ear to the gathered teachers, we may
learn some useful thing which we did not know before,----either the certainty of some
doctrine, or the explanation of some difficult Scripture, ----or may hear some discourse
that will improve our morals?

4 But you seem to me to have abandoned your care for virtue, to have forgotten your zeal
on behalf of your souls, and to have devoted all your thought to the rubbish of mammon and
the business of the markets; some bargaining yourselves; some greedily haggling with
competing dealers in order to reduce their prices. But transfer your |77 love to the
church, Abandon the love of money, that mad passion of the market. Turn from it as from a
disorderly courtezan who, embellished with foreign stuffs and with the brilliant colors of
the apothecary, smiles upon the multitude. Love the church, divine and discreet, modestly
attired, with look august and grave. For thus Solomon says in the book of Proverbs,
"Forsake her not, and she shall preserve thee: love her, and she shall keep thee." Do not
pass her by with contempt, nor deem the things that lie near us on this table of little
worth because it is possible for you to procure them freely. But desire them all the more
because we do not sit, as hucksters, with balance and scales; but seek only one gain,----
the salvation of the hearer.

5 There has been read to us from the Acts |78 the speech of Paul to Festus and Agrippa,
----Paul the faithful apostle and wise speaker.You doubtless saw, my hearer, if you gave
heed, how he boldly declares the truth, but, mingling deference to Agrippa with his
boldness, he softens the harsh tribunal to gentleness, subduing them by the manner of his
speech, as wild beasts by song. Zechariah, too, has prophesied to-day, opening to us the
door of the great mysteries of the Only-begotten, by the stone with the seven quick-
glancing eyes, and by the golden candlestick with its seven lamps, and the trunks of the
two olive trees.There are many kindred Scriptures full of profit for us, into all of which
I wished to go that I might show you the abundance of the spiritual feast. But I must
fulfil the promise that I made yesterday. For after we had brought many accusations
against |79 covetousness, but had scarcely laid bare its vanity, we deferred until to-day
the proof of the charges. Listen, therefore, and show yourselves wise judges of the truth;
for your decision affects your own salvation, not that of others; and each of you casts
his vote of condemnation against his own soul, as though driving it out of house or town.

6 Covetousness, then, is not simply being mad for money, and other possessions, wishing to
add to what you have that to which you have no right, but, to speak more broadly, it is
the desire to have in every transaction more than is due or belongs to you. And you know
that the devil was the first to have this fault; for he was an archangel, and appointed to
the most honorable life and station; but the arrogant creature conceived of absolute rule,
and rebellion against God, and was |80 thereafter cast down from heaven, and, falling into
this atmosphere of earth, he became your malicious neighbor. So he did not attain the
divinity to which he aspired, and he lost the rank which he had enjoyed of being
archangel; an unfaithful servant, changed by gradually increasing audacity into a
robber;----the dog of the Greek fable, who was both deprived of his meat and failed to
grasp the shadow----for how could he grasp an intangible thing?

7 After him, the first man was beguiled into the love of pleasure, and by eating the
forbidden fruit lost immortality, as Esau afterward lost his birthright for a dish of
pottage. And love of more introduced into our life these languages of ours, the many
tongues of men. For men who through plenty had become wanton, |81 thinking that the
heavens were accessible to them, foolishly made a preposterous tower for mounting up to
the sky, and so caused mankind, which had been of one language, to speak with different
tongues; in seeking more than they had, they themselves were not only confounded but left
to mankind the weariness of hearing unintelligible tongues, and of searching for their
interpretation. And what of Pharaoh? How came he to fall into difficulties and to be
afflicted with plagues? Was it not through covetousness, through the desire of being lord
over a strange people which by no means belonged to his kingdom? And, since he did not let
those go who belonged to another, he lost those who were his own; some in the smiting of
the first-born and others in the pursuit through the sea. For I do not mention the rivers
flowing blood, |82 and the infinite generation of frogs, and the destruction wrought by
locusts, and the eruption of boils, and the death of four-footed beasts, and all the evil
to which Egypt was condemned on account of her ruler's covetousness.

8 Again, somewhere else I have learned the outcome of this sin, how leprosy in a moment
spread over the body of the covetous. Recall with me, if you are historically inclined,
and fond of hearing of Elisha's deeds, how Naaman the Syrian bathed in the Jordan, and was
healed of his leprosy, and how his malady passed over upon Gehazi, the prophet's servant,
a covetous and foolish young man, who received raiment and silver for his master's free
act of healing. How did Absalom, that fiery and impetuous young man, son of an indulgent
father, become a parricide? Was |83 it not by prematurely seeking the inheritance of the
kingdom and leaping like a robber upon what Was another's? And Judas, also,----what drove
him out from the company of the apostles, and made him a traitor instead of an apostle?
Was it not the treasury at first dishonestly administered, and then the getting of the
shameful price? Why does the Acts of the Apostles tell in tragic vein of Ananias and
Sapphira? Is it not because they were thieves of what was their own, and violators of
their own offerings? The day will soon fail me if I try to enumerate the servants of
covetousness.

9 But now, leaving ancient history, let us interrogate the experience of daily life, and
learn what sort of a creature it recognizes in covetousness, and how hard it is to get |84
rid of; for whomsoever it seizes, ever waxing but never waning, it grows old with its
victims and abides with them to the end. The lustful and the lover of his body, even if he
be for a long time mad in his desires, when he becomes old, or sees the object of his
affection, his body, now aged and the bloom departed, finds that there is a limit to his
disorder. The glutton himself withdraws from his indulgence when surfeited, or when his
digestive organs become weak, and their intense desire for food is gone. The ambitious man
after having attained great notoriety ceases to desire to show himself off. But the
disease of covetousness is an evil hard to rid one's self of. And just as this ivy, the
plant flourishing and ever green, creeping up the trees that grow near, coils tight about
the trunks wherever it touches----and even if they suffer harm or wither, it does not |85
die, unless some one with an axe severs its serpent-like coils----so it is not easy to
free the soul from covetousness, whether the body be youthful or beginning to grow old,
unless some sober consideration enter in and like a knife cut off the disease.

10 The covetous man is odious to the members of his household, severe to his domestics,
useless to his friends, ungracious to strangers, troublesome to his neighbors, a sorry
companion to his wife, a penurious rearer of children, a bad master of himself; at night
full of anxiety, by day absorbed, talking to himself like one demented; abounding in
wealth, yet groaning as though in need; not enjoying what he has, and yet seeking what he
has not; not using his own, yet casting avaricious eyes upon the property of others. Such
a man has a great flock of sheep that fills the folds in which it is penned, and covers
the plains |86 on which it pastures. And if a single sheep belonging to his neighbor
appear in good flesh, taking no notice of his own vast flock he lays greedy siege to that
one sheep of his neighbor. The same is true in the case of his kine and of his horses; nor
is it otherwise in the matter of his land. The house is crowded with everything, but
nothing is made any use of. For it is impossible for a greedy person to have any
enjoyment, but his house is almost like a grave. For see, graves are often full of silver
and gold, but no one uses the riches. The body is not sustained by them; the soul finds no
satisfaction in them; for alms are not scattered by the right hand of the dead.

11 Now let some one who has been seized with this disease of covetousness tell me what is
the object of this toil for gain? For I know that many with whom I am |87 acquainted, love
money more when they are sick than when they are in health. If the doctor prescribes for
their recovery softie inexpensive medicine, such as parsley or thyme or anise, which can
be procured without expense, they readily heed his directions. But if he. mentions some
drug, the ingredients of which are rich and complex, and they are sent to the apothecary
or the perfumer to purchase it, they give up their, lives rather than open their purses.
For being earthly-minded they think the possession of earthly things to be life itself.
These men are profoundly depressed by general prosperity and delighted by general
distress. They pray that intolerable burdens of taxation may be imposed by public
proclamation that they may increase their money by usury. They want to see their neighbors
throttled by money-lenders, in order that they may secure for |88 themselves their farms,
their chattels, or live stock, when through necessity they are thrown on the market at a
low price.

12 And they keep continually looking up at the sky, like those philosophers whose work it
is to investigate astronomical phenomena, not studying the movement of a star, nor trying
to observe what house is occupied by one of the planets, but curious about the state of
the atmosphere, whether the signs that present themselves promise a downfall of rain or a
drought. And if they see any portent of any calamity threatening to fall on the community
at large, they rejoice over it. They gather everything into their warehouses, which they
closely seal and secure with double bars, while they continually measure and reckon up
their stores. And while the covetous man |89 cherishes such expectation and in his mind's
eye sees himself rich, if a thick cloud arise, he is frightened as though danger were
imminent. If showers besprinkle the earth he begins to weep. And if there comes rain
enough to mitigate the drought, it makes him perfectly miserable. Thereafter in all he
does he goes about cogitating on the grain, as on a son in peril, thinking by what means,
by what device it may be preserved for a long time, and escape danger by insects. But when
he sees that the weather is dry, as physicians treat persons wasting away by perspiration,
spreading out his grain he stirs and freshens it, toilsomely tends it, devises a shelter
against the noonday heat, and strips off the screens at night, that it may be fanned by
the night winds.

13 To him, engaged in this distressful toil, the poor man presents himself, asking for |90
some of the endangered grain, but he does not give it; or, if he gives it, he bestows it
parsimoniously, and half-heartedly, parting with it with extreme reluctance. Therefore, I
beseech you, if you are such a man, do not undergo these infinite hardships. For the
covetous man who lives in luxury is deserving of pity, since he bounds his existence with
the belly's enjoyment and other pleasures, regarding this as the goal of humanity. But in
the case of the mean and penurious, his wretchedness has no limit, since he receives the
goods of many, and does not give even to himself, and so has nothing for his pains. For
who does not know that nothing, except the virtues, exists for its own sake, but we do one
thing in order that we may accomplish another? No sailor traverses the sea simply for the
sake of sailing, and no farmer passes his life in toil simply for the |91 sake of farming;
but it is manifest that both persevere amid their hardships that they may secure, the one
the increase of the earth, and the other the wealth of maritime trade. But tell me now, O
covetous man, what is your goal? To accumulate? And what kind of an object in life is
this, to heap up and gloat over unused substance? The very sight, he replies, delights me.
Then attack your disorder in another way.

14 For you can allay this longing with what belongs to others. If the glitter of silver
delights you, sit beside the silversmiths and gaze steadfastly upon the strong and
glittering sheen; or haunt the markets, and enjoy the richly wrought vessels, platters:
and pitchers. For the sight of them is free and unhindered. Watch the moneychangers also
who are continually reckoning and counting the coin at their tables; but, better yet,
yield to good advice and give |92 up this inclination. For amendment is easy, since
covetousness is not a necessity of nature, but a direction of choice, and to change it is
not difficult for those who consider their own advantage. 15 Pass over in thought to the
time to come, when you shall be no more; when a small plot of earth shall hold your body,
insensate, returned to dust, and a little tablet, a few spans in size, shall cover all
that remains. Where then will be your wealth and your gathered treasures? Who will be the
heir of what you leave behind? For it is by no means certain that it will be he whom you
suppose. If you leave children, perhaps they will be beaten, and driven weeping from their
ancestral home by some covetous man like you. But if, being childless, you mean to
transmit the inheritance to one of your friends, do not regard your will as an immutable
law, a thing strong |93 and incapable of being set aside. It will require but little
exertion to make the writing invalid. Do you not see those who are constantly contesting
wills in the courts, how by all kinds of attacks they wrest them by putting forward as
advocates skilful lawyers, invoking the aid of eloquent orators, suborning witnesses,
corrupting judges? So from what you see while you are alive, learn what will happen after
you are dead. If you have gotten your wealth justly, use it, as did the blessed Job, for
needful purposes; if unjustly, restore it to those who have been defrauded of it, as you
would a thing captured in war, giving back either just what you took, or that with
something added, as did Zacchaeus.

16 If you have no wealth, do not get any by wickedness. For as you go the inevitable way,
your sin, a bitter portion, will |94 follow you, while the enjoyment of your ill-gotten
gains will be left behind for whom you know not. And then you will admire David because he
says, "He heapeth up riches, and knoweth not who shall gather them. And observe also the
rich man contrasted with Lazarus, of whom we have just read in the Gospels,----a narrative
which is no fable composed to inspire terror, but a true picture transmitted to us of what
is to be. 17 The fine linen perished, the kingdom departed to another, the luxuries passed
away; but the sin of them went with him, as a person's shadow follows him when walking.
And for this reason, after his extravagant banquets, and his luxurious table, he begs for
a drop of water that falls from a leper's finger, and calls to alleviate his punishment
the beggar who, perhaps, |95 when he lay at the gate, did not even have hands; for surely
if he had had them he would have driven away the dogs that licked his sores. And he
desires to join Lazarus, seeing him on the other side, and is hindered by the ditch or
gulf between them, which was no hole that had been digged nor artificial ditch like that
which one can see between hostile camps in war. But the Scripture, I think, means that his
sins were the obstacle that cut off the approach of the condemned to the righteous. And
the prophet Isaiah sets his seal to my interpretation, when he sternly rebukes a foolish
people and says, "Is the Lord's hand shortened, that it cannot save? Or is his ear heavy,
that it cannot hear? But your sins stand between you and God." But if sin is able to
separate men from God, nothing can be more sinful than |96 covetousness, which Paul, the
herald of the truth, truly calls idolatry, and the root and parent of all evils.

18 For how are those drawn into the service of demons who were once of the company of
Christians and partakers in the mysteries? Is it not by the desire of acquiring great
wealth, and of becoming masters of what belongs to others? Upon receiving from godless and
impious men promises either of official preferment or of wealth from royal treasuries,
they quickly put off their religion as a garment. And such examples occurring in previous
times, memory and tradition have preserved and handed down to us. And there are also
instances which belong to our own generation, and are within the range of our experience.
For when that emperor who all at once cast aside the character of a Christian, and |97
disclosed the farce he had long been acting, himself shamelessly sacrificed to demons, and
offered many gifts to those who were willing to do the same, how many left the church and
ran to pagan altars! How many, taking the bait of emolument, swallowed with it the hook of
apostasy, and branded with disgrace are wandering about among the towns, objects of
hatred; pointed at as betrayers of Christ, for the sake of a little money; stricken from
the list of Christians, as was Judas from the roll of the apostles; known by the name of
apostate, as horses are known by the marks branded upon them; who simply allowed
themselves to be drawn into the basest of all sins, and promptly followed the teacher of
unhallowed and abominable impiety!

19 Thus, therefore, as the apostle says, covetousness is idolatry also, and is the root
|98 of all evils, generating untold iniquities. For as those who seek gold in the bowels
of the earth say that the goldrbearing rock lies in great quantities at its very source
and the place of its origin, and thence in veins, one running this way and another that,
extends to a great distance, and is prolonged in many ramifications, somewhat as the roots
of trees diverge from the trunk, so here, while I see many offshoots, I find them all
bound together in one root, covetousness. Indeed, with no impropriety does a sermon
against covetousness draw its illustration from gold. For gold I see the parricide taking
violent steps against his father's life, reverencing neither the hoary head, nor the
paternal dignity, but vexed at the lengthening life of the old man. For seeing everything
abundant at home, yet having no authority over what he sees, he longs |99 to be master of
this paternal wealth, and finds his father's authority irksome. At first he keeps silent,
and represses the malady of covetousness in the depths of his soul; but after his desire
has increased with time, and his soul is filled with it, all at once he lets the
wickedness break forth, as waters break through their embankments. And thereafter he
behaves insufferably to his father, all but driving him to the grave, while he is still
alive and well. If he mounts his horse with agility, the son is astounded;

20 if he eats heartily, his son murmurs. If he early arouses the servants to their duties,
the son is grieved by the alertness and vigor of the old man. But if he gives away any of
his property, or releases a servant from bondage, then indeed as silly and half-witted and
living beyond the proper limits of life, and as a squanderer of what belongs to another,
he must listen to every |100 impious reproach, and be blackguarded like a drunkard, and
upbraided for not dying soon enough. 21 This is your fruit, O abominable covetousness!
Spurred on by you, the child becomes his parent's enemy. You fill the earth with robbers
and murderers, and the sea with pirates, cities with tumult, courts with false witnesses,
false accusers, betrayers, advocates, and judges who incline whichever way you draw them.
Covetousness is the mother of inequality, unmerciful, hating mankind, most cruel. On
account of it, the life of men is full of inequality. Some being surfeited, loathe the
abundance of their possessions, as one disgorges food which has been too greedily
swallowed; while others are in peril through extreme hunger and want. Some lie down under
gilded roofs and live in houses that are like small cities, adorned |101 with sumptuous
baths and chambers, and most extensive porches, and every kind of extravagance, while
others have not the shelter of two boards. When they cannot live in open air, they either
take refuge beside the furnaces of the baths, or, finding the attendants of the baths
inhospitable, they dig into the dung like swine, and so contrive to get for themselves the
needful warmth. Such is the marked disparity in the conditions of life, between men
created equal in worth, and the cause of this disordered and anomalous state of things is
nothing else than covetousness. One is put to shame by his naked limbs; the other, beside
having almost countless garments, dresses his walls with purple hangings. The poor man has
not on his wooden table any bread to break;

22 while the luxurious man sitting at his broad silver stable is delighted with its
glitter. How |102 much more just it would be that the poor man should feast to the full on
the other's luxury, and that the support of the needy should be the decoration of the rich
man's table! One man, aged and unable to walk, or lame by reason of some outrageous
mutilation, does not possess the ass that he needs to carry him about, while another does
not know his droves of horses for their very multitude. One lacks oil to light his lamps,
while another has a fortune simply in lamp-stands. One has only the ground for his bed,
while he who is unreasonably rich, is dazzled by the splendor of his couch, with its
silver balls and chains instead of cords. These are the results of insatiable
covetousness. For had it not introduced inequality into life, these anomalous heights and
depths would not have existed, nor would manifold misfortunes have made our life joyless
and tearful. |103

23 On account of covetousness men lose their natural friendship for one another, and whet
their swords and array themselves against each other and like wild beasts fight one
another with great ferocity. But how can one relate the consequences of these things?
Massive walls are thrown down by engines, cities are taken, women led captives, and
children enslaved. The land is wasted and ravaged, and the trees are warred against as
though they were wrong-doers. There is great slaughter of those who are in the prime of
life, and torrents of blood stream from the wretched corpses; and the wealth of the
conquered is the victors' prize. There are, moreover, the lamentations of widows, the
tears of orphans, who bewail at once both their fathers and their freedom. He who was day
before yesterday possessor of great wealth, stretches forth his right hand to beg a bit
|104 of bread, and he who had many slaves at the loom, and houses full of garments, now
clothed in rags does the work of a slave, forced to carry water and scrape the dung from
the stable, and to perform most menial duties. There are besides countless evils which it
is impossible to compass all at once. But of all of these, the beginning and cause and
root is greed, unrighteous love of the goods that belong to another.

24 And if any one should extirpate this passion from the human heart, profound peace would
be inevitably introduced into our life, and wars and tumults would be banished from among
men, and all would return to the natural condition of love and friendliness. On this
account, our Lord also carefully heals this disease, once declaring in his teachings; "Ye
cannot serve God and mammon; and on another |105 occasion declaring wretched the rich man
who was just about to die, even as he was picturing to himself the protracted enjoyment of
luxury; and elsewhere teaching that that man was perfect who divided all that he had among
the needy, and went over to a self-denying life, which is the mother and companion of
virtue. 25 But I seem to hear, even though they are silent, those who are wont to say such
things as these to their teachers: "How shall we continue to live, if we do not care for
the getting of money? and how shall we satisfy our needs? How are loans to be repaid, and
how shall a gift be bestowed upon him who asks it, if we are all to follow your admonition
and be poor? This is the objection of an unbeliever, the speech of one devoid of
understanding, who does not know that God |106 is our Master, the director of our life,
and that he himself furnishes the living creature what it needs, the means of getting both
necessary food and needful clothing. For the providence of God is over all his works, and
the misfortune of poverty never overtakes one who is rich in faith. By presenting one of
the divine narratives in proof of what I now affirm I shall, I think, offer sufficient
evidence of it. In the history of the kings a widow woman is mentioned who, on account of
her solitary condition was greatly oppressed. A greedy and churlish creditor pestered her,
threatening to take away as pledges for her debts, her sons who were all she had left. And
when the crisis in her affairs came and none of the rich had pity on her, she went to him
who had humanity and faith.

26 Now this was Elisha the |107 prophet, a man poor in this world's goods, but abounding
in immaterial wealth; an unworldly soul from among the plowmen, houseless, homeless, clad
with but one garment; who had just had a legacy, and had received as his inheritance a
cheap sheepskin and an invisible blessing, which fell from the chariot of fire. Yet he did
not send away the suppliant disappointed, nor did he despair of helping her because he had
not what she asked, nor did he utter any sordid and doubting words, as many would have
done, such as, "And where am I to get money to pay your debt? but, like a most excellent
physician when there are no medicines to be had, by an unexpected device he found a remedy
for the disease and said, "Woman, what have you in the house? Call to mind whether you
have anything within, however small. For |108 no one is so poor as to have absolutely
nothing. And when she replied that she had a cruse with a little oil remaining in it, he
said, "Prepare me a multitude of vessels. So she got them ready and filled them from the
cruse. Thus the debt was paid to the money-lender, and the woman departed, having found a
way out of her difficulties.

27 For the very little oil which she had told the prophet she possessed, contrary to her
expectation gushed forth and filled all the jars she had made ready, and it ceased to flow
only when there was not another vessel to receive it. And the gift was commensurate with
her need. That was indeed oil which no plant, but the mercies of God, produced. Buy
yourselves this knowledge, if you can, you kings, rulers, men of wealth, from the rising
to the setting sun. You who are rich |109 in worldly wisdom, get the gift of the plowman
prophet, which could not be taken away from him who had received it For the possessions
which you so eagerly desire are beset with countless risks; thieves who break into houses,
tyrants who confiscate, flatterers who plot, the sea that overwhelms, and the earth that
quakes and yawns. Therefore let the right hand of God be the hope and treasury of men,----
the hand that led his people out of Egypt,and in the desert provided abundance of good
things, which brought Habakkuk to Daniel, and preserved Ishmael when he had been cast down
from his mother's arms; which provides for those of every generation; and which, finally,
multiplied |110 five barley loaves so that they equaled a great harvest, and one loaf
supplied a thousand hungry men and filled a basket with fragments besides.

28 Now to our God be glory forever and ever. Amen. [Footnotes renumbered and moved to the
end] 1. Hebrews 3:1. 2. Proverbs 4: 6 (Lxx). 3. Probably the Scriptures were on the table.
4. Acts 26. 5. Zechariah 3: 9; 4: 14. 6. Genesis 3:3. 7. Genesis 25: 29-34. 8. Genesis 11:
1-9. 9. Exodus 8-14. 10. 2 Kings 5. 11. 2 Samuel 15. 12. John 12: 6; Matthew 26: 15. 13.
Acts 5: 1-10. 14. They believed that each planet had its own house in the heavens. Cf.
Century Dict. "House," sec. 10. 15. Luke 19:8. 16. Psalms 39: 6; 38: 7 (Lxx). 17. Isaiah
59: 1, 2 (Lxx). 18. The Emperor Julian. 19. Ephesians 5:5. 20. 1 Timothy 6: 10. 21. Luke
16: 13. 22. Luke 12: 20. 23. Matthew 19: 21. 24. 2 Kings 4:1-7. 25. 2 Kings 2: 9-13. 26. 2
Kings 4: 3. 27. Exodus 14.

29 28. Exodus 16; Numbers 11. 29. In the history of Bel and the Dragon, Habakkuk is said
to have carried food to Daniel in the den of lions at Babylon. 30. Genesis 21: 15-19. 31.
John 6: 9-13.


SERMONS OF ASTERIUS OF AMASEA
=============================

SERMONS OF ASTERIUS OF AMASEA continued

SERMON 4 -- ON THE FESTIVAL OF THE CALENDS

IV — ON THE FESTIVAL OF THE CALENDS

1 The preacher had no text. His sermon is an earnest protest against the evils into which
New Year's festivals had drifted in his day. This is the earliest extant New Year's
sermon, and in that respect it is unique. The strange customs portrayed in it make it
peculiarly fascinating.

IV — ON THE FESTIVAL OF THE CALENDS

2 YESTERDAY and to-day two feasts, not only unrelated and discordant, but wholly adverse
and hostile to each other, have been celebrated. One is of the rabble without, gathering,
in large sums, the money of mammon, and bringing in its train bargaining, vulgar and mean.
The other is of holy and true religion, inculcating acquaintance with God, and the virtue
of the purified life. And since many, preferring the luxury and absorption which arise
from vanity, have left off going to church, come, let us with a discourse dispel from your
souls this foolish and harmful |114 delight, which as a sort of inflammation of the brain,
with laughter and jesting, induces death. And in the treatment of the subject I may
fittingly emulate Solomon. For in counseling young men to keep themselves from the snares
of licentiousness, in order to make his own admonition cogent and effective, he
personifies excess as an abandoned woman, and, by portraying all her wickedness, he thus
exposes her to her dupes as deserving of their hatred.Wherefore I, too, after showing the
vanity of the human heart in my discourse, will attempt to convert the lovers of pleasure
from their misdirected zeal.

3 Of a public feast, this, then, should be the rule and law: first, that the festival have
a distinct object; and then that the mirth be common to all; not that a part enjoy
themselves and the rest be left in dejection and |115 pain. For this latter condition is
characteristic of war rather than of a feast, since it is inevitable that the victors
parade in their victory, while the conquered bewail their misfortune. Now in these days,
first, it is not clear for what object this festival is celebrated. For the many legends
current concerning it are mutually subversive and disclose nothing certain. Then I see
only a few making merry, while the mass of the people are melancholy, even though they try
to conceal their dejection by a cheerful demeanor; while all is noise and tumult, the
multitude heedlessly jostling one another. 4 It is a recollection of, and a rejoicing
over, the new year. What kind of rejoicing, sir? First, then, I observe the manner of
meeting, of what a sort it is, and how suspicious and unfriendly! With a voice feeble and
faint the salutation drops |116 from the lips. Then follows the kiss, as a prelude to the
New Year's present. The mouth indeed is kissed, but it is the coin that is loved,----the
form of a sale and the deed of covetousness! But where there is pure and frank friendship,
kindnesses are freely bestowed with no expectation of gain. So, while on this New Year's
festival many things are carried about everywhere, and money is given, there is no pretext
of legitimate barter, nor does any one claim it. It is not a wedding, so that one might
call it the prodigality of a haughty bridegroom. Nor am I able to call the expenditure
almsgiving, since no poor man is relieved of his misfortune. One cannot call what takes
place exchange, for the multitude exchange nothing with one another. But to call it a free
gift is still more inappropriate, since the giving is by necessity. What, then, are we to
call the |117 festival, or the money spent in it? I cannot make out. But tell me, you who
have been wearing yourselves out in preparing for it. Give an account of it, as we do of
the festivals which are genuine and according to the will of God.

5 We celebrate the birth of Christ, since at this time God manifested himself in the
flesh. We celebrate the Feast of Lights (Epiphany), since by the forgiveness of our sins
we are led forth from the dark prison of our former life into a life of light and
uprightness. Again, on the day of the resurrection we adorn ourselves and march through
the streets with joy, because that day reveals to us immortality and the transformation
into a higher existence. Thus we keep these feasts and the rest of them in orderly
succession. For every human event there is a reason, but that which lacks reasonable
explanation and purpose is stuff and nonsense. |118 6 Oh, the absurdity of it! All stalk
about open-mouthed, hoping to receive something from one another. Those who have given are
dejected; those who have received a gift do not retain it, for the present is handed on
from one to another, and he who received it from an inferior gives it to a superior. The
money of this festival is as unstable as the ball of boys at play, for it is passed
quickly on from me to my neighbor. It is but a new form of bribery and servility, having
inevitably linked with it the element of necessity. For the more eminent and respectable
man shames one into giving. A person of lower rank asks outright, and it all moves by
degrees toward the pockets of the most eminent men. And you may see just such a thing as
happens in the confluence of waters. There a streamlet melts into and mingles its waters
with one larger than itself, and it in turn |119 loses itself in one still more copious,
and many small streams joined together become part of the neighboring river; this again,
of another greater still, and so on, one joining another, until the last one brings the
waters to rest in the depth and breadth of the sea.

7 This is misnamed a feast, being full of annoyance; since going out-of-doors is
burdensome, and staying within doors is not undisturbed. For the common vagrants and the
jugglers of the stage, dividing themselves into squads and hordes, hang about every house.
The gates of public officials they besiege with especial persistence, actually shouting
and clapping their hands until he that is beleaguered within, exhausted, throws out to
them whatever money he has and even what is not his own. And these mendicants going from
door to door follow one after another, and, until late in the |120 evening, there is no
relief from this nuisance. For crowd succeeds crowd, and shout, shout, and loss, loss.
Such is this delectable feast, the source of debt and usury, the occasion of poverty, the
beginning of misfortunes. And if a man become prosperous by honest industry, incredible as
that may seem, and not by the craft of the usurer, even he is dragged along as one who has
failed to pay the royal taxes; he weeps like one whose goods are confiscated, and he
laments like a man who falls among thieves. He is dogged, he is flogged, and if there be
in the house any little thing for the support of his wife and wretched children, this he
lets go, and sits him down hungry with his whole family on this glorious feast-day. A new
law this, of evil custom, that annoyance be celebrated as a feast, and man's want be
called a festival! |121

8 This festival teaches even the little children, artless and simple, to be greedy, and
accustoms them to go from house to house and to offer novel gifts, fruits covered with
silver tinsel. For these they receive in return gifts double their value, and thus the
tender minds of the young begin to be impressed with that which is commercial and sordid.
But as to the sturdy and honest farmers! What things this feast-day brings to them! It
renders the city a place to be shunned rather than visited, and they fly from it more
timidly than hares from nets. Such as are found within it are flogged, treated with
drunken violence, what they have in their hands is snatched from them; they are warred
upon in time of peace, are jeered at, and mocked with words and deeds. Even our most
excellent and guileless prophets, the unmistakable |122 representatives of God, who when
unhindered in their work are our faithful ministers, are treated with insolence. Thus it
is, then, with those in office, thus with the poor, thus with the children, thus with the
rustics. For some are distressed, some murmur, and some learn what it were better not to
know.

9 And let us consider how the soldiers under arms, too, are benefited by this feast. As to
money they are losers. They offer their entire wages as pay for one debauch. As to manners
and habits they are made worse. For they learn vulgarity, and the practices of actors.
Their military discipline is relaxed and slackened. They make sport of the laws and the
government of which they have been appointed guardians. For they ridicule and insult the
august government. They mount a chariot as though upon a stage; they appoint pretended
lictors and publicly act like buffoons. This is |123 the nobler part of their ribaldry.
But their other doings, how can one mention them? Does not the champion, the lion-hearted
man, the man who when armed is the admiration of his friends and the terror of his foes,
loose his tunic to his ankles, twine a girdle about his breast, use a woman's sandal, put
a roll of hair on his head in feminine fashion, and ply the distaff full of wool, and with
that right hand which once bore the trophy, draw out the thread, and changing the tone of
his voice utter his words in the sharper feminine treble? These are the good uses of the
festival, these the advantages of to-day's public feast!

10 Even the eminent consuls who have attained the pinnacle of human rewards, spend their
money in vanity, scattering large sums for no righteous end, but for the fruit of sin.
Their folly is as conspicuous |124 as their throne is high. For being seated on many human
thrones, and administering the greatest offices of the kingdom, they take unsparingly from
every source the largest possible amounts, some appropriating the provision money of poor
soldiers, others oftentimes selling justice and truth, and others extracting untold wealth
from royal coffers and greedily gathering together money from all quarters, disdaining no
source of income, however unbecoming or unjust. They provoke God: now presiding in public,
and, a little later, lavishing their gold upon charioteers, ill-starred flute-players,
buffoons, dancers, the effeminate and harlots, who offer their persons for sale to the
public. Moreover, they squander their gold upon the beast-fighters, blood-stained and
desperate, and even upon the beasts themselves. For it is manifest that their gold
supports the wild beasts, too, |125 buying flesh for some, grain for others. And all this
money is prodigally spent for one object, that their names may be written upon contracts.
What folly! What blindness! God promises to write the names of those who feed the poor in
living books, immortal, incorruptible, which moth does not consume, nor time destroy. For
these inscriptions you do not care. Do you take no account of the blessed promise, nor
seek to be written in the remembrance of God? For this is the Book that abides.

11 But you count it of great importance to have your names written down by the notaries,
to be mentioned by those who buy slaves, and to be applauded by vulgar flatterers. You
thus show yourselves poor judges of what is truly useful and advantageous. Give to |126
the crippled beggar, and not to the dissolute musician. Give to the widow instead of the
harlot; instead of to the woman of the street, to her who is piously secluded. Lavish your
gifts upon the holy virgins singing psalms unto God, and hold the shameless psaltery in
abhorrence, which by its music catches the licentious before it is seen. Satisfy the
orphan, pay the poor man's debt, and you shall have a glory that is eternal. You empty a
multitude of purses for shameful pastime, and ribald laughter, not knowing how many poor
men's tears you are giving, from whom your wealth has been gathered; how many have been
imprisoned, how many beaten, how many have come near death by the halter, to furnish what
dancers to-day receive. And what is the end? Vanity. After it all, a little grave, a
garment worth a few obols, shrouding the poor body. |127 After a little, forgetfulness,
----the inevitable experience of time, veiling all the things striven for. After that, the
judgment of God and the inexorable punishment of evil choice.

12 Where now are the consuls? Consider those of very recent times. Was not one caught in
the sudden uprising of an armed multitude and did he not lose his head like a malefactor?
And after death he was more paraded than when aforetime riding in his chariot he used to
exult in his dignity. And another, with a military command, attaining the same honor,
fleeing the penalty of condemnation, perished miserably on the frontiers of Egypt and
Libya, at last ending his life on the sands, since all the region through which he fled
was waste and without habitation. And what can we say about that one of the generals and
|128 consuls who is now living in disgrace in the Colchian country, and who is kept alive
only by the generosity of the barbarians there? And that one of the prefects, that man
invincible and lion-hearted as was supposed, what an end his life had! For first he beheld
his own son beheaded; then he himself also was doomed to die, but when the noose had
already been adjusted around his neck, the royal clemency stayed the hand of the
executioner. And the old man, after living a short time amid woes and calamities, departed
this life in disgrace, having found this the end of his august consulship. And that other,
so much discussed by both men and women! how last year he planned greater things than the
giants! Escaping his masters' rods, he aspired to the rods of a consul.He acquired land to
an amount not easy to |129 describe; but he was buried in only as much as the pitiful gave
him. Are not all such things then, according to the wise Preacher, Vanity of vanities? And
are not these political eminences like visions of baseless dreams, delighting for a
little, then fleeting away; blooming and withering? Let us therefore end our discourse at
this point, and render glory to the Saviour.

13 [Footnotes renumbered and moved to the end] 1. Proverbs 5; 3-6. 2. In the Byzantine
period contracts were usually dated by the names of the ruling consuls, who thus became
the eponyms of the year. 3. The allusion is to Rufinus, who fell A. D. 395. 4. i. e., the
fasces. 5. The allusion is to Eutropius, and supplies the only fixed date in the life of
Asterius, who must have preached this sermon at the beginning of January, A. D. 400. 6.
Ecclesiastes 1: 2.

SERMON 5 -- ON DIVORCE

V — ON DIVORCE

1 The Pharisees also came unto him tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a
man to put away his wife for every cause?----Matthew 19: 3.

V — ON DIVORCE

2 ON the text from the Gospel according to Matthew, whether it is lawful for a man to put
away his wife for every reason? A beautiful lesson is presented to the Christians and the
industrious in the conjunction of these two days; I mean the Sabbath and the Lord's Day,
which revolving time brings round each week. These days, as mothers or nurses of the
church, both assemble the people and seat the priests before them as teachers. And they
lead both learners and teachers to care for their souls. So the discourse of yesterday is
still ringing in my ears, and the things |134 that concerned us then linger in my memory.
I behold the cross set up, according to the prophecy of Isaiah, and the Lord's garments
stained with blood, like the garments of one who treads the wine-press; and I see the
Saviour bearing in his right hand the reward; and Solomon I behold exactly arranging for
us the balances and weights to the best of his ability. And I pity the debtor of the
Gospel, who did not share with his fellow servant the clemency which he had received from
his Lord, but by thoughtlessness and harshness brought calamity again upon himself. For
with those chapters we were yesterday busy as all of you who were not inattentive know.

3 And to-day again the Spirit lays before us many things, all beautiful, as many as are on
the table which you see. And I |135 have fixed my attention on the disputatious and
tempting Pharisees; and I have pitied them exceedingly for the depravity of their
dispositions, inasmuch as they sought to outwit even the Fountain of wisdom by their
questions and failed in their attempt; the divinity of the Only-begotten ever turning
their questions against themselves. It was of them, as it seems to me, that Isaiah
prophesied, when he said, "I am the Lord that turneth wise men backward, and maketh their
knowledge foolish; that confirmeth the word of his servant." And again David says, "They
flatter with their tongue; Hold them guilty, O God; let them fall by their own
counsels."But thanks be to them, hostile though they were, that they moved Wisdom to
answer, in order that he might leave behind in writing for us, his servants, instruction
for |136 our profit. For, behold, marriage, the chief affair of human life, is regulated
by him, and the limits of this union and the conditions of its dissolution are exactly
determined. Let each one earnestly attend to the two ordinances of marriage, in order that
women may be instructed as to their duties and men in the duties which belong to them.

4 "Whether it is lawful for a man to put away his wife for every reason?" This, then, is
the problem of the Jews. I see the aim of their asking this question in the presence of
the others. For since women are more ready to believe than men and are more susceptible to
the magnificence of miracles, and inclined to the acceptance and belief of the divinity of
Christ, (thus even behind the murderers who were dragging the Lord to the cross, was the
multitude of women who bewailed his |137 sufferings, and, following the Saviour, piteously
lamented him) in order that they might lead him to offend and alienate all women, the
Jews, by their crafty question, laid a trap and snare for him. But the Lord, through the
power of his divinity, seeing what villainy they were devising, defeating their treachery,
and, at the same time, laying down beneficent rules of life, makes reply, pleading the
cause of women, and sending away empty those hungry wolves of Pharisees who in vain had
snapped at him with their questions. "The creation itself," says he, "shows its aim to be
union, not separation." The Creator was the first bestower of the bride in marriage, since
he joined the first human beings in the marriage bond, giving to those who should come
after, the inflexible ordinance of the conjugal life, which must be recognized as |138 the
law of God; and they who are thus associated with one another are no longer two, but one
flesh, so that" What God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

5 These things were spoken to the Pharisees; but do you hear them now, you who do such
things as these: you who change your wives as readily as your garments; who build bridal
chambers as often and as easily as you build booths for feasts; who marry money, and deal
in women; who if provoked a little immediately write a bill of divorcement; you who leave
many widows while you are yet alive; believe me, marriage is terminated only by death or
adultery. For it is not as in the case of mistresses, a companionship for a few days only,
nor a mere quest for pleasure, but like most other things is subject to rule and
regulation. But in marriage, O man, both soul and body are united, so that |139
disposition is mingled with disposition, and flesh with flesh. How, then, are you going to
sever the bond of marriage without suffering? How can you withdraw from this union easily
and without pain, after taking your sister and wife not as a servant of a few days, but as
a partner for life, a sister by reason of her formation and creation,----for you were both
made of the same element of earth and of the same substance,----and wife because of the
conjugal union, because of the law of marriage? What sort of a bond, then, are you about
to break, for you are bound by both law and nature; and how will you set at naught the
agreements which you made at marriage?

6 What sort of compacts do you think I mean? Those made when the dowry had been agreed
upon, when with your own hand you signed the roll, and set your seal to the contract?
These are strong indeed, |140 and possess stability enough, but I refer back to the
utterance of Adam: "This is flesh of my flesh and bone of my bones, This shall be called
my wife. Not without reason is this utterance preserved in writing; for, uttered by the
first man, it is the common covenant of men, made with the whole class of women, who are
joined by law to their husbands. Do not be surprised if by what one has said, another is
bound. For whatever happened in the beginning, in the case of those first created, has
become the nature of their posterity. 7 If, then, the woman you have lightly divorced
shall take the book of Genesis and drag you unto the Judge, who is both Judge and witness,
tell me, what will you say? How will you repudiate your own utterance which you made in
the name of |141 God, which Moses, the servant of God, recorded, instead of some cheap
notary? God gave Adam a wife without father and without mother; and for this reason, as a
guardian he shielded the orphan. But now daughters strongly assert their mothers' rights
against their unfeeling and undutiful husbands. So that from every point of view it is
impossible for you to slight your wife with impunity, bound as you are by the ancient laws
of God and the modern laws of men.

8 Let your wife's very helpfulness put you to shame. For she is a companion, a helper, a
partner with whom to pass your life, and to bring children into the world, an aid in
sickness, a comfort in distress, the guardian of the hearth, the custodian of the
household goods, having the same sorrows, the same joys, sharing with you your wealth, if
wealth be yours, or mitigating |142 hard poverty, resourcefully and sturdily bearing up
against its grievous consequences, and because of her marriage with you, enduring the
toilsome rearing of children. And if perchance a change of fortune overtakes the husband,
he overwhelmed thereby sinks into obscurity, and those who have been considered friends,
measuring their friendship by the duration of his prosperity, desert him in his adversity,
while the servants run away from both master and misfortunes. Only the wife is left, a
partner of his distress, serving her husband amid manifold evils. She wipes away his
tears, and heals his stripes if he be smitten. She follows him when he is led to prison;
and if permitted to enter with him, she cheerfully shares his confinement. But if even
this be forbidden she remains at the door of the prison, like a dog devoted to his master.
|143

9 I have known a woman who even cut off her hair, and put on man's attire,----and that
gay-colored, in order that when her husband fled and hid himself, she might not be
separated from him. And while she seemed to be a slave, in truth she was a slave of love.
This life she lived for many years, going from place to place, and from wilderness to
wilderness. Such a one, too, we find the wife of most excellent Job to be. For all had
left him. With the loss of his wealth his flatterers departed from him. His friends, too,
limited their friendship by the duration of his prosperity. If they were present at all,
they came to reproach, not to cheer him. Instead of comforting him they aggravated his
calamity. By reason of it, indeed, all his "miserable comforters" uttered indignant
complaints against him. But she alone, who |144 had before lived in splendor, sat with her
husband upon the dunghill, scraping off the discharge, and drawing the worms from his
sores. Thus was she the partner of his life, not the sharer of his prosperity only; an
inseparable friend, not a mere flatterer during his days of pleasure,----the only blessing
that remained of all his good fortune and of all his intimates and kindred. So on account
of her lofty and superlative affection for her husband, she fell even into the sin of
blasphemy, counseling him to utter a blasphemous word against God so that he might die
quickly and not be long punished, and that she might not see him in his ceaseless pains.
For she took no account of her own misfortune of widowhood that would follow, but she
cared for only one thing,----that her husband might escape from his insupportable
existence. These |145 are the lessons which those who outrage the ordinances of marriage
should learn from antiquity and from modern experience.

10 Now what can the man seeking divorce say to this? And what sort of specious defense of
his own fickleness can he offer? "My wife's disposition," he says, "is mean and hateful,
and her tongue is violent, and her tastes are not domestic, and her house is ill-managed.
So be it. Granted. I am so far persuaded, and accept it, like the judges who are not very
critical in hearing, but are readily carried away by the invectives of advocates. But tell
me, when you first married her, did you not know that you were being joined to a human
being? And does anybody fail to see that to a human being sin attaches? For perfection is
of God alone. And do you yourself, then, never sin? Do you not cause your |146 wife pain
by your conduct? Are you free from all fault? Do you preserve the ordinance of wedlock in
purity? Oh, how many times, perhaps, your wife has endured your drunken violence! How many
ready insults and shameful reproaches she has patiently suffered I And how many
shortcomings of yours are kept secret, because your wife has not published them! She has
borne with you when you were angry without reason, and boiling with wrath; and the free
woman, your equal in station, has remained silent like a slave from the market. When you
failed through poverty or parsimony to furnish the necessaries of life, though grieved,
she did not reproach you.

11 Nay, further, when you came once from a banquet, drunken and frenzied, she did not cast
you off, hating you for your drunkenness, but with kindly forgiveness she received you,
and though you resisted, |147 she led you by the hand, and gently bathed your head,
dizzied by the fumes of the wine, and guided you to the marriage bed, alone feeling
sympathy, while the domestics were laughing and mocking at their master's drunken
derangement. Yet you stalk about the neighborhood heartlessly accusing and misrepresenting
your wife, that you may awaken sympathy for yourself and secure approval of your
prospective divorce. Hard is the heart of such men, savage and cruel, sprung, as the
proverb says, from oak or rock. For wiping out the memory of all past kindnesses, they
unfeelingly seek divorce. But who chops off a diseased limb, instead of healing it, and
that, too, when no dangerous malady has attacked it, but when there is bright and certain
|148 prospect of restoration? A blister has risen on the hand; let us carefully attend to
it. A boil has begun to annoy the foot; let us reduce the swelling with liniment. But if
we decline the attendance of physicians and busy ourselves with amputation and the knife
in the case of each of the disordered parts, before we have lived long we shall have
pruned ourselves of all our limbs. But not so, sirs. Let there be some thought even of the
limbs. Let the very services of your wives put you to shame.

12 However much you are provoked, compare the pain of one child-birth with your grounds of
complaint, and you will find your crowd of grievances outweighed. 13 Recall her good deeds
of kindness: nursing of the sick, companionship in misfortune, tearful entreaties in court
on her husband's behalf; leaving her parents and the ancestral hearth, and following a
|149 stranger; selling her own property to atone for her husband's insolence and relieve
his embarrassment. Let all this unite you to her and prove a bond of affection, propping
up and making secure your unsteady soul, as one braces a dilapidated house. Let pity
prevail, and let not intimacy and the association of a long life, which makes even brute
beasts inseparable, be trodden under foot. For I have seen an ox lowing piteously when he
had wandered away from his fellows and found himself alone; and a sheep bleating in a glen
and scurrying over the mountains until it rejoined the flock from which, while feeding, it
was parted. And a she-goat in this same plight, no matter if as she runs she overtakes
many flocks of goats, does not stop until she finds her own flock and her own herdsman.

14 Let us who are reasonable beings not be |150 found less susceptible to friendship than
the brutes. And let us not hold a wife less precious than a fellow traveler, or a man, who
on some slight pretext has suddenly become dear to us. You observe how men meeting one
another even on the highways, and coming under the roof of the same inn, or under some
spreading tree, as a shelter in summer from the noonday heat, make the chance meeting the
occasion of genuine friendship; and when they come to the place where their ways diverge,
they do not part from one another without emotion, but stand and with tears in their eyes
look earnestly upon one another, while each gives mementoes to the other to carry with
him. And after going a little way, they turn back again, and call to each other, invoking
good fortune upon each other. Does a little time like this cement a friendship so closely
that separation |151 becomes difficult and is only effected by absolute necessity, and
will you think as lightly of the partner of your life, as of a broken dish, or a cheap
cloak spoiled on a journey, or a Maltese lap-dog that has escaped the house? Where is that
attachment that was formed at first? Where the sharing of one bed, the bond of law, the
power of constant and protracted association, which, as the saying is, and experience
proves,----becomes a second nature? You have snapped them all asunder more easily than
Samson the cords of the Philistines.

15 But the man who is wise and guards his attachment does not easily forget his wife even
after she has departed this life; but he cherishes the children that she leaves as a trust
common to him and her and sees in them the departed one. For one of the children preserves
the tones of his mother's |152 voice; another possesses most of her features; another is
like her in disposition. Thus the father has impressed upon him, with many living and
striking likenesses of his wife before him, the immortal character of his union with her.
For this reason, he takes no thought of pleasure. He does not to-day heap up a grave and
shortly thereafter furnish a nuptial chamber. He does not hasten from tears and groans to
the marriage dance. He does not exchange his black and mourning garb for a wedding suit.
He does not lead a second wife to the marriage bed, still warm, of her who is departed,
nor does he give a stepmother, hateful name, to his children. But he imitates the strange
yet natural devotion of the turtle-dove. For they say that that bird, when separated from
its mate, devotes itself to perpetual widowhood, and is very different from the common
dove, as far as mating |153 again is concerned. So, then, let reproaches come thick and
fast upon the husband who seeks divorce, and let the charges of ingratitude, falling
thicker than snowflakes, pelt him.

16 But if he put forward a charge of adultery, ,and offer this as the ground of his
separation, I will at once become the advocate of the injured man, and directing my
discourse against the adulteress, will take my stand beside the husband, no longer his
foe, but his valiant ally, commending him who flees the treacherous woman, and severs the
tie which bound him to an asp and a viper. For the Creator of all is the first to absolve
this man as justly indignant, and right in driving the plague from his house and hearth.
For marriage exists for these two things, love and offspring, neither of which is
compatible with adultery. For there is no love when |154 affection turns towards another;
and honor in bringing children into the world is destroyed, when their parentage is made
doubtful. The things that contribute to this sin have been duly mentioned under another
head. But pray let both parties to the marriage contract practise self-control,----the
unbroken bond of wedlock. For where the honor of marriage is maintained, there is, of
necessity, affection and peace, with no vulgar and unlawful desire to excite the soul, and
expel legitimate and righteous love.

17 This law of self-control is not ordained by God for women alone, but for men also. But
they who give heed to secular lawgivers, and leave to men the unrestricted license of
adultery, while they are stern judges and teachers of the sanctity of women, are
themselves shamelessly licentious. Healers of others, according to the proverb, they are
yet themselves full of |155 sores. If any one upbraids them with these offenses, they
offer a subtle and playful defense. For men, they say, even if they approach many women,
do their own hearth no harm; but women, if they sin, introduce alien heirs into their
houses and families. But let the sophistical inventors of this frivolous justification of
their conduct know that they themselves are overturning other hearths and homes. For the
women with whom they associate are surely the daughters or wives of somebody; and in any
case there will be found either a marriage plotted against, or a parent wronged who has
begotten and reared a daughter, hoping to have a virgin for the bridal chamber, but whose
fond expectation has been thwarted by the robbers of her virtue. If the wretch is a
father, let him think on the feelings of a father who |156 has been thus disappointed; if
a husband, let him imagine himself the injured man. For usually it is well that each one
judge the affairs of another as he wishes another to judge his own.

18 And if any, heeding the law of the Romans, consider fornication permissible, they make
a dreadful mistake, not knowing that God lays down law in one way, while men make statutes
in another. Listen to Moses, as he proclaims the will of God, and utters bitter
condemnation against fornicators. Listen to Paul when he says: "Fornicators and adulterers
God will judge. Other teachers will not be able to save you in the time of retribution,
but, trembling and filled with consternation, they shall melt away. Plato, the professor
of laws, shall appear to you then ignorant and untaught, and that weighty voice, which
assumed authority over all |157 lawgivers, will be humbled when he and they shall see the
lovers of the body to whom they have wickedly permitted license, dragged forth to
punishment. And assuredly they who have not forbidden others, have first involved
themselves in the sin, and are found liable to a twofold charge, both for what they
themselves have done, and because they have allowed others to be licentious. Let those,
therefore, whose purpose it is to live with the very purest wives, make their own manner
of life a model for their spouses, in order that they may maintain in the home a worthy
rivalry in virtue.

19 [Footnotes renumbered and moved to the end] 1. Matthew 19: 3. 2. Isaiah 63: 1-3. 3.
Proverbs 11: 1. 4. Matthew 18: 28ff. 5. Isaiah 44: 25. 6. Psalm 5: 9, 10. 7. Luke 23: 27.
8. Genesis 2: 23. The quotation does not agree exactly either with Heb. or Lxx. 9. Job 16:
2. 10. Job 2: 9. 11. Odyssey 19: 163, "You are not born of immemorial oak or rock"
(Palmer). Cf. Clement of Alexandria, who quotes the verse, Admonit. ad Gentes, p. 18. 12.
Judges 16: 12. 13. Cf. Euripides, Frag. 1071. 14. Deuteronomy 22: 22. 15. Hebrews 13:4.


CHROMATIUS OF AQUILEIA: PROLOGUE TO THE SERMONS ON MATTHEW
==========================================================

CHROMATIUS OF AQUILEIA: PROLOGUE TO THE SERMONS ON MATTHEW d. c. AD 407

Bishop of Aquileia and friend of Jerome.

SERMONS ON THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW - PROLOGUE

1 [Translated by Stephen C. Carlson] § 1 The sacrament of our salvation and faith, though
in all the divine scriptures, is especially contained in the evangelical preaching, in
which the secret of the heavenly sanctuary is revealed to us even as the mystery of the
Lord's passion and resurrection is revealed to everyone. However, the transcribers the
gospel (as it is divided into four books) are: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, who once had
been prefigured and predestined to the duty of this divine work, as the blessed Luke
reported: Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compose a narrative of the things that have
been fulfilled among us. (Luke 1:1) For Matthew is appointed by the divine authority and
grace of the holy spirit to be the first to write down the gospel, then Mark and Luke,
most recently of all John, after he came back, upon the death of Domitian Caesar, from
Patmos, the island where he had been bound. After he had been posted on this island and
written the Revelation, he was disclosed the gospel he was to write on account of the
different heresies instigated by the devil that by then were beginning to spring up.

2 § 2 Matthew certainly and John too belong to the number of the twelve apostles, who not
only were with the Lord before the passion but also kept company with him after the
resurrection for forty days. They carefully recounted everything they saw and heard
according to what John testified in his epistle, saying: as we have heard and saw with our
eyes and by our hand have been examined, these things we declare to you. (1 John 1:1-3)
But Mark was Peter's disciple and interpreter. He did not see the Lord in the flesh but he
wrote the gospel, filled full of heavenly grace and the holy spirit. Luke also did not see
the Lord in the flesh, but, because he was very educated in the law (since he was a
companion of Paul in everything), he wrote down the gospel carefully in his own name,
expounding from the very beginning everything in the order of the matters as he learned
with respect to the apostles, as he himself testified, saying: as those who have been
there all along and those who had been ministers of the message handed down to us. (Luke
1:2)

3 § 3 Therefore, the authority of these four evangelists is firm and steadfast, because
they all composed by one principle. Of course, various principles are taught in their sure
foundation, but they do not disagree among themselves on anything, because every one of
them perceived the same thing by faith concerning the Lord's incarnation, nativity,
passion, resurrection, and also his twin advent. And because we endeavor to say some
things about the gospels, the responsibility and situation of the matter advise us to test
also the truth of the gospels prefigured from the law of the Old Testament, as surely the
Apostle says: the law was a shadow of things to come (Heb 10:1), because neither can the
new stand without the old nor could the old have any stability without the new. It is said
that everything about them is more complete in their place when the message is to be from
the two testaments.

4 § 4 Thus, both the type and the number of the four gospels are clearly described in the
law and the prophets, as in the four rivers that flow from one source in Eden, or in the
four rows of stones that Aaron wore woven in the priestly garment on his chest, or in the
fourfold row of twelve calves that Solomon set up under the bronze sea in the temple. In
all of these, the expressedexamples of the future truth cannot be doubted. Hence also
Elijah the Tishbite----not unknowing by the holy Spirit of the evangelical sacrament of
the preaching to come, when he freed the people from error and turned them from idols to
God----poured four jugs of water in the sacrifice he offered when he put the burnt
offering on the wood and made it three times in number. And fire came down from the sky,
as he openly declared even then the image of the coming hope, that is the sacrament of the
cross and the number of the gospels and the grace of baptism and the faith in the Trinity,
in which we are baptized and made a worthy sacrifice for God, coming upon us with fire
from the sky, that is, his holy Spirit presented to us as a gift.

5 § 5 But even clearer and plainer we find that through Ezekiel the prophet these gospels
are depicted in the four living things whose appearance and shape are both described.
Their likeness, he says, is the appearance of a human and the appearance of a lion and the
appearance of a calf and the appearance of a flying eagle. (Ezek 1:10) Evident among these
is certainly the form of the evangelists. Although they are depicted in different
appearances for each changing principle, their preaching is nonetheless not different. In
fact, the prophet, when he said that the appearances are specific to each, related that
each of their four appearances is heavenly, that is, each living thing has the four
appearances. The reason for this is not obscure, because it is meant that they are one,
both individually and collectively. While he certainly distinguishes and separates them in
connection with their appearances or number, the unity of preaching still makes them
inseparable and whole, because you will find everything in each and the whole in all. But
we must understand and get to know just this difference among the appearances. The
appearance, he says, of a human, and the appearance of a lion and the appearance of a calf
and the appearance of a flying eagle. The appearance of a human is understood as the
gospel according to Matthew, a human since he began from the bodily birth of the Lord to
make the introduction, saying:

6 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham, (Matt 1:1)
etc. He announces his birth by this human origin. Because of that, it is thus described as
the appearance of a human. Now, the appearance of a lion is understood to be the gospel
according to John, because, when the other evangelists had said that Christ our God is
made human according to the assumption of flesh and born of the virgin, he revealed his
timeless and divine birth in just the beginning of his message, saying: In the beginning
was the Word and the Word was with God and God as the Word, (John 1:1) etc. With this
voice, the preacher of such divinity roared like a lion to frighten off the heresies. 7 §
6 The Apocalypse also mentioned these living things, but we must carefully examine why,
when the prophet had said that the first appearance was of a human, then of a lion, did
the Apocalypse put the appearance of the lion earlier in reversed order, saying The
appearance of a lion and the appearance of a human (Rev 4:7), because we must point out it
is so, not accidentally but for a particular reason. For Matthew has thus been described
first in order in with the prophet in the appearance of a human, because he was to write
down the first gospel. But John is brought earlier for this reason in the Apocalypse,
because he surpassed everyone in preaching the timeless and coeternal Son of the Father by
the excellent beginning of his preaching. Thus, he is placed later as to time or order,
but he is regarded first as to faith since he would know the secret, divine mysteries from
reclining on the Lord's bosom. But the fact that John is preferred in connection with
faith does not detract from the other evangelists since they all were directed by one and
the same Spirit to the complete instruction of the Church and wrote about the Lord
necessarily and completely. For, because many different heresies were to come, the holy
spirit so impacted the writing of each as to expound the complete and perfect sacrament of
the heavenly faith through all of them, by which it confuted all enemies of the truth
together.

8 Finally, the Holy Spirit at once opposes those wretched people who deny that the Son of
God was born of a virgin for our salvation, judging this as unworthy for God, through
Matthew and Luke. Through them, it clearly discloses both the birth of the Lord according
to the flesh and the conception and labor of the virgin. However, those who dared
blaspheme the true divinity of the Son of God and the unlimited nature of his eternity,
denying in particular that he was born of the Father and is true God and had always been
with the Father, St. John and Mark nonetheless oppose at once, condemning the infidelity
of their blasphemy, testifying in the beginning of his gospel that the only-begotten Son
of God is God. 9 § 7 But as we are all carefully following this along, I seem to have gone
on longer than I intended to. Let us now go back to the order. Thus, St. John is described
in the appearance of the lion, as best comprehended. The gospel according to Luke,
however, is recognized in the appearance of the calf, because he wrote according to the
law as he began from the priesthood of Zacharias saying: In the days of Herod the king of
Judea, there was a certain by the name of Zacharias from the order of Abijah and his wife
of the sons of Aaron, etc. For that reason, however, he has been represented by the person
of the calf, because the law he wrote according to had decreed for a type of a future
truth that, among other sacrifices, a calf be offered for the sins of the people. Hence,
not undeservedly, only this evangelist made mention of this fattened calf, which was
killed for the salvation and return of the lost son in the joy of the exulting father,
because St. Luke so made mention as he declared that our Lord and Savior has suffered for
the sins of the human race according to the preceding form of the law.

10 To be sure, the appearance of the flying eagle is understood as the gospel according to
Mark, who began with a prophetic testimony saying: The beginning of the gospel of Jesus
Christ Son of God, as is written in Isaiah: Behold I send my angel before my appearance. A
voice crying in the wilderness: Prepare the ways of the Lord, make our God's paths
straight. (Mark 1:1-3) And because the eagle is often described as the form of the holy
spirit, who has been spoken in the prophets, he is thus depicted in the appearance of an
eagle. For also only he reported that our Lord and Savior flew away to heaven, that is,
wetn back to the Father, as David had said: He ascended above the Cherubim and flew; he
flew above the feathers of the wind. (Ps 17:11 [18:10]) § 8 Finally, as we know that the
reason for such a sacrament is arranged in each of the evangelists by the Holy Spirit, the
same appearances also combine in the person of our Lord and God. For, he is understood to
be a human because of the flesh that he took on from the virgin, and the calf because of
what he himself offered as a sacrifice worthy of God for our sins, and a lion for the
power of the virtue that defeated death in triumph, allowing in himself none of the brunt
of outside fears, and an eagle because, when the mystery of the passion was completed as
an eagle flew to heaven, the booty of human flesh it snatched from our jaws has been taken
with him.

11 § 9 For the same reason in the prophet Zechariah we also read the foretold number of
the evangelists, reported by the prophet like this: I saw, he said, four chariots going
out of two mountains ,and these mountains, he said, were mountains of bronze. In the first
chariot were red horses, and in the second chariot were black horsed, and in the third
chariot were white horses, and in the fourth chariot were different and dappled horses.
And I said to the angel who was speaking to me: What are these, lord? Responding he said
to me: Do you not know what these are? And I said: No, lord. And he told me: These are the
four winds of the sky that stand with God before the whole earth. (Zech 6:1-5) And so this
is the number of the chariots. 12 In fact the following rationale, promulgated by
prophetic reason, teaches us to perceive a type of the gospel truth: we notice that the
gospels have also been clearly designated in these chariots. He declared that the four
horses are described in four parts, as we best recall, because each of the gospels must be
understood in the four and the four in each. Although the preaching of the evangelists
would rightly seem to be in four portions, they still are undividedly of one mind for the
unity of the faith. In fact, we know that the gospels were clearly prefigured in these
chariots, because the prophet asked the angel speaking to him about what these were and he
was told this: These are the four winds of the sky that stand with God before all the
earth, which he reported by God's command to have circled all the earth. And if we have
not considered the saying about these winds (which blow through the lands and generate
waves or brew up storms), it is simple enough to understand that, when they have been
described in the prophets desiring only the divine and eternal heavenly things, the Lord
deservedly adds more: These are the ones that circle the earth; they soften my fury (Zech
6:8). As we perceptively have recognized, the divine wrath, which was over people's sins,
cannot otherwise be appeased except through the gospel's preaching, which runs throughout
the globe and gives both the remission of sins and salvation to the human race.

13 § 10 Yet the arrangement of the world rests upon the rationale for this evangelical
number: for we recognize the four seasons that the year progresses through and the four
corners of the earth that the four guardian angels are assigned to, referring to the
Apocalypse. § 11 And although there are said to be four gospels because of the number of
the evangelists, even though there is only gospel among them all, as the Lord said: And
this gospel will be preached through the whole globe (Matt 24:14). He did not say gospels
but gospel. The apostle described this too when he says: If anyone has preached to you a
gospel other than what you have received, let them be accursed. (Gal 1:9) Hence, it is
plain that there are certain four books of the gospels, but one gospel is counted in these
four books. And for that reason one must not be prejudiced should we sometimes say
"gospels" because of the number of evangelists or when we name the gospels in this way as
the most important books or when we designate the number of the evangelists according to
the usual custom of the majority. Indeed we both confess and believe that there is one
true gospel according to the authority of the Lord or even the apostle.

14 § 12 Although we have wanted to establish the number of evangelists from a painstaking
study of the various testimonies of the prophets, I have extended the sermon longer than I
have intended to. But we strive to investigate the order of the gospel according to
Matthew, even with little insight and a mediocre sermon. Notes 1. The Latin text used is
that of R.ÉTAIX and J. LEMAIRE, CCSL 9A (1974). Tractatus lxi in euangelium Matthei, (CPL
218), also in PL 20, cl. 327. This is the author's prologue to a series of sermons which
were mainly transmitted in the manuscripts under the name of John Chrysostom. Their
correction attribution was recovered by Étaix and Lemaire in the 1960's. This prologue has
been seen as having interesting parallels to the Muratorian canon. Chromatius also wrote
another series of sermons (CPL 217).


SOURCES AND CREDITS
===================

Where each text comes from, and the licence under which it may be reused.

THE ANCORATUS (THE WELL-ANCHORED MAN) Greek text: Karl Holl’s edition (Epiphanius,
Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1915), digitised by Open Greek and Latin and the First Thousand
Years of Greek project (CC BY-SA 4.0). The English is a new translation made by
SermonIndex with AI directly from the Greek, as a first reading version; it has not been
checked line by line by a person and may contain mistakes. No older English translation
was used. Where the digital Greek is flagged as damaged, the English is a best reading.
Released under CC BY-SA 4.0. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES English translation: an out-of-copyright translation as transcribed,
or commissioned and given to the public domain, by Roger Pearse for his collection Early
Church Fathers – Additional Texts ( tertullian.org/fathers ). 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.
published 1935, US copyright not renewed (Pearse's preface). Licence: Public domain.

APOCRITICUS 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.

SERMONS OF ASTERIUS OF AMASEA English translation: an out-of-copyright translation as
transcribed, or commissioned and given to the public domain, by Roger Pearse for his
collection Early Church Fathers – Additional Texts ( tertullian.org/fathers ). 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. published 1904. Licence: Public domain.

CHROMATIUS OF AQUILEIA: PROLOGUE TO THE SERMONS ON MATTHEW 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.