do you not know that he who insults the royal image transfers the insult to the dignity of the prototype? Or do you ignore that he who overturns a wooden or brass statue is punished, not as though he had harmed the wooden material, but as though he had laid hands upon the King himself? Inanimate material which bears the likeness of the King transfers the insult to the King; but if a living form, which God the Word has clothed himself with, is insulted, will it not transfer the insult to Him who is clothed with it? Appreciate the dignity, and do not insult the economy. But let these things suffice for now; reserving what remains to be treated concerning God the Word for another discourse, let us honor his moderation in some order, and render glory to God, to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit, now and always, and for ever and ever. Amen.
MONITUM ON THE HOMILY "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD"
Who the author of this discourse may be, is not easily perceived, nor at what time or in what city it was delivered. It is plain that it was spoken against the Pneumatomachi and the Anomoeans and the followers of Eunomius, who not long ago had held primacy in that city and oppressed the Catholics. This matter is described by the orator here near the middle of the discourse: "For when impiety flourished, when heresy devastated this city, the children of the Church were consumed..." But today, beloved, that pestilential doctrine has been cast out, and saving grace has entered in. It seems altogether that this concerns the Anomoeans and Arians expelled by Theodosius the Great, who occupied many churches in Constantinople. That event happened in the year of Christ 380; and thus this homily was delivered in the year about 381, which was also the opinion of Tillemont in his *Life of Chrysostom*, pages 392 and 587. To this opinion everything corresponds. For at Constantinople, where the homily is thought to have been delivered, there were many Pneumatomachi and many Anomoeans, whom this writer—whoever he is—harasses here: these were expelled from the Churches; yet they struggled against the Catholics, which lasted even until the times of Chrysostom, as can be seen in his homily against the Anomoeans delivered at Constantinople (Vol. 1, col. 701 et seq.). At the end of the homily, however, the speaker commends the whole assembly to the prayers of their common father and doctor. Truly, that was perhaps still St. Gregory Nazianzen, who in the same year resigned the episcopate of Constantinople for the sake of preserving peace. The style is altogether complex and iron-like, whence some have ascribed it to Severianus, bishop of Gabala, on account of the similarity of speech. But these things precede the age of Severianus as a speaker; nor did he labor alone under this defect of style, as we have often seen. We have rejected the Latin interpretation of Joannes Jacobus Beurerus, because it was composed in a paraphrastic manner, and we have prepared a new one.
ON "IN THE BEGINNING WAS THE WORD" AND THE FOLLOWING, AND THAT THE SPIRIT SEARCHES THE DEPTHS OF GOD (1 Cor. 2.10), AND CONCERNING THE NEWLY ILLUMINATED AND AGAINST HERETICS.
Our discourse yesterday ended at the contemplation of the great eagle, of that truly great one, I say, who flies beyond the heaven and the heavenly powers in spirit, and begins from the summit of all things. For John first preached to us, *In the beginning was the Word*, and philosophized concerning the uncreated nature; he who surpassed all created things more than any eagle, and rose above the sound of thunder, as he who alone preached the eternal and heavenly philosophy. For thunder, brothers, both terrifies and irrigates: it irrigates with the shower of clouds, it terrifies and strikes with its sound. Therefore, the voice of John adopts diverse parts: it irrigates the Church, and strikes terror into the host of the heretics. For when they speak vain things, when they deny things which they know to exist, when they contend with human language against divine Scripture: then John cries out, *Was*, before *Was not*. *In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God*, [544] by his voice terrifying his adversaries: as David testifies and says, *At your rebuke they shall flee, at the voice of your thunder they shall be afraid* (Ps. 103:7). *In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God*. For because the generation of the Word is free from passion, he calls Him "Word," so that through the things which are in you, he may teach you the things which are above you. For just as the mind, generating a word, generates without passion, without being cut, without flowing, without suffering any corporeality: so the divine and passionless generation is ineffable and incomprehensible, not cut, not divided; but while it is evilly cut by impious and incredulous heretics, it is rightly preserved by the pious without division. Why did the evangelist not wish to say, "In the beginning was the Son"? Lest the name of "Son" might introduce a generation liable to passion: but he calls Him "Word," so that he may declare a generation without passion. And lest you should think the Word to be prolatitious, he subjoined: *And the Word was God*: so that by the name of "Word" you might understand impassibility, and by the name of "God," dignity. Then, his generation having been set forth, he introduces the dignity and power of the Creator: *All things were made by him*.