we must consider whether beings are capable of being comprehended or not, in truth; and if they are capable of being comprehended, there is another power, and one superior to the senses, which reaches them. If they are not comprehended, we shall not even be able to attain those things which are seen otherwise than as they are. That things are indeed comprehensible to us is clear from the fact that we use each of them suitably for our needs, and in turn we adapt them to whatever we wish. Therefore, if it is shown that things are comprehensible to us, and the senses, being void of reason, judge falsely, the mind will be that which distinguishes all things by reason [al. which distinguishes every reason] and judges, and knows things as they truly are; the mind, moreover, is that part of the soul which is adorned and illumined by reason. Therefore, the soul is a participant in reason. B Lastly, because we do nothing that we have not first described and defined for ourselves; and this is nothing other than the dignity of the soul; for knowledge of things does not come to it from without, but it ornaments things, as it were, with its own thoughts; and therefore it depicts and describes the thing within itself beforehand, so that it may afterwards bring it forth into the light; furthermore, the dignity of the soul is nothing other than to do all things with reason, by which it also differs from the senses. It is therefore demonstrated that the soul is rational [al. for by this it is also demonstrated that it differs from the senses. Therefore the soul is endowed with reason].
S. GREGORY THAUMATURGUS FOUR HOMILIES
(Opera S. Gregorii Thaumaturgi, ed. Ger. Vossii, p. 9.)HOMILY I On the Annunciation of the holy Virgin Mary.
C Of our holy Father Gregory, bishop of Neocaesarea in Pontus, the Wonder-Worker, on the Annunciation of the most holy Mother of God, the Virgin Mary, Sermon I.
Today divine praises are celebrated by angelic choirs, and the light of Christ’s advent shines upon the faithful. Today the joyful spring for us, Christ the sun of justice, has dawned, and has illumined us with clear light, and has enlightened the minds of the faithful. Today Adam is renewed [al. recalled], and performs dances with the angels, having been taken up into heaven. Today the whole world is full of joy on account of the advent of the Holy Spirit upon men. Today divine grace, the hope of things invisible, shines forth, and miracles that exceed mind and understanding, and the mystery which was hidden from eternity, it makes plain to us. Today crowns of perennial virtue are being woven
A. Today God, wishing to crown the sacred heads of those who love to hear and love to feast, has called the lovers of unwavering faith as those invited and as heirs; and the kingdom above hastens, calling the heaven-minded to join the divine ministry of the incorporeal hosts. Today the oracle of David is fulfilled, which says: *Let the heavens rejoice, and let the earth exult*. The fields shall rejoice, and all the trees of the forest from the presence of the Lord, because he is coming. And David spoke of trees, but the Lord’s forerunner called them trees bringing forth *fruits worthy of repentance*, or rather, he called them the coming of the Lord. And our Lord Jesus Christ announced perennial joy to all who believe in him. For he says: *I will see you, and you will rejoice; and your joy no one will take from you*. Today the celebrated and ineffable mystery of the Christians, who have B willingly sealed their hope in Christ, is plainly announced to us. Today Gabriel, who stands by God, comes to the chaste Virgin, announcing to her the *Hail, full of grace*. And she was reasoning, what manner of salutation this might be; but the angel immediately added, saying: *The Lord is with you, do not fear, Mary; for you have found grace with God. Therefore you shall conceive in your womb, and bear a son; and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Highest. And the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father, and he will reign over the house of Jacob unto the ages, and of his kingdom there will be no end*. And Mary said to the angel: *How shall this be to me, since I do not know a man? Shall I remain a virgin? Is the dignity of virginity within me betrayed and lost?* While the most holy C Virgin, as if struck with wonder, was turning these things over in her mind, the angel briefly brought forth the sum of his word, saying: *The Holy Spirit shall come upon you, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow you. Therefore also that which is born of you, holy, shall be called the Son of God*. For what he is, that he shall also strictly be called. Fittingly, therefore, did grace alone choose the holy Mary out of all generations. For she was truly prudent and wise in all things: nor was anyone like her ever found in all generations. She was not like the former virgin Eve, who, dancing alone in paradise, with a relaxed mind through negligence, received the word from the author of all evil, the serpent, and thus the disposition of her mind was corrupted; and through her the deceitful one, pouring out D poison and mixing in death, introduced it into the whole world; and because of this all the toil of the saints came into being; but in the holy Virgin alone, her fall has been repaired. Nor did the most holy Virgin accept the gift before she had learned who might send it, and what manner of gift it was, and who might bring it. And while she was speaking with herself, as if in doubt, she said to the angel: Whence to us
A hast thou brought this blessing? From what treasures has the pearl of the Word been sent to us? Whence has the gift obtained its substance? Thou hast come from heaven, yet thou walkest upon earth; thou showest the form of a man, and yet thou shinest with the radiance of light. These things the holy one pondered within herself, but the archangel resolved her hesitation with such words as these, saying to her: "The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee. Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." And, "Fear not, Mary; for I have not come to strike thee with fear, but to drive away the cause of fear. Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found grace with God." Do not judge grace by the laws of nature; for grace does not suffer itself to be subjected to the laws of nature. Thou knowest, O Mary, things which were hidden from the patriarchs and prophets. Thou hast learned, O Virgin, things which up to now were hidden even from the angels. Thou hast heard, O all-holy one, things which the chorus of those inspired by the Spirit has not yet been deemed worthy to hear. Moses and David, and Isaiah and Daniel, and all the prophets have preached concerning him; but they did not know the manner or the way. But thou alone, O all-holy Virgin, dost now receive the mysteries unknown to all these, and thou learnest whence they come. For where the Holy Spirit is, all things are readily prepared. Where divine grace is present, all things are possible with God. "The Holy Spirit shall come upon thee, and the power of the Most High shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God." If he is the Son of God, then he is God, of the same form— B —as the Father, and co-eternal, in whom the Father possesses all manifestation; the character in the person, and through the radiance, the glory shines forth. And just as rivers proceed from a perennial spring, so from this perennial and ever-living spring proceeds the light of the world, the perennial and true Light, Christ our God. For concerning this the prophets have cried out: "The streams of the river make glad the city of God;" and not one city only, but all; for just as it makes glad one city, so it makes glad the whole world. Fittingly, therefore, did the angel C to the holy Virgin Mary, first of all, signify the words: "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee," since the whole treasure of grace was stored within her. For of all generations, she alone was found a virgin, holy in body and spirit; and she alone bears him who bears all things by his word. And it is not only the beauty of the holy one in body that causes us to marvel, but also the virtuous manner of her soul. Therefore, also with those words, "Hail, full of grace," did the angel first salute her: "The Lord is with thee," and not an earthly bridegroom, but the Lord of sanctification himself, the father of chastity, the author of incorruption and the giver of liberty; the procurator of salvation, and the protector and bestower of true peace; he who created man from virgin earth, and from his side and rib D took Eve
A This Lord is with you, and again from you. Come, therefore, beloved, and let us, too, following the angelic melody, pay the debt of gratitude according to our power, saying: "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you." For it is truly yours to hail and to rejoice; since with you the divine grace, as it knows how, has taken up its dwelling; with the handmaid, the King of glory; with the beautiful one, the one beautiful in form above the sons of men; with the immaculate one, He who sanctifies all things. With you is God, and perfect man, in whom the whole fullness of the divinity dwells. Hail, full of grace, the fountain of light, which illuminates all who believe in Him. Hail, full of grace, the rising of the intelligible sun, and the immaculate flower of life. Hail, full of grace, the most fragrant meadow. Hail, full of grace, the ever-flourishing vine; you who gladden the souls of those who glorify you. Hail, full of grace, the field unplowed that brings forth most beautiful fruits: according to nature indeed, in that you brought him forth in our manner and by observing the time of movement and gestation; but contrary to nature, or rather above nature, because the divine Word descended from above, and in your holy womb refashioned Adam, and the Holy Spirit provided fruitfulness indeed to the holy Virgin; but the body itself was assumed from her body. And just as the pearl B from two natures, namely from lightning and water, proceeds from the hidden signs and indications of the sea; so too our Lord Jesus Christ, unconfusedly and immutably, proceeds from the pure and chaste, and immaculate and holy Virgin Mary, perfect in divinity, and perfect in humanity, in all things like to the Father, and consubstantial with us in all things, without sin. Many of the holy Fathers, and patriarchs, and prophets, desired to see Him, and to become eyewitnesses, and did not. And some of them indeed beheld Him through visions, figuratively in riddles; others heard the divine voice in the pillar of a cloud, and were granted the sight of holy angels; but to Mary the Virgin alone C, the holy one, did Gabriel the archangel come with brilliant light, announcing to her: "Hail, full of grace"; and thus she herself received the Word, and in the season of bodily completion brought forth the precious pearl. Be present, therefore, you also, most beloved, and let us sing those sweet words represented to us from the spiritual Davidic cithara, saying: "Arise, O Lord, into your rest; you, and the ark of your sanctification." For the holy Virgin is truly the ark, gilded within and without, who received the whole treasure of sanctification. Arise, O Lord, D
A to your rest. Arise, O Lord, from the bosom of the Father, that you may raise up the fallen race of the first-created man. Praying and beseeching these things, David, prophesying concerning the rod that was to sprout from him—that flower of most beautiful fruit—said: "Hear, O daughter, and see, and incline your ear, and forget your people, and your father's house; and the king will desire your beauty; for he is your Lord God, and you shall worship him" (Ps. XLIV, 11, 12). Hear, O daughter, the things formerly prophesied concerning you, that you may also perceive the facts with the eyes of knowledge. Hearken to me foretelling them to you, and to the archangel clearly announcing to you the perfect mysteries.
Come, therefore, beloved, and let us also, B recurring to the memory of those who went before, glorify, hymn, bless, and praise this rod from Jesse that sprouted so supernaturally. For not only Joseph, but also the Theotokos Mary, receiving testimony, Luke, in the divine Gospels, looking to the very family and lineage of David, relates and says: "And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Judea, which is called Bethlehem, to be registered with Mary, his betrothed wife, who was with child, because they were of the house and family of David. And it happened that while they were there, the days were fulfilled for her to give birth, and she gave birth to her first-born son, the first-born of all creation; and she wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn" (Luc. II, 4, 6, 7). C He wrapped in swaddling clothes him who is clothed with light as with a garment. He wrapped in swaddling clothes him who created all creation. He laid in a manger him who sits above the cherubim, and who is hymned by myriads of angels. In the manger of irrational beasts rested the Word of God, that he might bestow rational perception upon those men who had become truly irrational through their own free will. On the table of the beasts was set forth the heavenly bread, that he might grant to men, who had become like irrational cattle, participation in mystical food. And there was not even a place for them in the inn. He had no place, he who by his word fashioned heaven and earth; since, being rich, for our sake he became poor, choosing extreme lowliness for the salvation of our nature, out of his innate goodness toward us. He who fulfilled every dispensation of the secret mysteries of the economy D in heaven in the bosom of the Father, and in a cave in the arms of his mother, rested in a manger. Angelic choirs surrounded him, proclaiming glory in heaven and peace on earth. In heaven he sat at the right hand of the Father, and in the manger he rested as if upon the cherubim. This, too, was truly a cherubic throne; a royal throne; a Holy of Holies; unique in its glory upon earth; holier than the holy; in which rested Christ our God. To whom be glory, honor, and dominion, with the immaculate...
a throne truly Cherubic; a royal throne, holy of holies, unique in glory upon the earth, holier than the holy, in whom Christ our God rested. To whom be glory, honor, and power, with the immaculate Father, and with the all-holy and life-giving Spirit, now and ever, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
HOMILY II
On the Annunciation of the holy Virgin Mary
B Of the same holy Father of ours, Gregory, Bishop of Neocaesarea in Pontus, the Thaumaturge: an encomium on the Annunciation of the all-holy Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary, Sermon II.
It is fitting for us to offer all festive celebrations and hymns to God as a sacrifice; but above all, the Annunciation of the most holy Theotokos, comprehended in those words, *Hail, full of grace*, which were spoken to her by the angel: because it is the first of all wisdom and of saving doctrine in the New Testament—that greeting sent to us from the Father of lights. By saying *full of grace*, he encompassed the whole of human nature. *Hail, full of grace*, in the holy conception and in the glorious childbirth. I announce to you a great joy, which shall be for all the people. Again, the Lord, approaching the saving passion, said: *I will see you, and you shall rejoice, and your joy no one shall take from you*. And after His resurrection, again through the holy women, He first announces that *hail* to us. The Apostle again proclaimed things similar to these, saying: C *Always rejoice; pray without ceasing; in everything give thanks*. See then, O beloved, how the Lord has bestowed upon us everywhere, indivisibly, a joy that exceeds all understanding and is everlasting. For since holy Mary, while she was in the flesh, possessed an incorruptible life, and lived in every kind of virtue, and led a life better than that of human nature, for this reason the Word of the eternal Father deemed it worthy to take flesh from her and complete human nature; so that through the same flesh by which sin entered into the world, and through sin death, by that same flesh sin might be condemned in the flesh, and the tempter to sin might be overcome in the burial of the holy body; and the beginning of the resurrection be manifested at the same time, and eternal life be lived in the world, and a fellowship of God the Father with men be established. But what shall we say here, or what shall we omit to say? Or who shall recount and explain the incomprehensibility of this mystery? But now let us return to our present subject. Gabriel was sent to the most chaste Virgin; the incorporeal one, to her who was passing her life in the body in an incorruptible way, D in chastity, and who lived in virtues. And coming to
A her, he first announces: *Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you*, [Luc. 1, 28] and thus he proclaims to her: "Hail, full of grace. For you do things worthy of true joy, since you have put on the unspotted garment and are girded with the belt of self-control and purity. Hail, full of grace, you who are a vessel and receptacle of supercelestial joy. Hail, full of grace: for through you joy is dispensed to all creation, and the human race recovers its ancient dignity. Hail, full of grace: for in your arms the Creator of all things is to be carried."
But she was troubled at this word; for she was unaccustomed to the discourse of any men, and she embraced quiet and silence as the mother of self-control and chastity; and being a pure, unblemished, and unpolluted image, she did not fear the angelic appearance, B as most of the prophets did, since true virginity has a certain kinship and equality with the angels. For the most holy Virgin carefully guarded the lamp of virginity, and took great care that it should not be extinguished or defiled. And just as someone clothed in a splendid garment takes great thought and care that it not be contaminated by any defilement or filth, so also the most holy Mary reflected within herself and said: "Does this act of ministry and service perhaps contain some artifice, fraud, or flattery? Will this 'Hail' be a cause of sorrow for me, just as the smooth promise of divinity, which she had received from the operation of the demonic serpent, was for the first mother Eve * [Gen. ult.]? Or is that author of evil, the demon, once again transfigured into an angel of light C [II Cor. 11, 14], and envying my spouse for his great self-control, and perhaps attacking him with smooth speech, and not being able to deceive the man as one with a firmer mind, has he come to me as one adorned with a more tender mind, and has he thundered this ungraceful 'Hail' in my ears for the future? Is this beatification and salutation perhaps made in irony? Is there some poison hidden under the honey? Are the words those of one announcing prosperity, but the goal that of a plunderer? For how does he greet one whom he does not know?" These things she pondered within herself, and said.
Then again the archangel announces to her joy that is credible and indubitable to all, and says to her: "Do not be afraid, Mary [Luc. 1, 30], for you have found grace with God." You have a brief demonstration of what was said. For I not only indicate to you that there is nothing to fear, but also the reason for confidence. For through me, D all the heavenly powers greet you, the holy Virgin; and the Lord himself of all heavenly powers, from out of all creation, has chosen you, the most holy and honorable one; and through your holy, chaste, pure, and undefiled womb, the shining pearl goes forth for the salvation of the whole world; since you, O holy one, have been born more glorious, cleaner, and more holy than all human nature—having a mind brighter than snow, and of every
A gold more purified; and as for your womb, such as Ezekiel saw, and such as he recounted, saying these things: "The likeness of the living creatures above the head, as it were a firmament, and like the sight of terrible crystal, and the likeness of a throne over them, as the sight of a sapphire stone; and above the throne, as the likeness of a man, and as the sight of amber; and within it, as the sight of fire round about." Clearly, then, the prophet foresaw in figure and shadow Him who was to be born of the most holy Virgin—whom you, O holy Virgin, could not bear unless you were refulgent at that time with all glory and virtue. With what words of encomium, then, shall we describe the dignity of virginity? With what tokens of praise and proclamation shall we celebrate her immaculate character? With what spiritual canticles and expressions shall we glorify her, who is most glorious among the angels? She is planted in the house of God like a fruit-bearing olive, over whom the Holy Spirit overshadowed; B through whom He has called us to be sons and heirs of the kingdom of Christ. She is the ever-flourishing paradise of immortality, in which the tree of life being planted, provides to all the fruits of immortality. She is the glory of virgins, the exultation of mothers. She is the support of believers, and the perfect example of the pious. She is the garment of light, and the dwelling of virtue. She is the perennial fountain in which the living water gushed forth and brought forth the advent of the Lord in the flesh. She is the bulwark of justice; and whoever shall be lovers of her and of virginal innocence and purity, shall enjoy angelic grace. Whoever shall have abstained from the wine of drunkenness and the strong drink of pleasure, shall be gladdened by the produce of the life-giving plantation. Whoever shall have kept the lamp of virginity unquenched, C shall be adorned with the unfading crown of immortality. Whoever shall have prepared for themselves the immaculate garment of temperance and modesty, shall be received into the mystical bridal chamber of justice. Whoever shall have approached closer to the angelic rank, shall be refreshed more perfectly with the delights of the Lord's beatitude. Whoever shall have possessed the pellucid oil of the mind, and the pure incense of conscience, shall obtain the promise of good spiritual odor and of adoption. Whoever shall have worthily celebrated the Annunciation of the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, shall receive a more abundant reward of that angelic salutation, "Hail, full of grace." It behooves us, therefore, to celebrate this festival, since it has filled the whole round world with joy and gladness. Let us, then, celebrate it in psalms and hymns and spiritual canticles. Israel once celebrated also—but in unleavened bread and bitter herbs, concerning which D the prophet says: "I will turn their festivals into sorrows, and into mourning, and their mirth into sadness." But our sorrows, our Lord, through the fruits of repentance, has turned into joy...
A. The first testament indeed had justifications of worship, as in the case of our forefather Abraham, but in the pains of carnal distress through circumcision, until the times of completion. The Law was given to them through Moses for instruction; but to us grace and truth have been granted through Jesus Christ B. For us, the beginning of all good things has become the Annunciation of the graceful Mary, the much-praised economy of the Savior, His divine and supercelestial teaching. From thence arise for us the rays of intellectual light. From thence gush forth for us the fountains of wisdom and immortality, pouring out clear and pure streams of piety. From thence the treasures of divine knowledge shine upon us. For this is eternal life, that we may know the true God, and Him whom He sent, Jesus Christ. And again: "Search the Scriptures, for in them you will find eternal life." C For this reason, for those who search the divine words, the treasure of the knowledge of God is uncovered. Today, the Paraclete has unfolded to us the treasure of the divinely inspired Scripture. Let the prophetic tongue and the apostolic teaching be a treasure of wisdom for us; for it is not possible, apart from the Law and the prophets, or the evangelists and apostles, to possess the accurate hope of salvation. For through the tongue of the holy prophets and apostles our Lord speaks, and in the voices of the saints God takes pleasure and rests; not because He is in need of speech, but because He rejoices in good affection and disposition; not because He receives any fruit from men, but because He rests freely in the souls of the just. For it is not because we speak that Christ is magnified, but because we are affected by His benefits, we gratefully proclaim His beneficence; not so that we might reach His true worth, but so that we might pay the debt according to our power. When, however, the Gospel or the apostolic reading is recited, do not attend to the book, or to the one reading; but to God speaking from heaven. For the book is that which is seen, but Christ is He who is being theologically discussed; He announces, therefore, to us the much-praised economy of the Savior; that being God, out of philanthropy He became man; not laying aside his pre-eternal dignity, but putting on the saving economy. He announces to us the much-praised economy of the Savior: that for those who are laboring, the Physician has arrived, not healing with medicines, but curing by the nod of philanthropy. He announces to us the much-praised economy of the Savior: that for those who had wandered, the way of salvation was revealed, and for those who had despaired, the saving grace, benefiting everyone in many ways, seeking out those who have wandered, illuminating those who are in darkness, making alive those who have been put to death, freeing the slaves, redeeming the captives, and becoming everything to all of us—the way of salvation; not because of our own gratitude, but because of the goodness befitting the Benefactor Himself. For the Savior did everything, not so that
A He might acquire virtue for Himself, but so that He might procure eternal life for us. For having fashioned man in the image of God, He commanded him to dwell in the paradise of delight; but he, deceived by the envy of the devil and having become a transgressor of the divine commandment, became liable to death. Whence also those who were born of him, by succession, were held bound by the ancestral debt, having the reckoning of condemnation demanded of them. For death reigned from Adam until Moses. But the Lord, lover of mankind, seeing His own creature held by death, did not turn away to the end from the man whom He had made in His own image, but visiting him through every generation, He did not abandon him; and previously manifest in the Fathers, proclaimed in the law, and shadowed forth in the prophets, He foreshadowed His own saving dispensation. B When, however, the fullness of times of His glorious advent had come, He sent forth the archangel Gabriel to the Virgin Mary to bring her the glad tidings. And he, having arrived from the ineffable powers above at the holy Virgin, first addressed Her with the words: Hail, full of grace; and at the very sound of the voice of "Hail, full of grace" coming to her, the Holy Spirit entered through the hearing into the immaculate temple of the Virgin; and her mind was sanctified together with her members; and nature stood opposite, and intercourse at a distance, contemplating with wonder the Lord of nature performing in the body a work contrary to nature, or rather, above nature; and by the very weapons through which the devil had contended, by their opposites Christ saved us, having assumed a body capable of suffering, like ours, so that He might bestow C greater grace upon the failing human race. And where sin abounded, grace did superabound. Fittingly, therefore, the grace was sent to the holy Virgin. For thus also the oracle of the evangelical history contains, saying: "In the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent to a virgin betrothed to a man, whose name was Joseph, of the house and family of David; and the name of the virgin was Mary," and so forth. But this month is the first to the holy Virgin; as it says in the legal book: "This month is to you the beginning of months; it is the first to you in the months of the year. Celebrate a holy Passover to the Lord for all your generations." But the sixth month was toward Zachariah. Fittingly, therefore, the holy Virgin was of the lineage of David, and possessed Bethlehem as her fatherland, and was justly betrothed to Joseph according to the laws of kinship. And the betrothed was her guardian D and cohabitant of her unblemished incorruption. And the name Mary was very befitting to the holy Virgin; for it is interpreted as illumination. For what is more brilliant than the light of virginity? Whence also those who well consider their substances call virtuous persons virgins. If, then, having a virgin heart is such a great good, how much more so is the flesh which, along with the soul, has practiced virginity? Thus also holy Mary, being in the flesh,
A possessed an incorrupt and immaculate life, and received with faith the words spoken by the archangel. And then, with haste, she traveled toward Elisabeth, her kinswoman, into the hill country. And having entered the house of Zacharias, she saluted Elisabeth, imitating the angel. And when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the infant leaped for joy in her womb, and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. Therefore, the voice of Mary was effective, and filled Elisabeth with the Holy Spirit; and just as from an everlasting fountain, through the tongue, she sent forth a river of gifts through prophecy to her kinswoman, and she caused the feet of the infant, bound in the womb, to leap and exult. This was the symbol and sign of a miraculous dance. For where the full-of-grace has arrived, all things are filled with joy. Elisabeth exclaimed with a loud voice and said: "Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb; and whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me?" Blessed are you among women. For you have become for them the beginning of restoration. You have given us boldness of entry into paradise, and you have driven away the ancient sorrow. For no longer, after you, is the race of women reproached. No longer do the heirs of Eve fear the ancient curse, nor do they dread the pain of childbirth. Since Christ the Redeemer of our race, the Savior of all nature, the spiritual Adam, who heals the wound of the earthly man, proceeds from your holy womb. Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the fruit of your womb. For the planter of all good things has been revealed as your fruit. We see the words of the barren woman to be brilliant indeed; but B more brilliant still is what the holy Virgin spoke in return, and she offered back to God a song full of thanksgiving, of sweet fragrance, and of theology, declaring the new things along with those of old; proclaiming things from the beginning of the world along with those at the consummation of the ages, and in a brief word summarizing the mysteries of Christ. And Mary said: "My soul magnifies the Lord. And my spirit has exulted in God my Savior," and what follows. "He has helped Israel His servant, to remember His mercy, and the covenant which He made with Abraham and his seed for ever." You see how the holy Virgin has even surpassed the perfection of the patriarch, and confirms the covenant of God toward Abraham, as He says: "This is the covenant which I will make between Me and you." Therefore, coming, He fulfills C the covenant toward Abraham, mystically undertaking the sign of circumcision, and becoming the fulfillment of the Law and the prophets. This prophecy—or rather, this song—the holy Theotokos sent up to God, saying: "My soul magnifies the Lord."
And my spirit has rejoiced in God my Savior. For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name." For having made me the Theotokos, He also preserved me as a virgin; and through my womb, the fullness of all generations is gathered together for sanctification. For He blessed every age, of men and women, of youth and children, and of the elderly. B He performed might with His arm for us against death and against the devil, and He tore asunder the bond of our sins. He scattered the proud in the intention of their heart; He scattered the devil himself, and all the demons who serve him. For he was truly proud in heart, since he dared to say: "I will set my throne above the clouds of heaven, and I will be like the Most High." How He shattered him now, the prophet subsequently declared, saying: "But now you shall descend into Hades, and all your hosts." For everywhere He scattered his altars and the worship of vain gods; and from the nations He established a peculiar and acceptable people for Himself. "He has put down the mighty from their thrones, and exalted the humble." By these very words, He briefly hinted at the rejection of the Jews and the introduction of the nations. For the elders of the Jews, and the scribes in the Law, and those who were rich in other prerogatives and privileges, because they had used their wealth and power evilly, were hence deposed by Him from every throne—that is, of prophecy and priesthood, of legislation and teaching, of hereditary wealth, of the abundance of sacrifices and festivals, and of the royal dignity. Spoiled of all these, they were sent away C as fugitives, naked, into captivity; and in their place, the humble peoples from the nations, who hungered for righteousness, were exalted; because having shown their own humility and the famine of the knowledge of God by which they were held, they supplicated for the divine Word like crumbs, just as the Canaanite woman; and therefore they were filled with the riches of the divine mysteries. For the entire lot of divine goods, He who was born of the Virgin, Christ our God, transferred to the nations. "He has helped His servant Israel"—and not just any Israel, but His servant, who by his deed ennobles the nobility of Israel. And for this reason, the Theotokos called him servant and heir. For finding him laboring under the letter and the Law, she called him through grace; thus, having called such an Israel, He helped him, "in remembrance of His mercy. As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham, and to his seed forever." In these few words, she embraces the whole mystery of the dispensation. For to save the human race, D and to fulfill the covenant with our fathers—
A Christ, as He willed, at length inclined the heavens and came down. And thus He showed Himself to us according to our capacity, that we might be able to see Him and touch Him, and hear Him speaking. And for this reason, God the Word deigned to assume flesh and perfect human nature from the most holy Virgin, and was born man, that He might pay our debt and fulfill unto Himself the testament established with Abraham, the circumcision, and the requirements of the other legal precepts. After these words, B the most holy Virgin departed for Nazareth; from there, however, she was forced to go up again into Bethlehem by the decree of Caesar; and she, as one originating from a royal family, was sent into the royal city of David with Joseph her betrothed. And the mystery that surpasses every miracle followed: a Virgin gives birth, and carries in her hands Him who by His word carries all created things. And there was no place for them in the inn. He who by His word founded the whole earth had no place. With milk the Virgin mother fed Him who nourishes every living thing and produces spirit. With swaddling clothes she wrapped Him who by His word binds the whole creation. In a manger she laid Him who is carried on the throne of the Cherubim. C A light from heaven shone round about Him who illuminates the whole creation. The heavenly hosts, singing praises, stood by Him who is glorified before the ages in the heavens. A star, shining as a torch, directed those who had come from afar from the earth to Him who is truly the Rising Sun. From the East they come, bearing gifts to Him who became poor for our sake. But the holy Theotokos kept all these words, pondering them in her heart, as being the vessel and receptacle of all mysteries. Your praise, O most holy Virgin, verily exceeds all praise, D because of God incarnate from you and born man. To you every creature, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, offers fitting reverence and worship. For you indeed have truly become the Cherubic throne. You shine in the highest spiritual realms with the splendor of light: where the Father, who is without beginning, is glorified, whose overshadowing power you had; where the Son is adored, whom you brought forth according to the flesh; where the Holy Spirit is glorified, who in your womb brought to pass the birth of the great King. Through you, O full of grace, the holy and consubstantial Trinity is made known in the world. With you, deign to make us also partakers of your perfect grace, in Christ Jesus our Lord: with whom, to the Father is glory, together with the Holy Spirit, now and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.
HOMILY III. On the Annunciation of the holy Virgin Mary. By the same holy Gregory, Bishop of Neocaesarea, the Wonderworker, on the Annunciation of the most holy Virgin Mary, Mother of God, Sermon III.
Again, good and auspicious tidings of joy; again, indications of liberty; again, a recalling; again, a return; again, a promise of gladness; again, deliverance from servitude. An angel speaks with a Virgin, that the serpent may no longer speak with a woman. “In the sixth month,” he says, “the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a virgin espoused to a man” A (Luke 1: 26, 27). Gabriel was sent so that he might announce the salvation of the whole world. Gabriel was sent so that he might bring to Adam the decree of his recalling. Gabriel was sent to the Virgin so that he might change the ignominy of the female into honor. Gabriel was sent, to prepare a chamber worthy of the most pure Bridegroom. Gabriel was sent, to contract the betrothal between the creature and the Creator. Gabriel was sent to the animated palace of the King of angels. Gabriel was sent to the Virgin, betrothed indeed to Joseph, but kept for Jesus, the Son of God. An incorporeal servant was sent to the inviolate and immaculate Virgin. He who is free from sin was sent to her who was devoid of all corruption. A lamp was sent, which might point out the Sun of justice. The glimmer of dawn was sent, which might run before the light of the day. Gabriel was sent, that he might proclaim Him who is in the bosom of the Father, and in the arms of His mother. Gabriel was sent, showing Him who is on the throne and in a cave. B A soldier was sent, proclaiming the mystery of the great King: a mystery, I say, which is known by faith and is not investigated by curiosity; a mystery which is adored, and is not weighed by human ingenuity; a mystery which is pondered by divine, not human, reasons. “In the sixth month,” Gabriel was sent to the Virgin. But what sixth month does he call this? Which one? That one, of course, from which Elisabeth received that joyful news, from which she conceived John. And from whence is this made clear? The archangel himself interprets it, saying to the Virgin: “Behold,” he says, “Elisabeth thy kinswoman, she also hath conceived a son in her old age. And this is the sixth month with her, who is called barren” (Ibid. 56). In the sixth month, namely, of the conception of John. For it was fitting that the soldier should precede C. It was necessary that the attendant should go before; it was becoming that the messenger should run in advance, who might announce the coming of the Lord. “In the sixth month,” the angel Gabriel was sent to the virgin espoused to a man: espoused, I say, not united; betrothed indeed, but kept. Why betrothed? So that the thief might not the sooner know the mystery. For that the King was about to come through a Virgin, the wicked one knew, for the prophecies of Isaiah…
he too was listening to the voice of Isaiah, saying: "Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son" (Isa. VII, 14). And he was watching the Virgin’s talk A every day, so that wherever this mystery might be fulfilled, he might prepare to slander. Therefore, the Master came through one who was betrothed, so that He might escape the notice of the wicked one, for she who was betrothed, he expected, would be given over to a spouse. In the sixth month, Gabriel was sent to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph. Hear what the prophet says regarding this man and the Virgin: "This sealed book," he says, "will be given to a man who knows letters" (Isa. XXIX, 11). What is this sealed book, if not by all means the immaculate Virgin? By whom will it be given? By the priests, of course. To what man? To the carpenter Joseph. Since, therefore, the priests had betrothed Mary to Joseph as a chaste man, and had entrusted her to him, awaiting the time of the wedding, he was about, upon receiving her, to keep the Virgin in incorruptibility. This the prophet B had announced long before: "This sealed book will be given to a man who knows letters, and he will say: 'I cannot read.'" Why canst thou not read, O Joseph? "I cannot read," he says, "for the book is sealed." For whom is it kept? It is kept as a dwelling-place for the Creator of all things. But let us return to the subject at hand: "In the sixth month, Gabriel was sent to a virgin." He, having received such commands as these from God, so to speak: "Come then, O archangel, be a minister of a fearful and hidden mystery, serve the miracle. I hasten to descend, moved by My own compassion, to seek the strayed Adam. Sin has aged him who was fashioned in My image, and has weakened the work of My hands; it has darkened the beauty which I fashioned. The wolf devours My nursling, the dwelling-place of paradise is desolate, the tree of life is guarded by the flaming sword, the field of delights is closed. I have pity on him who is attacked, and I wish to capture the enemy; I desire that this mystery be hidden from all the heavenly powers, for I entrust it to thee alone. Go, therefore, C to the virgin Mary. Go to the ensouled city, of which the Prophet said: 'Glorious things are spoken of thee, O city of God' (Ps. LXXXVI, 3). Go to My rational paradise; go to the gate of the east; go to the dwelling-place worthy of Me, the Word; go to the second heaven upon earth; go to the light cloud; announce to her the rain of My advent; go to the sanctuary prepared for Me; go to the bridal chamber of My incarnation. Go to the pure thalamus of My birth according to the flesh. Speak into the ears of My rational ark, that she may prepare for Me the entrances of hearing. But beware that thou do not offend or disturb the soul of the Virgin. Appear humanely and placidly before that divine sanctuary, and announce to her the first word of joy. Say to Mary that, 'Hail, full of grace,' so that I may have pity on D the miserable and afflicted Eve." The archangel heard these things, and within himself, as was reasonable, he pondered and said: "This is a new and unheard-of thing. It surpasses understanding,
A what is being said. He whom the cherubim dread, he whom the seraphim cannot look upon, he who is incomprehensible to all the heavenly [al. angelic] powers, promises his own encounter to a maiden, and announces the arrival of his very person; nay, he even promises his entry through the sense of hearing. And he who condemned Eve, hastens to glorify her daughter to such a degree? For he says: 'The sense of hearing prepares for me the entrances.' But can a womb contain him who cannot be contained? This mystery is indeed B fearful and to be venerated."
While the angel was reflecting on such things, the Lord said to him: "Why art thou troubled and amazed, O Gabriel? Wert thou not sent by me before to Zacharias the priest? Didst thou not bring to him the joyful tidings of the birth of John? Didst thou not impose the penalty of silence on the incredulous priest? Didst thou not punish the old man with the deprivation of speech? Was it not I who confirmed and approved the things which thou didst assert? Did not the event itself follow thy annunciation? Did not the barren woman conceive? Did not the womb obey? Did not the disease of sterility depart? Did not the inertia of nature flee? Does she not now show fertility, who previously did not bear a womb? Is any word impossible with me, the creator of all things? Why then art thou clothed in doubt?"
What then, in turn, did the angel say? "To correct the errors of nature, O Lord; to dissolve the tempest of diseases; to recall dead limbs to vital power; to command nature to beget children; to repel sterility from the exhausted members; to restore the aging stalk to a green form; to suddenly make an unfruitful land a mother of sheaves; this is a work which is accustomed to be performed by thy virtue and power. Witness to this is Sarah, and with her [al. after her] C Rebecca, and again Anna; who, while they labored under the grave and burdensome disease of sterility, were afterwards liberated by thee. But for a virgin to bear without the encounter of a man, surpasses all the laws of nature; and dost thou promise thy arrival to a maiden? The ends of heaven and earth do not contain thee; how then will a virginal womb contain thee?"
To whom the Lord: "How, he says, could the tabernacle of Abraham contain me?" And the angel says: "Because it had a sea of hospitality, O Lord, and there thou didst render thyself visible to Abraham in the entrance of the tabernacle, and didst pass through as one who fills all things. But how will Mary bear the fire of divinity? Thy throne is kindled, illuminated by splendor; and can the fragile virgin bear thee so as not to be consumed?" To whom the Lord: "Nay, D indeed, he says, if the fire in the wilderness harmed the bush, my arrival will surely harm Mary. But if that fire, which foreshadowed the arrival of my divine fire from heaven, watered the bush and did not burn it, what wilt thou say of the truth itself, descending not in the flame of fire, but in the likeness of rain?" Then therefore the angel, receiving the commands of God into himself and wishing to execute them, approached the Virgin, and with a clear voice addressed her, saying: "Ave,
the end, the angel fulfilled what was commanded, and having entered in to the Virgin, he cried out to her, saying, "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with you." The devil is no longer against you; for where the enemy formerly inflicted the wound, there now the Physician of salvation applies the first plaster. From where death went forth, from there Life prepared for Itself an entrance. Through a woman evils flowed, and through a woman better things spring forth. Hail, full of grace. Do not be ashamed, as though you were the cause of condemnation. For you become the Mother of Him who condemned and redeemed. Hail, you who wedded the widowed world, undefiled Bride. Hail, you who in your womb submerged the death of Mother Eve. Hail, animate temple of God. Hail, dwelling place equal in worth to heaven and earth. Hail, most spacious container of the incomprehensible nature. B But since these things are so, the Physician is present through her to the ailing; the Sun of righteousness to those sitting in darkness; and to all those tossed by the storm, the anchor and the safest harbor. For the slaves who were irreconcilably hated, the Lord was born, and became the bond of peace, the liberation for the captives, and for those harassed by war, the pacification. For He Himself is our peace; may it be granted to us all to enjoy this peace, by the grace and loving-kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory, honor, and power, now and always, and unto all the ages of ages. Amen.
HOMILY IV.
On the Holy Theophany, or on the Baptism of Christ.
C A discourse of the same our holy Father Gregory, Bishop of Neocaesarea, the Wonderworker, on the Holy Theophany [al. on the Holy Lights], that is, on the manifestation of God, or on the baptism of Christ.
O men who love Christ, and who love strangers, and who love the brethren, receive my tongue into the hospitality of your hearing, and today, opening your ears like gates, receive my discourse within them, and accept from me the saving preaching concerning the immersion of Christ which took place in the river Jordan, so that you may love the Lord, who so far condescends to us, more intensely. For even if the celebration of the Epiphany, or the manifestation of our Savior, has passed, yet its grace remains forever. Let us, therefore, enjoy it with insatiable souls; for dissatisfaction in matters of salvation is good, it is indeed D good. And come, all of you, from Galilee to Judea; let us set out together with Christ; for blessed is he who travels along the way of life. Come, let us reach the Jordan with the feet of our mind, and let us see John the Baptist baptizing Him who has no need of baptism, so that He may bestow upon us the grace of baptism. Come, let us behold the image of our own regeneration being sketched out in those waters. Then Jesus comes from Gali-
Galilee to the Jordan to John, in order to be baptized by him A. O, what great humility and modesty of soul in the Lord! O, what great condescension! The King of heaven ran to John, His own forerunner, not moving the camps [al. armies] of the angels, nor sending on ahead the incorporeal powers as His precursors; but humble [al. humbly] thus coming in a soldier’s form, He arrived at His own soldier. And as one of the many, He approached him, even as the Redeemer joined Himself to the captives, and the Judge ranked Himself among the guilty, and the Good Shepherd mingled with the lost sheep—He who descended from heaven for the sake of the straying sheep, while not leaving the heavens, and mingled with the weeds, that heavenly grain which grew without human seed.
Seeing Him, therefore, John the Baptist, recognizing Him whom he had known and adored even from his mother’s womb, and clearly knowing Him to be that same One for whose sake he had leaped in his mother’s womb beyond the measure of his age, restraining the limits of nature, he withdrew his right hand within his cloak, and with head bowed, as the most loving servant of the Lord, he spoke toward Him with such words [al. used such words]: I have need to be baptized by Thee, and Thou comest to me B? What art Thou doing, O Lord? Why dost Thou change the order of things? Why dost Thou seek from Thy servant those things which belong to servants, when Thou art with servants? Why dost Thou desire to receive things of which Thou hast no need? Why dost Thou burden me, Thy servant, with such great indulgence and humility? I ought to be baptized by Thee; but that Thou shouldest be baptized by me, Thou hast no need. What is lesser is blessed by the greater and better; but what is better is not blessed and sanctified by the lesser. A lamp is illuminated on all sides by the sun, not the sun by a lamp. Clay is fashioned by the potter, not the potter by the clay. The thing created is renewed by the Creator, not the Creator directed by the thing created. The sick man is cured by the physician, not the physician visited [al. instructed] by the sick man. The needy man borrows from the rich, not the rich man from the poor. I have need to be baptized by Thee, and Thou comest to me? Am I ignorant of who Thou art? And out of what [source] Thou hast shone forth, and whence Thou hast come? Or shall I, because Thou hast become like me [al. because for my sake Thou hast become like me], deny the magnificence of Thy divinity? Or because Thou hast so far indulged me as to approach nearly by Thy body, and to bear me all in Thyself, that Thou mightest save the whole man, shall I, on account of Thy body which is seen, despise that which of Thy divinity is understood by the mind? Or because for my salvation Thou hast put on my first-fruits, shall I be ignorant that Thou art clothed with light as with a garment C? Or since Thou bearest flesh akin to mine [al. Thou bearest my flesh], and art visible to men so that they can see Thee, shall the splendor of Thy coruscating divinity escape me? Or because I see my own form in Thee, shall I dare to deny Thy divine essence, invisible and incomprehensible, by false reasoning? I know Thee, Lord; I know Thee plainly; I know Thee, having been taught by Thee: for no one can know Thee, unless D
he enjoys Thy illumination. I know Thee, Lord, plainly; for I saw Thee in the spirit before I saw this light. A For when Thou, being wholly in the incorporeal bosom of the heavenly Father, wast also wholly in the womb of Thy handmaid and mother—while I, in the womb of Elizabeth, held as if in a prison by nature and bound by the indissoluble fetters of the embryo—did leap and celebrate, anticipating Thy birth. Shall I, therefore, who proclaimed Thy arrival before Thy birth, be ignorant of Thy presence after Thy birth? Shall I, who was the teacher of Thy coming in the womb, now be an infant, having attained perfect knowledge? Yet, I cannot but worship and revere Thee, who art adored by every creature. I cannot but preach Him whom heaven heralded by the leading of a star, whom the earth graciously received through the Magi, and whose coming the choirs of angels, B rejoicing on account of Thy condescension toward us, chanted, and the shepherds watching in the fields celebrated as the Prince of the shepherds of rational sheep. I cannot be silent while Thou art present; for I am a voice; for it says: "The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Prepare the way of the Lord." Do I need to be baptized by Thee, and dost Thou come to me? I, when born, resolved the barrenness of the mother who bore me; and while I was still an infant, I became the physician for my father’s dumbness, having received from Thee as a boy the grace of the miracle. But Thou, born of the Virgin Mary as Thou didst will, and as Thou alone knowest, didst not dissolve her virginity; but Thou didst both preserve it and grant her the title of mother; and neither did virginity hinder Thy birth, nor did birth harm virginity; but things most contrary, birth and virginity, C concurred in one concord, since this is prompt and easy for Thee, the Creator of nature. I am merely a man partaking of divine grace; but Thou art God, and the same man, because Thou art by nature a lover of mankind. Do I need to be baptized by Thee, and dost Thou come to me? Thou who wast in the beginning, and wast with God, and wast God; Thou who art the radiance of the Father's glory; Thou who art the perfect image of the perfect Father; Thou who art the true light, which illuminates every man coming into the world; Thou who, being in the world, didst come where Thou wert; Thou who didst become flesh, yet wert not turned into flesh; Thou who didst dwell among us, and to Thy servants didst appear in the form of a servant; D Thou who didst bridge the earth and heaven with Thy holy name, dost Thou come to me? One so great, to one so small? The King to the forerunner? The Lord to the servant? But although Thou didst not blush to be born in the humble modes of humanity, I, however, cannot pass beyond the limits of nature. I know how great the distinction is between the earth and the Creator. I know how great the difference is between the slime of the earth and its Maker. I know how far Thy sun of justice surpasses me, who am but a lamp of Thy grace. Though Thou art clad in a pure cloud of body, I, however, [cannot fathom] Thy...
magnificence. I acknowledge Thy lordship as perfect, I acknowledge my own worthlessness. I am not worthy to unloose the strap of Thy sandal; and how shall I dare to touch Thy immaculate crown? How shall I extend my right hand over Thee, who hast stretched out the heaven like a curtain, and founded the earth upon the waters? How shall I spread my servile A fingers over Thy divine head? How shall I wash the immaculate, who is subject to no sin? How shall I illuminate the Light? What sort of prayer shall I make over Thee, who receivest even the prayers of those who know Thee not?
While I baptize others, I baptize in Thy name, that they may believe in Thee who art to come with glory; but when I baptize Thee, of whom shall I make mention? In whose name shall I baptize Thee? In the name of the Father? But Thou hast the whole Father in Thyself, and Thou existest wholly in the Father. In the name of the Son? But there is no other by nature the Son of God beside Thee. In the name of the Holy Spirit? But He is ever with Thee as consubstantial with Thee, and of one mind, and of one thought, and of equal power, and of equal honor, and with Thee He receives the adoration of all. B Baptize me then, if Thou wilt, O Lord; baptize me, the baptizer. Regenerate him whom Thou hast caused to be born. Extend Thy tremendous right hand, which Thou hast prepared for Thyself, and by Thy touch crown my head, that running before Thy kingdom, I may, as a crowned forerunner, diligently evangelize to sinners, crying out to them: Behold the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world. And thou, river Jordan, dance with me, and leap for joy, and rhythmically move thy currents, like dances; for thy Creator stands beside thee with a body. Thou didst once behold Israel passing through thee, and didst stand still when the waters were divided, awaiting the passage of the people; but now be poured forth more vehemently, and flow more slowly, and embrace the immaculate limbs of Him who even then brought the Jews C [al. Hebrews] across. Mountains and hills, springs and torrents, seas and rivers, bless the Lord who enters the river Jordan; for He Himself sends into these waters the sanctification of all waters.
But Jesus answering said to him: Suffer it now: for so it becometh us to fulfill all justice. Suffer it now; grant, O Baptist, silence to the time of My dispensation. Learn to will what I will. Learn to minister to Me in those things for which I urge thee, and do not curiously inquire into what I will. Suffer it now; do not yet proclaim My divinity; do not yet trumpet My kingdom with thy lips: lest the tyrant, having learned of it, flee D the counsel which he has conceived against Me. Suffer the devil to approach Me as one of the other men, and with me...
A to engage, that he may receive a timely blow. Suffer Me to fulfill the purpose and plan for which I have come upon the earth. It is a mystery and a secret that is being accomplished today in the Jordan. My mysteries are for Myself and for Mine. It is a mystery, not fulfilling any need of Mine, but devising a healing for those who are wounded. It is a mystery that, in these waters, prefigures the heavenly streams of human regeneration. Suffer it to be so: when you see Me, as befits God, working in My creatures that which seems good to Me, then attribute praises to the things that are done. When you see Me cleansing lepers, then proclaim Me the Artificer of nature. When you see Me making the lame to run, then do you also, with the swift feet of your mind, compose your tongue for My praise. When you see Me casting out demons, then adore My kingdom. When you see Me raising the dead from their tombs by a word, then glorify Me with those who are raised as the author and giver of life. When you see Me sitting at the right hand of the Father, then declare Me God, as co-throned, co-eternal, and of equal honor with the Father and the Holy Spirit. Suffer it to be so: for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness. I am the Lawgiver, and the Son of the Lawgiver; and it behooves Me first to pass through all things that are established, and then everywhere to set forth the proofs of My gift. It behooves Me to fulfill the law, and then to give grace. It behooves Me to bring the shadow, and then the truth. It behooves Me to put an end to the Old Testament, and then to preach the new, and to inscribe it upon the hearts of men, and to subscribe to it with My blood, and C to seal it with My Spirit. It behooves Me to ascend the cross, and to be fastened with nails, and to suffer according to the nature which is capable of suffering, and by passion to heal passions; and by the wood to heal the wound which was inflicted upon men through wood. It behooves Me to descend even into the very depths of Hades, because of the dead who are detained there. It behooves Me by the three-day death of My flesh to destroy and profligate the power of long-enduring death. It behooves Me to kindle the lamp of My body for those who sit in darkness and the shadow of death. It behooves Me to ascend with the flesh, where I am by My divinity. It behooves Me to bring to the Father Adam, who reigns D in Me. It behooves Me to perform these things; for it is for this that I have stood over My handiwork. It behooves Me to be baptized with this baptism now, and afterwards to grant the baptism of the consubstantial Trinity to all men. Lend to Me, Baptist, for the present dispensation, your right hand; as Mary lent Me her womb for My birth. Immerse Me in the streams of the Jordan, as she who gave birth to Me [clothed Me] in infant...
A swaddling bands. Grant Me baptism, as the Virgin offered milk. Lay hold of My head, which the seraphim serve and venerate. Lay hold with your right hand of the head which is united to you by blood. Lay hold of that which by nature can be held. Lay hold of that which was prepared for this purpose by Me and the Father. Lay hold of My head, which whoever lays hold of and touches piously, will never suffer shipwreck. Baptize Me, who am to baptize those who believe through water, and Spirit, and fire; through water, which is able to wash away the mire of sins; through Spirit, which is able to make those who are of the earth spiritual; through fire, which is suited to burn up the thorns of iniquities. Having heard these words, the Baptist, directing his mind to the goal of salvation and grasping the mystery which he had received, obeyed the divine command; for he was at once pious and obedient; and extending his own right hand, trembling slightly and yet rejoicing, he baptized the Lord.
But when the Jews, who were standing near and from afar, were reflecting within themselves and saying to one another: "Did we suspect in vain that John was greater and better than Jesus? Did we think in vain that he was more excellent than this One? Does not the baptism itself bear witness to the Baptist, as to who is greater? Is it not the case that he baptized, as one superior, while this One has been baptized, as one inferior?" While they were murmuring these things among themselves, being ignorant of the mystery of the dispensation, He who is the sole Lord and who is by nature the Father of the Only-begotten, He who alone knows accurately and perfectly Him whom He alone begot without passion or disturbance, He, I say, correcting the erroneous suspicion of the Jews, opened the gates of the heavens and sent down the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove upon the head of Jesus, pointing out with His finger the new Noah, and the creator of Noah, and the good navigator of the nature which was imperiled by shipwreck. And He Himself calls out from heaven, clearly saying: "This is My beloved Son": that Jesus, not John; He who has been baptized, not he who has baptized; He who was begotten of Me before all temporal space, not he who was begotten of Zacharias; He who was born of Mary according to the flesh, not he who appeared from Elizabeth beyond hope; He who is the fruit produced without the violation of virginity and without any preceding human cultivation, not he who is a branch produced from the end of sterility; He who has lived among you, not he who has been raised in the desert. C "This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased": a Son consubstantial, not of another substance; consubstantial with Me in that which is not seen by you, and consubstantial with you in that which is seen by you, without sin. This is He who with Me formed man. This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. This My Son is not one person, and the son of Mary another; but this is My beloved Son, who is both seen by the eyes and understood by the mind. This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear Him. If He should say, "I and the Father are one," hear Him. If He should say, "He who has seen Me, has seen the Father," hear Him. If He should say,
If He says: "He who sees me, sees also the Father," A listen to Him. If He says: "He who sent me is greater than I," adapt your interpretation to the economy. If He says: "Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?" answer Him: "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." By these words, which came from heaven like thunder from the Father, the human race was illuminated, and they recognized the difference between Creator and creature, King and soldier, Maker and work; and, confirmed by faith, they approached through the baptism of John Him who baptizes in the Spirit and fire, Christ our true God; with whom, to the Father, be glory, together with the all-holy and life-giving Spirit; now and always, and for ages of ages. Amen.
FRAGMENT OF SAINT GREGORY THAUMATURGUS
On the Gospel according to Matthew, Chapter VI, Verses 22, 23.
The light of the body is the eye. If therefore your eye is sound, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is evil, your whole body will be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in you is darkness, how great is the darkness?
The sound eye is unfeigned charity, through which, when the body is illuminated, it brings forth its innermost thoughts through the outward members. But the evil eye is feigned charity, which is also called hypocrisy, through which the whole body of a man is darkened. For he ponders within himself deeds worthy of darkness, but B through his outward members he brings forth words that seem to be of light; for they are wolves in truth, clothed in the skins of sheep: men who wash only the outside of the cup and the platter, and do not see that unless the inside of these is cleansed, the outside cannot become clean either. Therefore, clearly refuting them, the Savior says: "If the light that is in you is darkness, how great is the darkness?" That is: if the charity which you think is light is, because of the hypocrisy hidden within you, a work worthy of darkness, what must your manifest transgressions be?
A CROWN OF THE WORKS OF ST. GREGORY THAUMATURGUS. SERMON ON ALL THE SAINTS.
(Edited by Joannes Aloysius Mingarelli, Bologna, 1770, in-4.)PRELIMINARY EPISTLE.
Joannes Aloysius Mingarellius to Aegidius, his most excellent brother, sends greetings. If you are well, it is well.
How great is the benevolence with which I have pursued you at all times, and of how great account I have always held you because of your accomplishments, and because of your ardent study of literature from your very youth—a study never thereafter interrupted—you yourself, my brother, can judge more easily than I can declare. More than ten years have now passed since that day on which, parting from you, I was torn with difficulty from your embrace at Rome; nor has it fallen to my lot to see you again since that day, save once, and that at Todi, many years ago. Yet the image of your countenance continues to dwell in my mind, believe me, and that sincere goodness of yours, and—known to all those of whom I have heard speak of you, and to all those who have had any familiarity or acquaintance with you, whether at Bologna, Todi, Alatri, Tusculum, or Viterbo—your sufficiently well-observed integrity and constancy of character. And so, there is nothing I do more willingly than to send you letters from time to time. But if at this time, since you have been so honorably called from Rome to Viterbo, I write to you less often than I used to, I beg you not to attribute it to negligence or forgetfulness, but to my love for you; for since I understand that you are occupied daily with very many tasks, and those of the most serious nature, I fear to trouble you with too frequent letters. But now, since that holy time approaches in which we are accustomed to rest from business and celebrate the day of the Lord’s Nativity, I do not doubt that you will gladly grant me a small part of an hour. Therefore, I send for you to read a certain very brief oration inscribed to Gregory Thaumaturgus, which now, for the first time, as I think, I am bringing to light; for to whom else should I publicly offer so slight a gift, if not to a brother who is most loving to me and most familiar? However, I do not say this because I hold the little oration itself in low esteem; for I am very far from feeling that way: it is only because it is so short and small that it scarce fills three or four little pages. Otherwise, this writing can by no means fail to be valued highly by a Christian man, for although it consists of but few verses, it seems not unworthy of a most ancient doctor and Father of the Catholic Church. And what a Father, good God! And how great a doctor, how eloquent an alumnus and disciple of Origen, how learned and wise a master, theologian, and orator; how great in his zeal for the propagation of religion and the extirpation of superstition; how well-deserving an episcopate, how holy, and how admirable a patron of Christians; and, finally, how celebrated by the illustrious praises of the greatest men—Basil, Gregory of Nyssa, Jerome, and countless others! And would that I could speak of such a man for the present, if not according to his dignity, then certainly according to the highest admiration and reverence with which I pursue him; for I would do so most willingly. But these things belong to another time and another writing; for you might not unfairly demand this task rather of him who first publishes an ancient work, that he should diligently pursue those things which tend to confirm its genuineness. It is therefore better and more opportune to include in these letters, briefly, all those things that occur to be said both concerning the copy from which the little work was transcribed, and concerning the title and antiquity of the work itself.
But to start from the beginning: you know, my brother, the most illustrious prelate, adorned with all virtues worthy of both a patrician and a bishop, Joannes Nani, the bishop of Torcello, who, because of my long-standing custom and friendship with him, has permitted me to see all the Greek codices written by hand—a library of the most select sort—some of which he lent to me in Venice, and others he took care to have brought slowly to Bologna, so that I might not only observe them individually and review them as a whole, but even transcribe from them whatever I liked. In this you will both recognize and admire that man’s supreme and extraordinary kindness, for he did not hesitate to entrust those monuments entirely to my faith—the faith of a man who was first a guest, then a stranger and a newcomer, and finally even an absent one—which many others would not allow to be freely handled and inspected even by their own citizens. Therefore, while I was unfolding one of these codices, which is now [xxii], I chanced upon that little writing of which I spoke above. It is of parchment, of such magnitude that each of the two hundred and ninety-three pages of which it consists is equal to a quarter of a medium-sized folio sheet of our paper, made of common rags and poor lines. Most of these, or rather almost all of them—and especially those from which we transcribed the little sermon of Gregory—were written about five hundred years ago, but by a copyist so crude that he seems to have understood almost nothing of what he was writing. And so, A for example, he sometimes puts the letter [eta] for [epsilon] or [iota], sometimes a large letter for a small one, or vice-versa, and he stains the writing throughout with other errors of that kind. But the whole codex is one of those books which we call ecclesiastical; which Latin priests would call a Homiliary, but the Greeks call a [Panegyrikon]. For nothing else is contained within it but forty-seven orations, or homilies, or [anagnoseis]—that is, longer readings—some of which are anonymous, while others are by Gregory Nazianzen, John Chrysostom, Amphilochius, Cyril of Alexandria, Ephraim the Syrian, Athanasius, Andrew of Crete, Pontius Pilate, a certain Bishop Eusebius, Bishop Epiphanius, Gregory of Antioch, the deacon and chartophylax Pantaleon, the Constantinopolitan presbyter Aetius, the monk and presbyter Epiphanius, and
A Germano, Bishop of Constantinople, are inscribed. The one which is placed in the thirty-fifth position is the *Laudatio* of all the martyrs, the very one which now first comes to light: and it has this title at the head: Τοῦ ἐν ἁγίοις Πατρὸς ἡμῶν Γρηγορίου τοῦ Θαυματουργοῦ λόγος εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους πάντας. Εὐλόγησον, Δέσποτα. That is: *The sermon of our Holy Father Gregory Thaumaturgus upon all the saints. Bless, Master.* And so that these latter words do not cause trouble for anyone, nor that anyone should conclude therefrom that the booklet is falsely attributed to Gregory Thaumaturgus, these same words should be weighed for a moment. For, in my judgment, they indicate nothing other than that this sermon was recited in the ecclesiastical Offices on the day of the feast of All Saints, namely the Sunday immediately following Pentecost, which day is consecrated to the most holy Trinity among the Latins. And indeed the Greeks have long assigned this very day to the solemn commemoration and veneration of all the saints, for which reason they are accustomed to call it Κυριακὴ τῶν Ἁγίων Πάντων, i. e., the Sunday of All Saints. Nor should anyone suspect that such a custom was recent in the Churches of the East and was introduced later, in the time when we previously said the Nanian codex was written. For the ancient Menologium composed in coarse and inept verses, which I myself read in the LXXII Nanian codex, shows the state of affairs to be to the contrary: for there, the day of the Ascension of the Lord, the Sunday immediately preceding Pentecost, the Sunday of Pentecost, and the Sunday immediately following Pentecost, are indicated in the Triodion recension by these four verses, one, to be sure, for each:
*Χριστοῦ τὴν ἀναληψιν πρὸς πόλους ἀνωτάτω.* *Καὶ πατέρων ἄθροισμα τῶν ἐν Νικαίᾳ.* *Τὴν πεντηκοστὴν καὶ τοῦ Πνεύματος χύσιν.* *Πληθύν τε πάντων ἁγίων τῶν ἐν βίῳ.*
That is: *The Assumption of Christ into the highest heavens.* *And the assembly of the Nicene Fathers.* *Pentecost and the outpouring of the Spirit.* *And the multitude of all the saints who are in eternal life.*
And, what must be valued even more, in the most ancient *Typikon* of Sancti Sabas, page 229 of the Nanian codex XCII, after the described rites to be observed on Pentecost, those which pertain to the Sunday immediately following are then immediately added in this manner: Κυριακῇ τῶν ἁγίων πάντων. Ἐν τῇ ἀγρυπνίᾳ ἡ συνήθης στιχολογία, κ. τ. λ. That is: *Sunday of All Saints. In the vigil, the customary recitation of verses, etc.* And one may read similar things in the fifth volume of Fabricius’s *Bibliotheca Graeca*, cited by Allatius in his first booklet, *De libris ecclesiasticis Graecorum*, no. 14. What, then, if even in the age of John Chrysostom, a hundred years or a little more after the Thaumaturgus’s death, the same custom had nearly prevailed in the East? I believe I can conclude this from the first words of that oration, which Montfaucon saw fit to print on the seven hundred and eleventh page of the second volume: for thus does that great orator begin: Ἐξ οὗ τὴν ἱερὰν πανήγυριν τῆς Πεντηκοστῆς ἐπετελέσαμεν, οὔπω παρῆλθεν ἡμερῶν ἑπτὰ ἀριθμὸς, καὶ πάλιν κατέλαβεν ἡμᾶς μαρτύρων χορός, μᾶλλον δὲ μαρτύρων παρεμβολὴ καὶ παράταξις. i. e., as Fronto Ducaeus translates: *Not yet has the number of seven days elapsed since we celebrated the sacred solemnity of Pentecost, and the chorus of martyrs has again overtaken us, or rather, the camp and army of the martyrs.* I confess indeed that Chrysostom is not speaking in that oration about all the saints in general, but only about the illustrious martyrs of Christ, and that this is shown by the very title of the *Laudatio*, which is of this sort: Ἐγκώμιον εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους πάντας τοὺς ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ μαρτυρήσαντας. i. e.: *Laudation of all the saints who have suffered martyrdom in the whole world.* Furthermore, I do not deny that three other orations, delivered as I believe on the same day and read in the ecclesiastical Office in subsequent centuries, were inscribed in nearly the same way: one by Chrysostom himself, and two by Ephraim the Syrian. For of these three, the first, which appears in the second volume, page 667, has this title: Εἰς μάρτυρας ὁμιλία, i. e., *Homily on the martyrs*; but the second, in the Roman edition of the Greek Works of Saint Ephraim, volume III, page 248, is inscribed thus: Ἐγκώμιον εἰς μάρτυρας, i. e., *Encomium on the martyrs*; and the third, finally, in volume III, page 306, bears this inscription on its front: Ἐγκώμιον εἰς τοὺς ἐνδόξους μάρτυρας τοὺς ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ μαρτυρήσαντας. i. e., *Encomium on the glorious martyrs who have suffered martyrdom in the whole world.* All of which are grounds for argument that the Greek Church in the time of the Thaumaturgus celebrated a feast day and commemoration not of all the saints entirely, but only of all the martyrs, shortly after Pentecost. How, therefore, you will say, can it be that this oration of ours (for now I can in some measure call it my own) was written by Gregory of Neocaesarea, when the title itself, or the subject matter of the oration, by which it is said to have been delivered for all the saints, abhors the customs and institutions of those times? But these things are indeed said rightly and truly, if only the account of that title is to be taken. But let us also run through the oration. Is there any discourse in it about all the saints? The martyrs are indeed openly named at the beginning; the intermediate verses extol the admirable virtue of the martyrs; the final ones proclaim the invincible spirit of the martyrs and the victory gained by them over the demon: but I find no mention made of all the saints. Therefore, one must either believe that the little oration was once inscribed to this effect: Εἰς τοὺς μάρτυρας πάντας, i. e., *In all the martyrs*; or rather, that the entire title was once nearly as follows: Εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους πάντας τοὺς ἐν ὅλῳ τῷ κόσμῳ μαρτυρήσαντας. i. e., *In all the saints who have suffered martyrdom in the whole world*; but that these latter words began to be omitted little by little when, on the first Sunday after Pentecost, the memory not only of the martyrs but of all the saints began to be recalled and celebrated. I see that this very thing indeed happened to the oration of Chrysostom B which I mentioned above in the first place: for although in the copies edited by Montfaucon it has the inscription I have brought forward, yet both in the Nanian codex XXVII, which I myself saw, and in another, which Fronto Ducaeus mentions, it has the very same title as this one by the Thaumaturgus, namely, Εἰς τοὺς ἁγίους πάντας. Is this little oration, then, truly Gregory’s, someone might say? For in our times, a desire to deny almost everything, or at least to call it into doubt, has infected many, and a certain prurience, as it were. But I, if any plausible reason should occur to anyone as to why he might doubt its genuineness, or if, led by a firm argument, he should seriously and truly assert that it is wrongly attributed to the Thaumaturgus, I earnestly ask him to share with me, either privately or publicly, whatever he may have found. In the meantime, I shall affirm only those things that I think can be determined for certain: that the credit and authority of the ancient scribe who inscribed it with Gregory’s name, although it should not be valued at the utmost because he attributed some things to certain men, and especially to John Chrysostom, which Montfaucon and others have rejected, yet should not be rejected without any reason, and one that is sufficiently valid: for he wrote nothing other than what he found in an older copy, which...
he described, and found inscribed. But among the ancient Fathers and writers who have made mention of this little oration, I have as yet found none: if, therefore, we wish to pass judgment upon the true parent of this product, nothing else remains for us, before a greater light shines from elsewhere, than to compare this little work with the other extant works of the Thaumaturgus, and especially with those which all agree to have been written by him, weighing them as if in a balance. A Now, indeed, thirteen works in particular, if I am not mistaken, are circulated in our age inscribed with the name of Gregory Thaumaturgus, some complete, some mutilated: for I am not speaking here of those which have perished entirely. The first is the Brief Exposition of the Faith. II. Metaphrasis on Ecclesiastes. III. Canonical Epistle, which has seemed to me in reading it to have reached us mutilated here and there. IV. Panegyric Oration, in which Gregory publicly thanked his teacher Origen when he was about to depart from his side. V. Another longer Exposition of the Faith, which is called 'H κατὰ μέρος πίστις. VI. Anathematisms, or Twelve Chapters on the Faith. VII. Disputation on the Soul to Tatian. VIII. First Sermon on the Annunciation of the most holy Mother of God, beginning: Σήμερον ἀγγελικῇ παρατάξει. IX. Another sermon on the same subject, beginning: Ἑορτὰς μὲν ἁπάσας. X. Third sermon on the same Annunciation, beginning: Πάλιν χαρᾶς Εὐαγγέλια, which however bears the name of John Chrysostom in the twenty-second Nani manuscript, which I described before: where this third oration is set forth in such a way that some things are missing there which were read in the copies of Gerard Vossius, and on the contrary, some things are lacking in these which the manuscript has. XI. Certain fragments inserted by Ghislerius into his Chain on Jeremiah: which John Albert Fabricius thinks were taken from some homily or epistle of Gregory. XII. Sermon on the celebration of the night of the fourth feria, mentioned by Stephen Evodius Assemanus in the Catalog of the Medicean Library, manuscript LXII, page 107. Finally, a certain Sermon, whose beginning is: Ἔχθιστοι καὶ ἀλλότριοι, cited by John Veccus in a little book whose title is: Ῥήσεις ῥαψικαὶ, available in Arcudius in his Golden Theological Opuscula. These are entirely all the little works that exist inscribed with Gregory’s name, or at least those which I myself have been able to find mentioned by writers. B But they are not all of the same weight and authority, so that this little oration of ours can be applied to each one as to so many standards and judged. For the ancients, and all moderns entirely, attribute the first four to the Thaumaturgus without doubt: but the remaining nine seem partly to be falsely inscribed with his immortal name; partly are such that men of refined taste might have doubts about their antiquity; and partly, finally, are unknown to us, as we have not seen them. Wherefore, let us be content for now with those first four, so that we may compare this little oration of ours with those alone, and especially with the most celebrated and eloquent oration on Origen. This I shall perform myself, not without diligence, in the annotations which you will read a little later: for I have judged that it is done much more conveniently there, where you can follow every detail without the writer’s diligence seeming too subtle. Now, however, nothing remains to be done except to summarize briefly what I have gathered from a careful consideration of the oration itself. I believe I can therefore affirm without doubt that in it, or rather, in so short a work, many things show themselves to the reader from every part which wondrously suit our Gregory. For first, that time in which he lived a solitary life in the fields in Pontus after his departure from Origen is indicated at the beginning; then, whoever compares this with the Panegyric Oration on Origen will find that work to be far more copious and embellished, as it was meditated upon and prepared long before it was recited, whereas this one of ours seems to have been delivered almost extempore and in a state of great shortage of time: yet both works seem to have been composed in no very dissimilar oration and style. For in both one will encounter some peculiar words not in general use among everyone, and will find translations of a somewhat bolder sort and almost of a single manner, and will see one and the same matter not infrequently repeated in several different ways without great necessity, and will discover that modesty shining forth in both, in which Bengelius recognized the singular character of Gregory. C This one which I am publishing is indeed very short, and is one of those which Gregory himself used to call λόγους μικρούς, when in that panegyric oration, which I have mentioned more often, he said: Οκταετής μοι χρόνος οὗτος ἤδη ἐξ οὗ οὔτε αὐτὸς εἰπών τι ἢ γράψας λόγον τινὰ μέγαν ἢ μικρὸν ὅλως τυγχάνω. That is, as Sirmondus translated it into Latin: It is now the eighth year since I myself have either spoken or written any oration, whether brief or long. Beware, however, of thinking that this of ours has been willfully mutilated in any part so that it might be accommodated for the use of the ecclesiastical Office. This is indeed sometimes done in ancient, so-called, Lectionaries. But this seems to consist of its own parts in their entirety, nor is it longer than that oration of Chrysostom on the martyrs, which begins: Αἱ τῶν μαρτύρων ἑορταί; moreover, as Montfaucon rightly says, from the panegyric sermons on the saints, others may be produced shorter than this of Chrysostom, which are nevertheless perfect in all their numbers and parts. These were the things I had to say, my brother, concerning the little work which you have below, both written in Greek and translated by me into Latin, and furthermore illustrated with brief annotations. But do not, I pray, force me to declare openly what I think about its authenticity: be content that I have expounded to you all those things from which you yourself can form a judgment. Farewell, my Aegidius, and if you love me in return as I love you most dearly, which you certainly do, aid me with your prayers at the altar. Given at Bologna, on the fifteenth of the Kalends of January, in the year of the Lord one thousand seven hundred and sixty-nine.
SERMON OF OUR HOLY FATHER GREGORY THAUMATURGUS ON ALL THE SAINTS
Bless me, Lord.
A I wished to remain silent, and not to make manifest the rusticity of my tongue; for silence is a great thing when one's speech is lowly; and quietude is a wonderful thing when there is a lack of learning; and a supreme philosopher is one who, through silence, covers up his ignorance. This, indeed, I was choosing to do, that lowly, B truly, C as I find myself unprepared, and I am inexperienced in those fair and seemly words.
A But the sight of those who are listening draws me on to speak. Since, therefore, the festival is brilliant, and the theater crowded, and our gathering is fervent in faith, I shall turn with confidence to the beginning of my discourse, especially with the Father praying, the Church joining in the struggle, and the holy martyrs strengthening this weakness of mine. For these [martyrs] have persuaded even the aged to finish a long journey with much sweat; they constrained them to support their faltering steps with the staff of the Word; they encouraged the female sex to travel alongside the young men; and they brought the infant age, still crawling, to this place, leaping against death, mocking at swords, tearing apart the tyrant’s rage, snatching away death as the provider of immortality, B and in their own fall taking possession of the victory, through body C indeed, the city has almost entirely moved hither, and neither did the fear of a master hold back the servant, nor the necessity of poverty the poor man, nor the weakness of age the old man, nor the softness of their nature the woman, etc. Daring to trample [on death] with feet—this is indeed that of the discourse—to ears which the divine Word himself has in no way covered, as are those of the majority of men, but with feet, as one might say, clear and manifest, treading, D [it]—
A dispersing their members so that they might tighten their souls, having broken the bars of life so that they might open the keys of the heavens. Whosoever disbelieves that death has been destroyed, that Hades has been trampled upon, that its bonds have been shattered, that the tyrant is bound—let him look at the martyrs leaping in the face of death, and singing the triumphs of Christ’s victory. O the miracle! From the moment Christ despoiled Hades, men have trodden upon death. Where, O Death, is thy sting? Where, O Hades, is thy victory? Hades and the devil have been despoiled; he has been stripped of his ancient armor; he has been cast out of his own dominion; and just as Goliath was decapitated by his own sword, so also the devil, who brought forth death, is overthrown by death; and he finds the easy method of his own deceit to be a powerful instrument of his own undoing. Just as if he had been pierced like a hook by the Divinity, and had swallowed the customary bait, he who thought he was doing the catching is himself clearly caught, having seized God instead of man. Therefore, the martyrs leap upon the head of the dragon, and despise every kind of torment. For from the moment that the second Adam led the first out from the depths of Hades like Jonah from the whale, and showed the one who had been deceived to be a citizen of heaven, to the shame of the deceiver; from that moment the gates of Hades were closed, and the gates of heaven were opened, yielding their entry unhindered to those who ascend with faith. B Formerly, Jacob saw a ladder set up to heaven, and the angels of God ascending and descending; but now, because for man’s sake the Philanthrope became man, having kicked the misanthrope with the foot of the Divinity, and lifted up man with the hand of His Christ-hood, He has prepared the impassable ether to be traversed by human feet. Then, the angels were ascending and descending; but now, the Angel of great counsel does not ascend and descend—for whence could He depart, He who is present everywhere, who fills all things, and who holds in His hand the ends of the [world]? For once did He descend and once did He ascend; not C acting via a change of nature, but by condescension—somehow from that point He began to dwell D
A in our midst, this holy discourse, and now and from that point; [the Word] sitting with the Father, and the Word dwelling in the womb, and the Word found everywhere, and never separated from the God of all. The devil once laughed a broad laugh at human nature, and rejoiced at our calamities as if at festivals. But his laughter was for three days, while his lamentation is eternal; and his broad laugh prepared for himself a broader wail, an incessant tear, an inconsolable mourning, a dart in the heart. B This dart, in the virgin furnace, just as He willed, and as He willed, through fire did the Commander of the battle forge against the enemy; and having sharpened it with the energy of His unconquered divinity, and dipped it in the water of the immaculate baptism, and whetted it with passionless sufferings, and polished it through the mystical resurrection, by Himself, with all His host, He slew the destroyer. What word, then, can describe either our joy or his calamity? For he who was once an archangel is now a devil; he who once dwelt in the heavens is now seen crawling on the earth like a serpent; he who once rejoiced with the cherubim is now confined in the pen of swine, suffering. C We shall reverse his condition by thinking the opposite of his intentions, by the grace and philanthropy of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and power unto the ages of ages. Amen.
On the spiritual ladder
When you hear of an iron ladder, remember that spiritual ladder which the patriarch Jacob saw extending from earth to heaven: by that one, angels descended; by this one, however, martyrs ascend: the Lord is leaning upon both. Those saints could not have endured their torments had they not been leaning upon Him. And by that one, indeed, angels ascend and descend; by this one, however, it is manifest to everyone that martyrs ascend. D
more abundant laughter for him, tears without end, and prepared an incurable wailing and an intimate dart. This dart, in the virgin furnace, the emperor 42 fashioned against the enemy as he willed, and how he willed; and sharpening it both with the efficacy of his invincible divinity, and dipping it in the waters of incorrupt baptism, and whetting it with the sufferings of Him who is immune to suffering 43, and vibrating it through the mystical resurrection, he alone slew the ruinous enemy and all his army. Who, therefore, is able to set forth our joy, or the devil’s calamity? For he who was once an archangel is now a devil; he who once lived in the heavens is now seen crawling upon the earth like a serpent; he who once rejoiced with the cherubim is now confined in a prison of swine to be tormented 44: whom we finally shall put to flight, if we be wise to those things that are contrary to his will, by the grace and kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen.
LEO ALLATIUS' DISSERTATION ON THE THEODORES AND THEIR WRITINGS
Num. LXII, on Theodore who was afterwards called Gregory and Thaumaturgus — *Ap. Mai, Bibliotheca nova, vol. VI, p. 93, Rome, 1853.*NOTICE
Learned men have sought Leo Allatius' three unpublished dissertations—*On the Nicetas*, *On the Philo*, and *On the Theodores*—with great desire ever since the times of Labbé and Fabricius; others even mourned them as lost. I myself had mentioned them more than once, and said that they had been inspected by me in the author’s papers at the Vallicella Library, and that I had begun to transcribe them. The matter, however, lay neglected for a long time, until a most learned man and very dear friend of mine, who has merited much for the Catholic religion and the Roman Church, Fr. Augustinus Theiner, priest and librarian of the Oratory in the City, granted me those precious Allatius papers to be published: filled with joy at this gift, I thought of adorning this sixth volume of my *Library* with them. These dissertations were written by Allatius' own hand, in very small letters: and although another copy made by a more recent hand was present, one could still hardly have hoped for a good edition without Allatius' autograph. Nor let anyone suppose that this task of editing was completed without any labor of mine: for especially in *the Nicetas* and *the Philo*, a great many books had to be perused by me, so that I might bring the authorities mentioned by Allatius to the standard of truth, as was fitting. And since Allatius had used ancient books, often with no designation of printer or place added, which were neither distinguished by chapters nor equipped with other aids of the critical art, this matter caused me much trouble, and imposed the necessity of purging not a few errors. Therefore, not without patient delay, I took pains to examine the nearly numberless passages from pagan or Christian authors at their very sources; which texts I indeed discovered not rarely to be distorted or mutilated or erroneous. And I would certainly have deserved badly of my readers if I had omitted this diligence of perpetual verification. Moreover, it came about that I often favored better editions of authors in place of the old and obsolete ones, and those prepared after Allatius' death; which I mention for this reason, that no one may perhaps wonder at some future time at *a-historicity*. Mai.A For what end should I act, or obscure his illustrious and most noble deeds with ineptly composed eloquence? With regard to his writings, nevertheless, I shall bring something into the light in accordance with my plan; which works he brought forth from various hiding places as best he could, and published them first translated into Latin and illustrated with notes by Gerard Vossius at Mainz in quarto, in the year 1604; afterwards, in the year 1622, they were published at Paris in folio along with those of Macarius the Egyptian and Basil of Seleucia.
Among his works is held the *Metaphrasis of Ecclesiastes*, which is in the Queen's codex, written in capital letters, as Billius writes, and equaling the antiquity of Gregory of Nazianzus; it is numbered among the genuine works of Nazianzen, which was of such value to Billius that,
although the style protested—which does not everywhere bear out that polished and refined type of speaking that shines throughout the writings of Nazianzen, as the connections of the sentences are somewhat harder and the transitions more abrupt: for if certain words had sometimes been woven differently, the entire face of the context would have been much softer, and the sentences would not have joined together so unwillingly—he nevertheless did not hesitate to count this work among the pseudo-epigrapha of Nazianzen. A Yet he yields to Jerome, who removes all ground for doubt and asserts this offspring to his true parent. For explaining that passage of Ecclesiastes, chapter IV, "Better is a child poor," he takes his exposition from the metaphrase on Ecclesiastes by Gregory, bishop of Pontus and auditor of Origen, verbatim digested into chapter IV of this metaphrase. Wherefore, let there be no doubt hereafter that its true author is Gregory of Neocaesarea. Moreover, that it was also ascribed to Nazianzen was caused by the common name, as frequently happens in ecclesiastical books, and is proven by the example of others. Likewise, in the very ancient and excellent Vatican codex 479, in which this metaphrase has a place along with other works of Nazianzen, it is written in the margin: *It is to be known that according to some this discourse is doubtful.* The same thing is also read in another codex, no less ancient and no less elegant, 1446. Others think they have sufficiently proven and vindicated it for the Thaumaturge by the testimony of Rufinus, Jerome, and Suidas, who write that the Thaumaturge edited a metaphrase on Ecclesiastes. B But how small and vain this argument is, they know well who realize that diverse and various writers have often written on the same subject under the same title. The Thaumaturge wrote a metaphrase on Ecclesiastes; no one denies that: therefore this metaphrase on Ecclesiastes is the Thaumaturge’s; but it must first be proven that no one else wrote a metaphrase on Ecclesiastes. But who will ever prove that? And yet there is something in this matter in that writers hand down that the Thaumaturge wrote a metaphrase on Ecclesiastes, whereas no one asserts this of Nazianzen, whose writings have been submitted to the examination of almost everyone. There are, therefore, besides Billius, other more recent writers who return the said metaphrase to its own parent: Sixtus Senensis in his *Bibliotheca*, Antonius Possevinus in his *Apparatus*, in his *Gregory Nazianzen* and *Gregory Thaumaturgus*, and in *Bibliotheca selecta*, lib. II, cap. 15; Fronto Ducaeus in his notes to the same metaphrase; Bellarmine *On Ecclesiastical Writers*; C and, most recent of all, Daniel Heinsius in his *Aristarchus sacer*, cap. 11. "There exists," he says, "a venerable monument of antiquity, a paraphrase of Gregory of Neocaesarea on Ecclesiastes, which they now call a metaphrase. Many things are explained there tersely and politely, and nothing was of such concern to him as that which is proper to a paraphrast, that in a very obscure writing he should demonstrate the connection, or *allēloukhian*; which he has also for the most part happily achieved." So he proceeds with an unoffended foot through the obstructions of the Hellenists, because that which is missing in our text, or most especially in the Greek, runs through this level plain: so that he gladly omits some things—for which I do not approve, that *phseis* [sayings], which are not wanting, are desired to be whole—rather than that he should fail to connect [the text], although elsewhere he does not fail to do something, even if he never departs from the laws of a paraphrase. For the ancients, as I have said, loved true brevity in this genre, etc. There are three printed Latin editions of this metaphrase. The first by Joannes Oecolampadius, then a Brigittine monk, among the *Orthodoxographa*, Basel, 1555. The second by Wolfgang Musculus, together with the orations of Nazianzen translated by Bilibaldus Pyrkeymerus. The third by Jacobus Billius, abbot of Saint-Michel-en-l'Herm, which appeared at Paris in 1583, and which, as being more faithful and elegant, has been preferred by Gerardus Vossius to the rest.
D Vossius says that he found the third oration on the Annunciation, which begins, *Paling kharas euangelia*, under the name of Gregory Thaumaturgus, after two other orations of the same author on the same Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, in a very ancient Greek manuscript volume of the Grottaferrata library; and he affirms that, if the contents here are examined, it reflects the same doctrine, phrasing, and sentiment as the preceding orations, with very similar encomia and the same matters. Hence, he wonders that it was published under the name of John Chrysostom by Aloysius Lipomanus in his *Lives of the Saints*, and especially with that interjected assertion unworthy of Chrysostom, by which the virginity of Joseph is impugned and taken away. Whatever may be the case regarding the doctrine, which is catholic and clearly common to other holy Fathers; and regarding that assertion, which Vossius deems unworthy of Chrysostom, and which we have elsewhere impugned in our Eustathius of Antioch; indeed, what he relates regarding the phrasing, the encomia, and the sentiments being the same are mere trifles. The rhythm of the Thaumaturge in speaking is rougher and more austere, and the composition is tangled and almost loose, barren of metaphors and other oratorical figures, the sentences more severe, more modest, more meditative: but in this oration, just as in the other two, the author like a colt leaping with reins loosened, noble in an acquired finery, roaming everywhere through the fields, trifles and plays; as if speaking impromptu, he pronounces his homoeopteta and homoeoteleuta, and all the other things with which the panegyrical genre of speaking—quite familiar to the Greeks in such matters—abounds. Compare, reader, one page of the Gregorian prosphonetic with these sayings, and you will clearly recognize the difference, unless you wish to be blind. And indeed, that prosphonetic spoken to Origen, when it was occupied with the laudatory genre, should have been sprinkled at times with such flowers; it was delivered principally to Origen, who, being experienced in similar things, did not abstain from such things when the occasion offered itself. But this rejects the severe nature of the Thaumaturge, and he wished to be rather than to seem a lover of virtue and simplicity. And this is so true that Vincentius Riccardus, a man assiduous in examining these matters
A and perspicacious, in his commentary on the sixth oration of Saint Proclus, citing testimony from the second, which begins: *'Eopτὰς μὲν ἁπάσας καὶ ὑμνωδίας*, has asserted: "Although I greatly doubt and hesitate whether that oration is truly of Gregory Thaumaturgus. For the diction itself seems rather to be that of Saint Proclus, and there are very many sentiments in it which are in the first oration of Proclus in the very words, and innumerable others which are encountered in other orations of Proclus; and the iteration of the word *Theotokos* is so frequent that it seems to attack Nestorius." And further down: "Saint Proclus imitated Saint Gregory Thaumaturgus in the second oration on the Annunciation, if indeed that oration is his." We, in our epistle to Nihusius concerning the liturgy of Saint James the Apostle, have brought forward some things concerning the use of the word *Theotokos* even before Nestorius. Whatever the case may be, one single manuscript codex, although very ancient, attributes the third to the Thaumaturge, but a hundred others, no less ancient, to Chrysostom; and for that reason it was published in Greek under the name of Chrysostom by Hoeschel and others. Regarding the sermons on the Annunciation and the Lord’s Theophany, as also the book *On the Soul to Tatian*, Bellarmine writes that he has nothing certain: since neither do the ancients recall these works; nor, however, can it be proven that they are supposititious; and regarding these three or four orations, he is conjecturing rather than determining. For it could be said not unsuitably that an argument taken from the character and the formulas of the diction is very light: for the pen is more often moved and steered by the affections of the mind; and one’s style changes with age. Hence it is not necessary that all the writings of the Thaumaturge be performed always in one and the same tenor.
But let us consider the words of Andreas Rivetus B (2) in the *Critici sacri* book 11, chap. 16, regarding these orations. "Guil. Perkins mentions the homilies on the Annunciation, etc., ascribed to this Gregory, which it had not chanced to me to see at the time when I first wrote these things; nor are they mentioned by Possevin in the *Apparatus*, or by Sixtus." Before he understands the cause, he delivers a judgment. Be it so, Rivetus did not see them when he was writing. What, therefore, follows from that? Either Rivetus is rash, or he is little diligent. Dealing with the writings of Gregory, in order to state what is true, the writings of Gregory himself ought to have been diligently inquired into, friends consulted, indices turned over, the authors themselves searched out; so that diligence might not be wanting, nor might we rashly pronounce upon those things which we have not seen. "Nor are they mentioned by Possevin in the *Apparatus*, nor by Sixtus." Let us grant that they are not mentioned by Rivetus. Are they, therefore, non-existent? That argumentation is foolish. As if, indeed, those writings which Possevin and Sixtus did not mention were nowhere else, or were nothing. "But afterward they were edited in Greek and Latin at Paris with the notes of Vossius Tungrensis, who commends those wares as much as he can." It is well. Therefore there are, after all, other writings of the Fathers not mentioned by Possevin and Sixtus, when now they are adorned by the Parisian editions. Nor are the treasuries C of sacred antiquity exhausted if Possevin and Sixtus are silent about them. Rivetus is clearly ignorant that these works of Gregory had been brought forth long before, illustrated with notes by the same Vossius, in Greek and Latin, and that they were later published at Paris and Mainz in the year 1604. "He who commends those wares as much as he can." It is presumably unpraiseworthy to Rivetus to commend the writings of the Fathers, and to offer to those who desire them wares as precious and beautiful as they are. He commends, as much as he can, the writings of the Thaumaturge, which antiquity and all the more illustrious ecclesiastical doctors of a later age have commended; but the heretics, among whom they were held in such estimation that they believed they could establish their own positions by their testimony alone, have exterminated them. Hence so many things have been added to them by wicked arts, and changed contrary to the custom and law of good men: many orations and small works having been imputed to them from the store of the heretics. Such was the authority in the commentaries of this one man! Vossius therefore commended what, before him, the pens of so many scribes had commended in writing among other works of the holy Fathers. Ancient and very good codices, which exhibit the said orations of Gregory with the name of Gregory affixed, commend them.
Perkins proves them to be dubious from the fact that the Lives of the saints, and likewise the hymns suitable for their feasts, were first established by Charlemagne, around the year 807 (Paulus Æmilius lib. 1 D *De gestis Francorum*, and likewise Sigebert, in the year 807), many centuries after the Thaumaturge. I have not seen Perkins myself. I believe, however, that Rivetus neither inverted nor mutilated the words of Perkins, but honestly enumerated them. Let us see if Perkins's reasoning holds; for if it falls, the opinion of Perkins will also fall, and that the aforesaid orations are dubious. Since it is asserted that these orations were made, at that time there were neither Lives of the saints, nor hymns suitable for their feasts in the Church: for the first to establish them was Charles, many centuries later: therefore the said orations, suitable for feast days and the solemnities of the saints, could not have been written by Gregory Thaumaturgus, who had preceded Charles by much. He proves his assumption by the authority of Æmilius and Sigebert. Then I myself infer: But it is false that Charles was the first to establish this, whatever Æmilius and Sigebert may croak: therefore it will also be false that these orations are dubious. Nay, it is proved that they are certain and indubitable, since it is certainly and indubitably demonstrated that, before Charles, orations and hymns were frequent in the Church on the solemnities of the saints, and from the very beginning of the nascent Church. And that the Jews themselves, according to the ancient institution of the Fathers, were accustomed to recite readings from the Law and the Prophets on legitimate and predetermined days, Isidore recounts (lib. 1 *De ecclesiasticis offic.*, cap. 10), and Rabanus Maurus proves it (lib. 11 *De institut. cleric.*, cap. 5). Origen mentions readings in *contra Celsum* (lib. 3, 50). Allatius is a learned man, but rigid and harsh.
A "See truly also in these things after what manner he slanders us, comparing us to charlatans, who bring forth shameful and unspeakable things in the marketplace? But what unspeakable things do we bring forth? Or what do we do that approaches the impudence of such men? We, I say, who through readings and their interpretations exhort men to piety toward the God of all things, and to the virtues that are co-throned with this piety." See how in these words also calumny affects us, for he compares us with charlatans, who set forth base and unspeakable things in the forum. But what unspeakable things do we set forth? Or what do we do that approximates the impudence of men of this sort? We, I say, who through readings and their interpretations exhort men to piety toward the God of all things, and to the virtues that have the same seat as piety. See the commentary of the same author *On the Engastrimyth* (3) in the beginning. Saint Augustine (in the prologue to his treatises) on the first Epistle of John says: "But because the solemnity of holy days was interposed, on which it is necessary that certain readings from the Gospel be recited in the Church, which are so annual that they cannot be otherwise; that order which we had undertaken was interrupted for a little while by necessity, not omitted." The same author in sermon (v, 1) on the *Struggle of Jacob*: "Those readings, which are read to you, are they read to you just now for the first time, and are the same ones not repeated daily? But just as it is necessary that the readings of God be repeated daily, lest the troubles and thorns of the age grow in your hearts, and choke the seed that was sown there; so it is necessary that the word of God be always repeated to you, lest, having forgotten, you say that you did not hear what we say that we have said." And in sermon 3 on the day of Pentecost: "We celebrate the advent of the Holy Spirit with an anniversary festival. To this is owed a solemn gathering, a solemn reading, a solemn sermon." Gregory of Nyssa, orat. 2 (beginning) on the *Resurrection of Christ*: "All indeed, beloved, so to speak, welcome the reading of the sacred Gospels, provided conveniently by us on the night of the Lord's day, concerning the resurrection of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ." All indeed, beloved, almost all, approve the reading of the sacred Gospels, which was conveniently introduced by us on the night of the Lord's day concerning the resurrection of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ.
Philostorgius writes (lib. III, 5) that Theophilus the Indian, sent as an ambassador by Constantius, went to the Divaeans who were Indians, and amended many things which had not been done rightly among them before, and among other things, that they were listening to the evangelical readings while seated. "For they were listening to the evangelical readings while seated." James Gothofred observes (in the annotations on the loc. cit.): "And when the Gospels were read, of which there were also fixed and certain readings [readings, hearings] (of which matter a clear testimony among others exists in Hippolytus, *On the Engastrimyth*, Lyons 1629. A. M.) — and by the Paschal Canon, where readings of this sort are designated in the cells of the arc of the table, concerning which I speak fully elsewhere — there was also a certain posture of the body for Christians in the church: for surely they ought to have heard the readings of the Gospels while standing, this passage of Philostorgius indicates." And from Sozomen, book VII, cap. 19, he notes that in the Alexandrian Church alone the bishop of Alexandria did not rise while the Gospel was being recited: "And that also was strange among these Alexandrians: for when the Gospels are read, the bishop does not stand, which I have neither known nor heard to be done among others." New and that, among the same Alexandrians, is the fact that the bishop does not stand while the Gospel is recited, which I certainly have neither found nor heard to happen among others. Add to this from the same Sozomen (loc. cit.): "This sacred book the archdeacon alone reads here; but among others, deacons; and in many churches, the priests alone; but on distinguished days, bishops, as in Constantinople on the first day of the resurrection feast." The archdeacon alone reads this sacred codex here, but among others deacons, and in many churches only the priests, but on solemn days bishops, as in Constantinople on the first day of the Paschal solemnity. B Pope Leo in sermon (VI, 1) on the Epiphany: "Although, therefore, the narrative of the evangelical reading commemorates those days properly, in which three men, whom neither the prophetic preaching had taught nor the testimony of the law had instructed, came from the most remote part of the East to recognize God; yet we perceive this same thing to be happening now more clearly and more copiously in the illumination of all who are called." Maximus of Turin in homily IX on the Epiphany: "You have heard, brothers, the reading of the Gospel reciting the salutary sacraments of the present day." Peter Chrysologus in sermon IX: "God acts with us, He acts in this age, so that nothing of us may perish in the future, just as it shines forth from the very beginning of the reading." And in sermon XVI: "He went to provide for them, for whom human care had already failed, as has been proved by today's reading." Item sermon XVIII: "The attentive auditor has learned from today's reading." The Lectionary or *Comes* according to Pamelius is published in volume I of the *Liturgicon*, in which are contained readings from the Prophets and the Apostle to be read throughout the curriculum of the year, collected by the divine Jerome, as the *Micrologus* On ecclesiastical observances, cap. 25, and elsewhere more often, maintains. Berno of Reichenau *On the Mass*, and John Beleth *Rationale of the Divine Offices*, cap. 57, and not long after Musæus, presbyter of the Church of Marseilles, as Gennadius hands down *On Ecclesiastical Writers* (cap. 79), "a man learned in divine Scriptures, and polished by a certain most subtle exercise in their senses, skillful also in language, at the exhortation of the holy bishop Venerius, excerpted from the holy Scriptures readings suitable for the feast days of the whole year, also responsories, and chapters of the psalms in accordance with the times and the readings," C D and Allatius himself with his most learned treatise *On the Engastrimyth*.
A fittingness, because such a work is so necessary for readers in the Church and is approved as requested, so that it may remove anxiety and delay, and instill knowledge in the people, and [carry] the beauty of a published work. Honorius of Autun repeats this same thing *On writers* (11, 78) in the Marseilles Museum. Regarding the Scriptures accustomed to be read in the Church and their expositions, see Socrates, book v, chap. 22, and Nicephorus Callistus, book XII, chap. 34.
Will Rivet also doubt concerning hymns? We who are engaged in the deeds and sayings of Christ at every hour, know that Christ after the sacred supper said a hymn, and that Paul exhorted us to teach and admonish one another singing in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs (Coloss. III, 16). And to the Ephesians v, 19: "Be filled with the Spirit, speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your hearts to the Lord." Chrysostom (in Matth. homil. LXXXII), explaining those words, "And when they had sung a hymn, he went out into the mount of Olives," says: "He gives thanks after He had given [the sacrament]; He sang a hymn, that we also might do the same." And John Stephanus Durantius, in *On the Rites of the Catholic Church*, book 1, chap. 14, proves by the testimonies of the Fathers that the apostles, and the Christians who followed, sang hymns composed by themselves or taken from some of the ancient prophets, and that in that age ancient songs existed in trimeter verse, and hymns with their own accents were to be sung among sacred things before the altars. And lest we appear to be fasting at such a rich and sumptuous feast, we will add a few things which will be, if the consideration of time is taken into account, most ancient. Philo Judæus, in the book *On the Life in Contemplation*, having a discourse about the Essenes—that is, the Christians at the very origin of the Church, as all the most learned men most firmly assert—and Suidas gave the title *On the life of the Christians*, whose words are referred to by Eusebius, *Hist. eccl.* book II, chap. 17, reports concerning their churches: "In which, sequestered, they perform the mysteries of the reverent life, bringing in nothing, neither drink, nor food, nor any of the other things which are necessary for the needs of the body, but laws and oracles divinely given through the prophets, and hymns." In which they, separated and divided from others, perform the mysteries of a pious life, and carry with them absolutely nothing of food, or drink, or other things which are necessary for the use of the body: but laws, and oracles divinely published by prophets, and hymns. And below, more openly: "Wherefore they do not only contemplate, but they also compose songs and hymns to God through all kinds of meters and melodies, necessarily inscribing them in more reverent rhythms." Thus, they clearly do not devote themselves only to contemplation, but they also compose songs and hymns to God's praise with every kind of meter and modulation. Pliny (for it would not be absurd to take testimonies from the enemies of the Church to prove our affairs), in his letter to Trajan (book x, 97), regarding the Christians: "They affirmed, however, that this had been the sum of their fault or error, that they were accustomed to meet on a stated day before light, and to sing a song to Christ B as if to God, together with one another." Whatever this singing may have been, one must leave it to Rivet, along with Conrad Ritterhusius and Franciscus Balduinus, whom he will consider his own, and will find even more propitious to himself in this matter. Those songs of the Christians were divided into three ways by the Apostle, into psalms, hymns, and spiritual odes, which, they think, differ among themselves in that by psalms are signified whatever sacred discourses are written with various arguments; by hymns, praises of the divine name or of the saints; by odes or songs, certain particular and more artificial songs, which indeed contain praises themselves, but are composed in a more majestic and sublime form. Then he proves by the authority of Chrysostom, homil. IX (ed. Montf. t. XI, p. 392) in the Epistle to the Colossians, that hymns are a thing more divine and more sublime than the psalms themselves. The words of Chrysostom are: "When you have accustomed him to these from childhood, gradually you will lead him also to more exalted things. The psalms have everything, but the hymns again have nothing human. When he has learned [these] in the psalms, then he will also know hymns, as being a more divine thing. For the powers above sing hymns, they do not chant." "If you accustom him to these from a boy, gradually you will lead him also to more sublime things. The psalms contain everything. C Again, the hymns also have nothing human. But if he has been instructed in the psalms, then he would also understand and know the hymns, as being a more divine thing. For the heavenly powers sing hymns, they do not chant." Thus far Balduinus.
Tertullian in the *Apologeticum*, chap. 59, concerning the banquet of the Christians: "After washing the hands and the lights, as anyone is able from the holy Scriptures or from his own genius, he is challenged into the middle to sing to God." Likewise book II (at the end) *To his Wife*, he says that Christians challenged one another as to who might sing better to their God: and that they sang psalms not only in church or in an assembly, but in the private homes of Christians. Certainly, he writes that in them, as in the church, prayers resounded, Cyprian *To the martyrs*. But also Clement of Alexandria, book VII (chap. 7) of the *Stromata*, indicates that it was a custom that when Christians took food, psalms and hymns should sound, etc. Therefore, it will be to sing a song, to sing hymns composed to the praises of the divine name or of the saints. The author who was writing under Commodus against the heresy of Artemon, as we learn from Eusebius, *Historia ecclesiast.*, book v, chap. 27, makes mention at the beginning of the canticles and hymns produced by the faithful to Christ himself: "And all the psalms and odes of the brethren, written from the beginning by the faithful, sing of the Word of God, the Christ, as theosophists." "However many psalms and hymns were written from the beginning (that is, of the Church arising after Christ) by the brethren, all these celebrate Christ the Word of God, attributing divinity to Him." And in the council of Antioch under Aurelian, in the same [author], book VII, chap. 30, among other crimes objected to Paul of Samosata, it held not the lowest place that he had eradicated the psalms and songs which were accustomed to be recited to our Lord until his time, and in the middle of the church on the solemn day of Easter he made women, who [sang] songs in...
which, if anyone heard them, would surely be horrified, chant to his own praise. A St. Augustine in his fifty-fourth epistle, which is to Januarius, says: "There is no doubt that what can be defended by the Scriptures should be done; as is the case for the singing of hymns and psalms, since we have the documents, examples, and precepts of the Lord himself and of the Apostles." The Fifth Council of Toledo (edited by Cardinal Aguirre, Vol. III, p. 568), chapter 13, which Baronius calls most celebrated and general, declares: "Regarding the singing of hymns, we have the example of both the Savior and the Apostles." I would waste my own time if I were to collect from the writings of the Fathers all those things that confirm this truth. It is certain, therefore, that even before Christ, and while He was still alive, and immediately after He ascended into heaven, and even before the Thaumaturge himself, the faithful in the Church sang hymns which contained the praises of God.
However, we must not omit the authority of Socrates, even though it is somewhat lengthy, so that the very ancient usage of hymns in the Church, and their origin from the very beginning of the Christian religion, may be recognized (Book VI, chapter 8): "The Arians used to hold their meetings outside the city; whenever the feasts of each week arrived, namely the Sabbath and the Lord's Day, on which assemblies were accustomed to be held in the churches, they would gather within the city gates around the porticoes, and they would sing alternately songs aptly harmonized to the Arian opinion, which they themselves had composed; and they did this for the greater part of the night. At the first light of dawn, while reciting such songs in turn through the middle of the city, they would exit the gates and head to the places where their meetings were held. But because they did not cease to speak disparaging words against the supporters of the consubstantial faith, by which they might irritate their minds—for they often sang in their faces, as it were, a song such as this: 'Where are those who say that three are one power?'—John, fearing that some of the simpler people might be led away from the Church by songs of this kind, took care that certain ones from his own people should be opposed to them, who would similarly devote themselves to chanting noctural hymns, and in that way curb the zeal of the Arians in this matter, and finally would greatly confirm his own people in their faith. But although this institution of John seemed very useful, nevertheless its outcome was not free from tumult and even danger. For when the hymns chanted in praise of the consubstantial were, on account of that nocturnal harmony, found to have much more dignity—for silver crosses had been devised, upon which tapers were placed, with Eudoxia Augusta providing the expense for it—the crowd of Arians, having been gathered together and inflamed with the heat of emulation, decided to avenge themselves and to clash with their adversaries. For being puffed up by that leadership which they had long obtained, they were much more ardent for battle, and they thoroughly despised the defenders of the consubstantial faith. B Carrying lights from wax torches, and with Empress Eudoxia providing the expense for them, the multitude of Arians, having been seized with jealousy, attempted to defend themselves and to cause quarrels; for they were still warm for battle from their previous power, and they despised them. Therefore, without delay, on one of the nights they clashed, and Briso, the eunuch of the empress, who was conducting the singers at that time, was struck by a stone on the forehead, and some of the people from both sides were killed; moved by which, the emperor forbade the Arians to hold their hymn-singings in public. And such were the events reported. It must also be said from whence the custom in the Church regarding antiphonal hymns took its beginning. Ignatius of Antioch in Syria, the third bishop from the Apostle Peter, who also spent time with the Apostles themselves, saw a vision of angels praising the Holy Trinity through antiphonal hymns, and he handed down the manner of this vision to the Church at Antioch; whence this tradition was also given to all the Churches. This, then, is the account regarding the antiphonal hymns." C D
A Sozomen, book VIII, chapter 8, and Nicephorus book XIII, chapter 8, relate nothing else. And lest you say that hymns of this kind were devised in the Church then for the first time, and not before, observe the words of Socrates in the previous chapter (that is, book VI, 7, at the end): Ήὔξησε δὲ πρῶτος καὶ τὰς περὶ τοὺς νυκτερινοὺς ὕμνους εὐχὰς, ἐξ αἰτίας τοιάσδε. "He [John Chrysostom] was also the first to augment the prayers which are accustomed to be made in the nocturnal hymns, being moved by such a cause." Things that are received by custom are augmented; but things that are devised for the first time, since they do not yet have any subsistence of their own, cannot be augmented. What, therefore, Rivetus rightly gathers from the argument of Perkins, let him see for himself. But what are you to do with those who know neither the writings of the Fathers, nor the customs of the Church, nor the institutions of the ancestors? And if even in their reading they encounter something that diminishes their feigned and empty opinions, they either do not notice it, or they neglect what they have noticed: and what is worse, they distort and pervert it to something else.
I hear Rivetus now saying—for he is not always foolish, I wish he were!—that the lessons and hymns ordained by Charlemagne were from the writings of the Fathers and in praise of the saints: yet there is no doubt that the lessons from the Sacred Scriptures, and in praise of God and Christ, were much older, and existed even before Christ Himself was born. But neither does this method prove that these orations of the Thaumaturge are doubtful. And will he himself deny that the Annunciation of the Virgin and the Theophany pertain to Christ? He will deny it, of course. What then? The lessons on the solemnities of the saints are far older than Charlemagne: and the Acts of the martyrs were read in the Church before that same Charlemagne. I think Rivetus ignored this intentionally; for he is not to be thought so much of an infant in ecclesiastical matters and the writings of the Fathers, which he tears apart at his own pleasure. B But if he was ignorant of it unintentionally, let him be taught and know and become silent, and put aside some of that arrogance, and that great learning which he claims for himself. The approved Acts of the martyrs were read in the Church before Charlemagne, and consequently the feast days of the saints were celebrated. Pope Adrian, in his epistle to the aforementioned writing of Charlemagne *De imaginibus*, chapter 17: "The lives of the Fathers without reliable authors are by no means read in the Church. For they are titled and received and read by the orthodox. Rather, the sacred canons have decreed that the Passions of the holy martyrs may be read even in the Church, when their anniversary days are celebrated." The canon which decreed this among the African councils is number 50: Ἐξέστω ἔτι μὴν ἀναγινώσκεσθαι τὰ Πάθη τῶν μαρτύρων, ἡνίκα αἱ ἐτήσιαι αὐτῶν ἡμέραι ἐπιτελοῦνται. "It is permitted also to read the Passions of the martyrs, when their anniversary days are celebrated." I said "approved," however, so that I might exclude what has been falsely written by heretics or others about the histories of the saints (as the Trullan canon lxiii commands). From this alone it has come about that the old custom of reading them in the Church was made obsolete by Gelasius. Pope Gelasius in the Roman council (ed. Labb. vol IV, p. 1265): "The accounts of the holy martyrs, according to ancient custom, are not read in the holy Roman Church with single caution: because the names of those who wrote them are entirely unknown, and they are thought by the unlearned or idiots to be written as superfluous and less suitable than the order of events required, such as the Passions of a certain Quiricus and Julitta, and of George and others of this kind, which are claimed to have been composed by heretics: for which reason, as has been said, so that not even a slight occasion for mocking might arise, they are not read in the holy Roman Church." C Gelasius admits the ancient custom of reading the accounts of the martyrs in the Church long before the times of Charlemagne, and Adrian declares it to that same Charlemagne: and yet Rivetus and Perkins relate that it was first established by Charlemagne? And so that you may better grasp what these were, let Basil of Seleucia be consulted, *On the Life and Miracles of Saint Thecla*, book II. He, preparing himself on the solemn day of the martyr Thecla to deliver an oration in her praise, fell into a very bad illness on the preceding day, and, with the martyr dissolving the sickness, he pours himself out into praises of her in the church: Ἦν γὰρ αὐτῆς ἡ ἐτήσιος ἑορτή· παρεσκευασάμην δὲ κἀγὼ πρὸς ἔπαινον μικρὸν τῆς ἑορτῆς· ὤφθην ἐπὶ τοῦ δεικτηρίου· λέγεται δὲ οὕτως ὁ τόπος ἐν ᾧ ἐπιδείκνυνται οἱ λέγοντες, τοῦτό ἐστιν ὁ ἄμβων ἤτοι τὸ ἀκροατήριον· καὶ εἶπον μὲν ἄττα. "Her anniversary gathering was being held, and I had prepared myself to deliver a short oration concerning the praise of the feast. I appeared in the *deikterion*—and the place in which speakers exhibit themselves is so called, whether you call it the ambon, or the suggestum, or the auditorium—and I said a few things." Whoever does not grant credence now that testimonies have been brought forward, even if six hundred others were offered, will become all the more perversely hardened. Therefore, not only Sacred Scriptures were read in the Church, both Latin and Greek, but also the Acts of the martyrs, and in the same solemnities the orations delivered by the older Fathers before Charlemagne, although both Rivetus and Perkins wickedly deny it. D They will say that this crime did not originate with them, but that the blame is to be referred to Sigebert and Paul Aemilius, who committed this fraud before them. They will say so, indeed, but with a cunning lie
A Let us propose the words of Sigebert, both from his *Chronicle* and from the book *On Writers* (chap. 81): "The Emperor Charlemagne, through the hand of his deacon Paul, excerpting all the best things from the writings of the Catholic Fathers, caused the lessons suitable for every feast day to be compiled throughout the cycle of the year in the Church in two volumes." Of the Lives of the saints, and the hymns in them, not even a word. With what countenance, therefore, is it said, from these words of Sigebert, that both the Lives of the saints and the hymns suitable for feasts were first established by Charlemagne? And how did he establish them first, he who ordered Paul to excerpt from the writings of the Catholic Fathers which existed before him? Such writings existed in the Church before Charlemagne, therefore; but since he saw many of them handled badly by heretics and sullied with supplemental doctrines, he ordered that the wheat be chosen from the Catholic writings, with the heretics rejected. Therefore, he himself did not establish them first. Then at last, does it seem to you, Rivetus, that to compile is one and the same as to establish? To compile is to gather into one; to establish for the first time is to set in place, to propose, to decree. Things that were before are compiled; things that then come into being for the first time are established as new. If, therefore, they were there before, he could not have established them first, although he could have compiled them himself, or caused Paul to compile them. You have read the words of Sigebert badly, therefore; you have conceived them worse; you have sold yours for his words most miserably, and you deceive the reader. And thus such an error was in you both. But the words of Paul Aemilius in his *On the Deeds of the Franks* regarding Charlemagne (ed. Basil., p. 65) are: "He gathered from the most ancient exemplars and from holy authors, acquired from everywhere by the power and wealth of Charlemagne, and he touched upon the lives and deaths of the martyrs and the rest of the saints with supreme brevity, to be read in the churches." No hymns are mentioned here. The lessons which Paul "touched upon" with supreme brevity were excerpted from the most ancient exemplars and holy authors. Charlemagne promoted the labor of Paul by his own aid and power, namely, by gathering exemplars and providing the costs, so that they might be read more readily in the Church, which were rendering the readers more sluggish due to their excessive prolixity. How, therefore, did Charlemagne first establish the lessons suitable for the feasts of the saints?
Neither should that be omitted: the words of Perkins which I myself—as I said above—have not seen, from which so many errors follow, Rivetus seems not to have understood. For Perkins argued, if he was writing of sound mind, that the lessons, B hymns, and Lives of the saints suitable for feast days were first established by Charlemagne. Therefore, these orations cannot be the work of Thaumaturgus, who wrote so many centuries ago. And it is manifest that in their second one, right at the beginning, mention of such things is held: Ἑορτὰς μὲν ἁπάσας καὶ ὑμνῳδίας δέον ἡμᾶς θυσιῶν δίκην προσφέρειν τῷ Θεῷ, πρῶτον δὲ πάντων τὸν Εὐαγγελισμὸν τῆς ἁγίας Θεοτόκου. "Sacred celebrations of feasts and hymns, it behooves us to offer to God as if they were sacrifices, but first of all the Annunciation of the most holy Mother of God." Not so that Rivetus might argue that these are doubtful, because lessons and hymns suitable for feast days were first established by Charlemagne. But although the argument of Perkins is nothing, as has been proven above, nevertheless it were a great thing in Rivetus, a most wicked critic of sacred matters, that these few things of Perkins were not understood. And clearly the argument of Perkins is so conceived, it is most foolish. For if because he makes mention of hymns and feast days, therefore those three or four orations are to be rejected, then the Gospels must also be rejected, and the Epistles of Paul, and so many other most beautiful monuments of the saints who lived before Charlemagne, and concerning whose authors it would be sinful to doubt, for that sole reason that mention is made in them both of feast days and of hymns, that these were first established by Charlemagne.
And to urge it more strongly, these orations of Thaumaturgus are four: three on the Annunciation, one on the Theophany. And of these, in one only—which is the second on the Annunciation—is there mention of feast days and hymns. What reason could be assigned so that, together with this one, the rest might be rejected? Even if that which speaks of feasts and hymns were to be exterminated from the writings of Thaumaturgus, this one would not drag the others with it. For suppose that among the Seleucian or Chrysostomian orations there is one which does not acknowledge Seleucian or Chrysostom; are the others to be sent away for that reason? "From a bad crow, a bad egg." Among ten adolescents one is spurious, and not indubitably so; therefore are all the others spurious? Among ten sheep one is black; therefore are the remaining nine also? And to finish, among the sacred critics Rivetus is mad and demented; therefore are all sacred critics [like him]? Let us grant, therefore, that there is doubt about the second on the Annunciation, because both hymns and feast days are rung out in it; therefore, because of that, are the others annexed to it there to be turned into doubt? Let them be turned, Rivetus will perhaps confess, who has it in mind to turn all sacred things into doubt. And these things, to the reasons of Rivetus—circumflected with Gordian knots, as it seems to him—may suffice.
Others write: "The words which the Father says on the banks of the Jordan and on the mountain about Christ, D the author of the homily on the Theophany joins and interprets, as if they had been said at the very hour of baptism: 'This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. The consubstantial Son,' etc., whence it is clearly signified that the author of that homily wrote after the times of Arius and the Nicene Council, nay, even after Nestorius and Eutyches themselves were condemned." The same judgment must also be made concerning the twelve chapters on the faith, since with the anathematisms they condemn the errors and blasphemies of the Nestorians and Eutychians, they cannot have Gregory Thaumaturgus as their author, who had passed away many years before the origin of these heresies. This reasoning does not entirely conclude. For not because heresies, which [happened] after the sentences of the Fathers,
were articulated or commentaries in which such sentences are arranged, do not belong to the Fathers who preceded the heresies: since the Holy Spirit, guiding their mind and pen, struck them down before the heresies themselves even arose, so that the faithful might have, when those [heresies] were born, aids for demonstrating the truth. Thus, when heresies were born, the faithful who were living at that time would compile selections from the writings of the ancient Fathers, in order to show that while the dogma of the heretics was indeed new, it was in fact the most ancient dogma of the Church and insinuated in the commentaries of the Fathers, from which they might elicit it. On this we have written more elsewhere. Wherefore, the Thaumaturge was also able to set forth the truth before the Eutychian and Arian heresy, and to predict what the Church herself would, after several centuries, propose against the heretics for her own defense. And the reasoning of these men is not altogether incongruous, as that of Rivet might be. A Bellarmin confesses that he has nothing certain regarding the homilies on the Annunciation and the Lord’s Epiphany, just as he does regarding the little work *De anima ad Tatianum*, of which the ancients do not make mention. Therefore, let those be doubtful. As if, indeed, what is uncertain to Bellarmin is also doubtful in the Church; and as if those works of which the ancients make no mention were uncertain; and as if the ancients remembered everything, and we had at hand all the ancients, whoever they might be. But these are trifles of Rivet, since he has nothing more solid.
No less a difficulty exists regarding the *Exposition of the Faith* which he wrote and published, and called *ad partem* [κατὰ μέρος], not because it hands down and explains what is of the faith only in part, or because the faith is explained therein piece by piece, or because it hands down not the whole faith but only part of it, or because it was a particular faith, but because it explains the individual and special parts of the faith. Vossius found it and published it in Latin only, since he did not have the Greek. B Bellarmin adds that perhaps Vossius is deceived. For the *Exposition of the Faith*, of which Saint Basil makes mention in *Epistle* 210 to the Neocaesareans, truly written by the Thaumaturge against Aelian, differs much from this Vossian one: for in that one it was held that the Father and the Son are one in hypostasis and are distinguished only by the thought of the mind, whence the suspicion had arisen that the heresy of Sabellius was being fostered by Gregory; for which reason Basil strove to defend him from the suspicion of Sabellianism. But the Vossian one refutes Sabellius by name, and never says that the Father and the Son are one in hypostasis and distinguished only by the thought of reason, but on the contrary says that Father and Son are one by the nature of divinity, and that each C Person subsists by itself, and that another is the hypostasis of the Father, another that of the Son, etc. Moreover, the Vossian one seems to be written entirely against the Arians, and therefore quite some time after the times of the Thaumaturge; for it begins thus: "They are most hostile and alien to the apostolic confession who say that the Son is from non-existent things," etc. And further down: "Those indeed who communicate with those who reject the *homoousion*, we consider them as alien to the Scriptures; and those who say that anything has been created from the Trinity, we consider them alien." Now it is certain that the Arians said that the Son is from non-existent things and rejected the *homoousion*. Furthermore, this author argues about the incarnation in such a way that he seems to be refuting the Nestorians and Eutychians. And these are the arguments of Bellarmin.
One could add the authority of Leontius in *De sectis*, act. VIII, 4, who says: "But they also bring forward another testimony for us, as if from the holy Gregory the Thaumaturge, from the *Faith ad partem*: 'Not two persons, not two natures: for one must not worship four,' and what follows. But we say also to this, that, first of all, this [fragment] also was questioned by the ancients as not being by the holy Gregory. Next, Gregory of Nyssa, writing a funeral oration for the Thaumaturge, says that no work of his is in circulation, except only the *Faith*, which he saw in a vision." They bring forward to us also another authority of Saint Gregory Thaumaturge from his confession of faith *ad partem*: "Not two persons," he says, "not two natures: because four are not to be worshipped." And the other things that follow. To this we also reply, first that of this likewise it was doubted among the ancients whether it is Gregory's. Next, Gregory of Nyssa, writing a funeral oration about the Thaumaturge, says that no work of his is in his hands except only the *Faith*, which he saw in a vision. Nor is it gathered that Eulogius, the Patriarch of Alexandria, thought otherwise from his third oration against those who slander the holy Fathers and the Council of Chalcedon, when he says: "But if anyone brings forward to us Athanasius in his discourse *On the Incarnation*, and Gregory of Neocaesarea in his *On the faith ad partem*, prohibiting the saying of two natures in Christ, etc." D If indeed anyone brings forward to us Athanasius in his book *On the Incarnation*; likewise Gregory Thaumaturge in his book *On the faith according to parts*, prohibiting one from asserting two natures in Christ, etc. And lest a suspicion arise that he is speaking of another, he brings forward below from the same *Faith* those words which seemed to smell of the impiety of Apollinaris: "But the usage attributed to the Thaumaturge Gregory is indeed said to be his, but it brings Apollinaris in..."
A revealing the absurdity: for it says: 'And there is true God, the bodiless, who appeared in the flesh, perfect in true and divine perfection, not two persons, nor eight (8) two natures; for we do not say that we worship four.' " For they have often tampered with the words of the Fathers; and they have attributed many of the words of Apollinaris to Athanasius, and to Gregory the Thaumaturge, and to Julius, by changing the inscriptions, B by which they entice the many, in particular, into their own impieties. "Do you not admit one action of the chosen teachers?" And Theodosius brought forth the testimonies falsely circulated under their names—those of Julius of Rome, and of Gregory the Thaumaturge, and of the saintly Athanasius—and read them. And Maximus said: "Let us fear God, and let us not wish to provoke Him to anger by the presentation of heretical testimonies; for no one is ignorant that these are of the impious Apollinaris; if you have others, show them." C
...they have brought in a certain temptation by means of a letter also to Anthimus, bishop of the Tyaneans, who is of the same mind as us, as though Gregory had said in his *Exposition of Faith* that the Father and the Son are two by conception, but one in hypostasis. But that this was not said dogmatically, but for the sake of contest in a dialogue against Aelianus, those who felicitate themselves on the subtlety of their minds could not discern. ...in an *Exposition of Faith*, in the *Exposition of Faith* in the *dialogue against Aelianus*...
D But the Vossian text appears to have been written against the Arians, who are much more recent than the Thaumaturge. Since it does not name the Arians, it matters little if, relying on the divine Spirit, before it existed, he destroys the Arian heresy. For so that the truth might be held in the Church from the Fathers, and that the heresies that have arisen might be defeated by the sayings of the ancients, it was brought about by divine providence that the seeds of truth should be found in the writings of the ancients, and the errors newly born should be refuted by the authority of the elders. And...
...we have spoken at length in the dissertation which you have in the fourth volume of this *Nova PP. Bibliotheca*. A. M.
(9) In the Greek, according to our *Script. vet.*, vol. VII, p. 474, where there is likewise the Monophysite corruption *oὐδὲ*. That corrupted testimony of the Thaumaturge also exists in the Arabic codex Vat. 101, in which there are excerpts of the Fathers collected by a Monophysite man, as we said in *Spicil. Rom.*, vol. III, p. 665, where we brought forth some of it. A. M.
divinity of the Son not only Arius, but others even before him, had denied from the very advent of Christ; and that the Nestorian and Eutychian heresy had been promulgated by others even before Nestorius and Eutyches himself, I remember I have proved elsewhere quite extensively. Indeed, that the Vossian [collection], acknowledged by authors not to be despised and by those most accurate in discerning the writings of the saints as being that of the Thaumaturge, and vindicated as our Thaumaturge’s own, will be admitted by anyone, provided he is trained in the monuments of the Fathers. Nor shall I recount them individually. A sufficiently ancient collector, whoever he may have been, of authorities concerning the two natures in Christ from the holy Fathers—which Vossius relates to be an ancient collection and to be found in many libraries—brings forth from this same exposition of the Faith according to parts a testimony, which Vossius published. Andronicus Camaterus, an author not to be despised and most experienced in the reading of the holy Fathers, among other testimonies of the saints collected by him concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit, gathered one and another and a third authority from this exposition of the Faith, and endeavors to expound them as genuine ones of the Thaumaturge with his own observations; to whom John Veccus, Patriarch of Constantinople, responding, does not reject them as spurious, but, acknowledging them as genuine, translates them by his explanation from the absurd exposition of Camaterus into a correct and faith-consonant sense, and elicits the true meaning of the same. But if he had judged it pseudepigraphous, he would have extricated himself more easily by asserting that no attention should be paid to them, since they were supposititious. Nay, the same Veccus in his oration *On the Union of the Churches* assumes it as genuine to refute the Greeks, saying: "The great and miracle-working Gregory, Bishop of Neocaesarea, in the oration whose beginning is: *Inimicissimi et alieni ab apostolica confessione sunt, qui Filium ex iis quæ non exstant asserunt*." And in his *Epigraphs* on more than one occasion: "The great and Thaumaturge Gregory, Bishop of Neocaesarea, in the oration which begins: *Inimicissimi et alieni ab apostolica confessione*," etc. And he brings forth testimonies from it. George Metochita, in his first oration *On Peace between the Two Churches*: "He who obtained a name befitting his works, Gregory the Thaumaturge, in the oration whose beginning is: *Inimicissimi et alieni*, says: *Ingenitus Pater cum sit*, etc." Constantine Meletiniota, oration 1: A regarding as a testimony Gregory who shines forth in miracles, from whom he also gained the epithet; for the Lord indeed said, "By two or three witnesses shall every word be established," perhaps foreshadowing what suffices them for confirmation; but we, having in great abundance doubled such a number, are here bringing forward this sixth one, possessing in addition to the others much credibility, who in his discourse *On the Faith in Parts* says these things: "We confess [the Son] to be consubstantial with the Father; and the rest." This too we shall show B if it pleases us, bringing in the miracle-renowned Gregory in testimony, from which he also attained his surname. For the Lord asserts, "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word stand," which He asserted would be enough to confirm the matter. But we, since an abundance was available, doubling such a number, bring forward this sixth one in the middle, who is more worthy of belief than the others. He in his oration on the faith in parts has this: "We confess [the Son] to be consubstantial with the Father, etc." And oration 11: C But it must be stated at the beginning the saying of the Thaumaturge Gregory, who is celebrated by the whole world, of which I would not have made mention for any other purpose in the previous part of the present treatise; but the saying, so that it may be mine to discuss it more quickly, is set in his discourse *On the Faith in Parts*; it says: "We confess [the Son] to be consubstantial with the Father; and this indeed that interpreter of divine revelations sets forth." And Demetrius Cydonius, *On the Procession of the Holy Spirit*, cap. 10: "Although some of the teachers teach that the procession of the Holy Spirit is an eternal sending forth; this indeed [is taught by] the Thaumaturge Gregory, and this by Gregory the Theologian; the former in the discourse D whose beginning is *Inimicissimi et alieni*, saying: 'and the rest'." This same thing is intended in every way, both by that of the Thaumaturge Gregory, and that of Nyssen, and that of Chrysostom, the one saying: "The Father being Ingenitus, but the Son being begotten; and the rest." And so that we may not seem to be deprived of more ancient ones, Anastasius Sinaita must be summoned, who from this exposition of the Faith of Gregory, as being genuine to the Thaumaturge, brings forth the saying.
A
Meanwhile, the statements of Baronius for the year of Christ 233, n. 19, must be considered: "It is established that the faith received from the blessed Virgin with John the Evangelist was most accurately explained by this same Gregory, with an appended commentary, inscribed *On the Exposition of the Faith*, which is found cited among others by Basil the Great *On the Holy Spirit*, ch. 29 (n. 74) and in his epistle (CCX) to the Neocaesareans, and by Leontius the Scholastic." But that man is argued of error when he says that it was doubted by the Fathers whether the *Exposition of the Faith* was written by Gregory himself. For Basil, who had accurately examined everything of Gregory, cites it as his work, and does not doubt that it was edited by him, although the same man there seemed to have spoken somewhat less properly concerning the subsistences, just as could also happen from the same text being corrupted or wrongly explained by heretics, as Evagrius says, bk. III, ch. 31. Let us consider the matter. Just as it is true that Gregory noted down the faith revealed by the Virgin and John the Evangelist, and kept it for himself, so it is false that he most accurately explained it in an appended commentary. So also the oration or *Exposition of the Faith*, which begins "Extrot" [Exestin], is not an explanation of that revealed faith, but a treatise divided by itself and distinct from it, as will become clear to one comparing each part. Basil, *On the Holy Spirit*, ch. 29, does not make even a word of mention of the *Exposition of the Faith*, but only gathers and examines the glorification edited by Gregory, along with others made by other more ancient Fathers, which—just as he himself did—others also expressed verbatim. Likewise, in his epistle (CCX) he has a discourse concerning another written to Aelianus, as we have proven above against Bellarmine. And Leontius the Scholastic is flogged undeservedly, for he writes that it was doubted by the Fathers, not regarding the one delivered by the B. Virgin, which both he and others have venerated as divine Word and committed to writing, but regarding this one which, under the special title *tοῦ κατὰ μέρους* (On the specific), Gregory separated from the others. And although it is also true that Basil had examined everything of the said Father, nevertheless the *Exposition of the Faith* which he rails against, and attempts to excuse, was neither that one dictated by the Virgin, nor this very one which is now under our examination, but a third one to Aelianus, or Gelianus, as Facundus of Hermiane writes (bk. X, ch. 6), as we said above, in which he relates that [Gregory] had spoken not conveniently concerning the subsistences: whereas in this one, about which we are now doubting, there is nothing, either in the mystery of the Trinity or in the mystery of the Incarnation, that is not most aptly handed down and consonant with the Catholic Church. And three such expositions had been noted before me by the most learned Jacques Sirmond in his notes to Facundus of Hermiane. B
The Fathers, therefore, doubted this [work], because there were found in it some things which smacked of the school of Apollinaris and Eutyches. It is certain that they doubted. Nevertheless, as is evident from their sayings collected together at one time, they doubted not about this whole oration, but only about an inserted saying in which it seemed to remove two natures from the person of Christ, and to establish only one. Thus Eulogius: "The usage [saying] attributed to the Thaumaturge Gregory, while it is said to be his, introduces Apollinaris." "The testimony which bears the name of Gregory Thaumaturgus is indeed said to be his, but it reeks of Apollinaris." Thus the monks of Palestine in Evagrius, although they say that heretics had supposititiously assigned many of Apollinaris’s treatises to Athanasius, Gregory, and Julius, writing their names on them, yet they had said before that they had often corrupted the books of the Fathers: "and they have often corrupted the words of the Fathers." Thus the author of the *Life of St. Maximus* calls them "usages [sayings] of the holy ones, and usages of the heretics" (11); *rhesis*, or *chresis*, is a saying, a pronouncement, a sentence, a complete part of a speech; *temachion*, a piece, a fragment ("Thus Euripides sings something," namely, a certain sentence of Euripides), a part of a speech, not a complete speech. Wherefore they contend here that that *chresis* or *rhesis*, which sprang from the store of Apollinaris, is not of the Thaumaturge, but of Apollinaris. Not for that reason, however, do they reject the rest of the continued oration, which is not unworthy of Gregory. And while Leontius says it was doubted among the ancients, he does not affirm this regarding the *Exposition of the Faith*, but only regarding that saying and sentiment, which, as he himself and others expressed verbatim, it ought to be understood that there was a doubt. But as for what he [Leontius] places in the last place from the opinion of Gregory of Nyssa—that there is no work of the Thaumaturge besides only the Faith which he had seen in the vision—this is not to strip Gregory of this *Exposition of the Faith* alone, but of the other remaining works also which are indubitably Gregory's, which would be plainly absurd and truly inconsiderate. And although Nyssa might assert that, I myself revere Nyssa, and I kiss his words. Yet I have Basil and Jerome to oppose to him, who recount many other works of the same man. That saying, therefore, concerning the two natures in Christ was corrupted by heretics, which Anastasius, drawing from the purer source of the codices as the Thaumaturge had edited it, transcribed in his *Ecloge*, and Sirmond recites in the said place: "From the *On the specific Faith* of Gregory the Great and Thaumaturge: And he is true God, the bodiless One manifested in the flesh, perfect in true and divine perfection, not two persons, but (12) two natures, and we do not say to worship four, God and Son, God and man, and the Holy Spirit." C D
And Euthymius Zygabenus, in the 15th title of the Panoplia, in that part where he collects the testimonies of the Fathers concerning the two natures in Christ: *Of the Great Gregory Thaumaturgus from the Exposition of Faith in parts: "And there is true God, the non-fleshed manifested in the flesh, not two persons, but two natures."* Of the great Gregory Thaumaturgus from the profession of faith in parts: *And it is true God, who yet being without flesh, appeared in the flesh, not two persons, but two natures.* Rightly, therefore, was it said that because heretics quoted it, the Fathers turned into doubt whether it belonged to Gregory. And regarding this *Exposition of faith* in parts, this is enough.
I said above that the Fathers revered the faith revealed to Gregory by the Virgin, and recorded it in their writings. I now add that they also confirmed many mysteries of the faith from his words, having drawn ideas and sentences from them. Not to recount them one by one, I shall bring forward two sayings of the most eloquent Father—to whom, because of his excellent and most accurate treatment of theological matters, the title of Theologian was given by the consent of the universal Church—I mean Gregory Nazianzen, by which my affirmation will be openly established. The first will be from his oration on baptism (or. XL, 42). Gregory writes: B *Οὐδὲν τῆς Τριάδος, ὦ οὗτοι, οὔτε δοῦλον, οὔτε κτιστόν.* "There is nothing in the Trinity, O friends, that is either servile or created." And it is clearly so. And someone unknown noted in the margin of the Vatican manuscript codex 1592, page 59: *Γεώργιον (he wants to say Gregory) τὸν Θαυματουργὸν ἐν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει* ("He hints at Gregory Thaumaturgus in the revelation"). The second is in the oration on the Holy Spirit (or. XXXI, 28): *Σέβειν Θεὸν τὸν Πατέρα, Θεὸν τὸν Υἱὸν, Θεὸν τὸ Πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, τρεῖς ἰδιότητας, θεότητα μίαν, δόξῃ, καὶ τιμῇ, καὶ οὐσίᾳ, καὶ βασιλείᾳ μὴ μεριζομένην, ὥς τις τῶν μικρῷ πρόσθεν θεοφόρων ἐφιλοσόφησεν.* "To worship God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, three properties, one deity, undivided in glory, honor, essence, and kingdom, as one of the God-bearers shortly before us philosophized." In another Vatican codex, 456, page 361, it is also noted: *Γρηγόριον λέγει τὸν Θαυματουργὸν ἐν τῇ ἀποκαλύψει* ("He means Gregory Thaumaturgus in the revelation").
Let the censure made by Bellarmine regarding the twelve chapters also cease, which, however, are recognized as Gregorian by the collector of the sentences concerning the two natures in Christ. And Suidas: *Γρηγόριος καὶ Ἀθηνόδωρος συναίμονες, ἀλλ᾽ ὁ μὲν τερατουργὸς, ὁ δὲ σοφιστής· ἔγραψε δὲ περὶ σαρκώσεως καὶ πίστεως λόγον.* "Gregory and Athenodorus were brothers, but the former was a worker of miracles, the latter a sophist. Yet the former wrote an oration concerning the incarnation and faith." For I recognize that this oration is none other than the twelve chapters themselves, from the fact that the collector C of the sentences takes them *ἐκ τοῦ περὶ σαρκώσεως καὶ πίστεως λόγου ἐν τῇ ἑρμηνεία τοῦ δευτέρου ἀναθεματισμοῦ* ("From the oration concerning the incarnation and faith, in the interpretation of the second anathema"). For although the work, by the division of the work into chapters, might have gained for itself the name of "chapters," it clearly appears from the very argument of the work that the title *περὶ σαρκώσεως* ("Concerning the incarnation") had been prefixed by the author. For the author writes: *Θεοῦ χάριτι πῶς δεῖ πιστεύειν περὶ τῆς σαρκώσεως καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσεως τοῦ Υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ.* "How by the grace of God one ought to believe concerning the incarnation and inhumanation of the Son of God, Jesus Christ." And he aptly joined these two, *σάρκωσιν, καὶ ἐνανθρώπησιν* (incarnation and inhumanation), as one who followed the Greek Catholics, who were accustomed to inscribe their books on this mystery as *Περὶ σαρκώσεως* (Concerning the incarnation), and refuted the opinion of the heterodox who, when they denied that the whole man was assumed by the Word, avoided the title of *ἐνανθρωπήσεως* (inhumanation) and used only the other, *Περὶ σαρκώσεως* (Concerning the incarnation), as Eudoxius of Constantinople and Apollinaris himself had done. Athanasius also, following Gregory, joined both words together against Apollinaris (lib. 1, 21): *Μανιχαῖος ἀπιστήσας τῇ σαρκώσει καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσει τοῦ Κυρίου, ἀσεβὴς κατὰ πάντα γέγονε.* "Manichaeus, not believing in the incarnation and inhumanation of our Lord, has become in all things impious."
It is also to be observed in the meantime that Gerard Vossius, the interpreter, is prefixed to these chapters with the exposition in the published Gregoriana, although Possevinus writes that, because they had never come to light either in Greek or in Latin, he had added the version of them made by Francisco Turrianus in his *Apparatus*. Since this exists in everyone’s hands with the same words, with few changes, it is uncertain to me who received them from whom.
The commentaries of John Zonaras and Theodore Balsamon on the canonical epistle of the Thaumaturge were published in Paris; Balsamon’s indeed together with his other expositions on the sacred canons; Zonaras's, however, separately, with the same Thaumaturge, Macarius, and Basil of Seleucia, in folio at Paris, in Greek and Latin. Beyond these, Jerome also praises his epistles. And other epistles of his are commonly circulated. Suidas: *Ἔγραψε καὶ ἄλλας τε πολλὰς καὶ ποικίλας ἐπιστολάς.* "He wrote also other many and various epistles." D That he also wrote other things, no one will doubt; for many and sufficiently prolix portions of his are read in the Greek Catena on Jeremiah, which we made into Latin, and which Michael Gislerius inserted into his own commentaries on Jeremiah, which are not present in the published editions. Some notice that Origen wrote an epistle to this Gregory of Neocaesarea—when and by what means philosophical disciplines are useful for the exposition of the sacred Scriptures, with the testimony of Scripture—which is inserted in the thirteenth chapter of the *Philocalia*.
A And not without reason did they judge so. "Hail in God, most learned and honorable son Gregory," from Origen. "To wisdom," etc. In the margin of the Vatican codex 389 it is noted: 'But the present chapter contains nothing else, save only the letter of Origen himself written to Gregory, whom some contend is the Thaumaturge.' The Gesnerian Epitomators [say]: 'The epistle of the same Thaumaturge, or his 11 canons, were printed at Basel by Johann Froben in the year 1518, with the Epistle of Saint Peter, and Gennadius, etc. Also a Metaphrasis on Ecclesiastes, and Aristeas On the seventy-two interpreters of the Hebrew law, translated by Joannes Oecolampadius. A Panegyric on Origen is preserved in manuscript in the Vatican library at Rome. A book On the soul addressed to Tatian exists at Venice in the collection of Diego Hurtado.'
Before I finish, the stubborn ardor of certain Greeks in defending their own opinion is not without cause to be rebuked; for they drag the exposition of faith of so great a Father—divinely given, and acknowledged and received by both the Eastern and Western Church—into another and adverse sense by an unsound interpretation, and they distort it in a way discordant with the mind of its own author. To pass by the rest, for this does not seem a suitable place to examine such things, let one be heard above the others: John of Jerusalem in his oration *On the Holy Spirit against the Latins*: "For these saints did not say anything else, but what Christ has said; that is, the 'from the Father alone,' [the one] who proceeds from the Father, and who has his existence from God and the Father, just as Gregory the Thaumaturge said in his revelation: 'One Holy Spirit, having his existence from God, and manifested through the Son, that is to say, to men.'" B Neither indeed did the saints say anything other than what Christ pronounced. This, of course, is the "from the Father alone," regarding him who proceeds from the Father, and who has his existence from God and the Father, just as Gregory Thaumaturge said in his revelation: "One Holy Spirit, having his existence from God, and who appeared through the Son, that is, to men." What could have been spoken more unadvisedly here? By this way of speaking are not all things confounded, and will not the lowest things become equal to the highest? The saints said nothing else than what Christ pronounced. C This is the truth; no one would deny it. "He is indeed from the Father alone." But this is false. Christ never pronounced such things; and therefore the saints who follow him refrain from writing down such declarations. "Who proceeds from the Father." This is Christ’s [teaching], and we kiss the statement; no one deceives us. But in the words of Christ, is that addition "from the Father alone"—which is discerned by the keenness of the eyes—added by John of Jerusalem? I, for one, do not see it. "As Gregory Thaumaturge [says]." This is a pure and unadulterated lie. The words of the Thaumaturge sound no different than the words of Christ: that the Holy Spirit has existence from God, that is to say, proceeds from the Father. From these you conclude that the Thaumaturge and Christ himself decree that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father alone. I would be more foolish than a fool if I believed these conclusions. D Listen, my good man. "The Spirit proceeds from the Father": therefore, "from the Father alone." That is false. For it is possible that what proceeds from the Father may also proceed from another. And that it proceeds from the Son is now established among all Catholics by the testimonies of Scripture and the holy Fathers. Know also this with me: even if Christ and all the remaining Fathers had said that the Spirit proceeds "from the Father alone," still the Son is not excluded from that procession—which is proven by most clear examples by Basil the Great, and is explained at length by John Veccus, Patriarch of Constantinople, in *On the procession of the Holy Spirit*, chap. 12, and by Peter, Bishop of Milan, in his oration to Alexius Comnenus, and by very many others. Add besides that "appearing through the Son" in divine matters denotes nothing else than existence, and Nicephorus Blemmydes proves this at length with the testimonies of the Fathers in his oration 1, *On the procession of the Holy Spirit*: nor is the name of procession alone, but also other terms, most openly and without any veil, taken regarding the very essential existence of the Spirit, as John Veccus [argues] in his oration *On the union of the Churches*. And that we may not waste time in an iniquitous strife, go to Basil the Great, epistle (236) to Amphilochius, which begins: *Ἐζητημένον ἤδη παρὰ πολλοῖς*. Foolish, therefore, is the act of the Patriarch of Jerusalem toward his Greeks, when from these words of the Thaumaturge, which John the Evangelist communicated to him, he contends for his own opinion concerning the procession of the Spirit from the Father alone, and inflicts an unseemly and intolerable wound upon a most sincere and candid profession of faith, which I have thought a sin not to point out to the reader in passing.
SAINT DIONYSIUS, BISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA. HISTORICAL AND LITERARY NOTICE.
(Galland., *Vet. Patr. Biblioth.*, vol. III, Proleg., p. xxx.)
I. Dionysius of Alexandria, surnamed the Great. Auditor of Origen, moderator of the School of Alexandria. The time when he was ordained bishop. His principal deeds. Monuments of his writings. The day of his death.
II. Most of his writings are lost. Those which are preserved among the ancients, now collected for the first time. Arranged according to temporal order.
III. On his *Elenchus* and *Apology*, discussed specifically.
IV. On what occasion such a work was written. Its value. What fragments survive. How they are distributed.
A Dionysius of Alexandria, by the ancient Fathers rightfully accorded the surname of "the Great" (a), was, as Jerome testifies (b), a very distinguished auditor of Origen, to whom he also dedicated his book *On Martyrdom* (c). Afterward the moderator of the Alexandrian School, he succeeded Heraclas in the episcopate in the third year of the reign of Philip, 247 A.D. (d). A few years after entering upon his episcopate, when the Decian persecution arose, he withdrew; but a short time later, he was seized by soldiers and led to Taposiris, where, by the will of God, he was wondrously rescued, albeit against his will, by a rustic band of Christians (e). Meantime, as the persecution raged, many at Alexandria underwent martyrdom for the name of Christ, whose glorious struggles Dionysius himself consigned to writing (f). In the year 252, he was present at the synod of Antioch, convened to put down the schism of the Novatians; to whom he also wrote an epistle (g). During that time, he refuted in two books, around the year 254 of Christ, the Egyptian bishop Nepos—by whose teaching the Arsinoites had been imbued with the error of the Chiliasts—where he also discoursed upon some matters worthy of note regarding the Apocalypse. Thereafter, in the dispute over rebaptizing heretics, he wrote many epistles to various persons for the purpose of restoring peace to the Church. When Valerian Augustus was harrying the Church of God with a dire persecution, after a noble confession made before Aemilian the Augustal prefect, he was forced to go to Cephro, a most uncultivated town in Libya; whence, a little later, he was ordered to migrate to Mareotis (h). While he was attacking the swelling Sabellian heresy, he was reported B to Dionysius the Roman pontiff, as if he were not thinking correctly concerning the consubstantiality of the divine Word with the Father: but he himself wiped away this stain smeared upon his reputation by writing four books. Then, indeed, after Valerian was captured by the Persians and Macrianus was killed with his sons, and peace was finally restored to the Christians by Gallienus, he returned to Alexandria toward the end of the year 261 (i), and was present to aid his fellow-citizens suffering from plague, famine, and civil war (j). Being called to Antioch to render judgment in the case of Paul of Samosata, because he was unequal to completing this journey on account of his advanced age and ill health, he pronounced his judgment by letters sent to the Antiochene Church. But at the time the synod was being held, the admirable man died, having completed seventeen years in the episcopate, seventeen (ἑπτακαίδεκα, as the author Eusebius attests (k)) under Gallienus, the Emperor of the eleventh year, at the beginning of 265 A.D. We have followed Lequien primarily in stitching together this Dionysian chronology (l). But as regards the day of Dionysius' death, the reader will perhaps not regret consulting Dodwell (m).
II. That Magnus Dionysius wrote very many things is clearly discovered from what has been said thus far, yet the greatest part of them has perished. But those things which still remain among the ancients from his literary monuments are certainly to be highly valued; these we now bring forth in public, collected for the first time from Eusebius, Athanasius, Basil, and other writers of the Church; so that the fragments, at least, of the works of such a great Father might to some extent make amends for and partially repair the loss we have sustained from the destruction of the rest. And many...
A endeavors to present them for consideration, along with others whether observed or even passed over; which, however, would lead us further away than is fitting from our plan. Since, therefore, we have briefly and methodically arranged the deeds of our holy Father, we have deemed it sufficient to have observed the same method of timing both in the fragments of his works and in the editing of his letters. If, however, anything remains that might call for some critical observation, the appended annotations will shed some light. For the rest, we have decided that one should not pass over what the most learned man, Peter Coutant [n], has observed regarding the fragments of the work inscribed *Refutation and Apology*; which, in this edition, occupy the fourth place in the first part of the Dionysian works, having been drawn up to an exact model by the study of the same most learned man. They are as follows.
III. The work of Dionysius of Alexandria, from which the proposed fragments were described, is cited in various places by Athanasius [o]. Basil [p] and Jerome [q] also make mention of it. But these two doctors do not describe it in the same way. For Jerome teaches that it is distinguished into four books; whereas Basil produces certain of its words as if from a second letter to Dionysius of the same name. In point of fact, however, it is certain from Athanasius that it is both distinguished into books and that the name of "letter" belongs to it; he indeed says in the letter *On the Opinion of Dionysius*, no. 13: "Dionysius, as soon as he could, for the purpose of clearing himself, published books which he inscribed *Refutation and Apology*," and concerning the same writing in no. 14 he speaks as follows: "He inscribed his letter with the title B *Refutation and Apology*." The letter, therefore, was divided into four books, and thus it is one of those which Dionysius calls "his own, dictated more fully and in the manner of a teacher" (διδασκαλικώτερον ἐξηγούμενος). It was not sent by him immediately upon being warned of his accusation. For, lest it should appear that he was failing the accusation if he delayed too long in writing back to the Roman pontiff, he sent this letter ahead to him, which he himself mentions below in no. 6, addressing the Roman [pontiff] in these words: "Καὶ σοὶ δι᾿ ἄλλης ἐπιστολῆς ἔγραψα." Therefore, the letter is not incorrectly called by Basil not only a letter, but also a *second* letter to Dionysius of the same name. At the same time, it is also the *Refutation and Apology*: the *Refutation* indeed of the adversaries and accusers of Dionysius, who are convicted and refuted in this work; the *Apology*, however, of Dionysius himself, who seeks to clear himself in the same work of the errors objected against him.
IV. This *Apology* of Dionysius is of the greater moment because it serves as a specimen for us of what the other Fathers who preceded the Nicene Council would have done, to whom some things had escaped which seemed akin to Arian impiety, had a similar necessity compelled them to explain their mind more openly. For from this, anyone is easily led to believe that there would have been no one among them who would not have condemned C the same perfidy just as Dionysius did. Regarding this work, Athanasius sets forth in no. 14 what he thought should be transcribed and what should be passed over, in this manner: "Passing over his very many words, by which he weighs the matters brought into question, or gathers them from the reasonings brought forward, or convicts the interrogated adversaries, or denounces his detractors, I will propose only those things which will seem necessary for clearing away the accusations." In those things, however, which he does transcribe, he does not preserve the order of the books in the least, but as the subjects treated required, he now brings forward one and another fragment from the first book, then another from the second, then the fourth, then again from the first, to which he joins another from the fourth. But since it is the intent of our work to accurately collect the remains of this same work, it has seemed better to present the individual fragments in the order which the books, from which they were described, maintain among themselves. If we examine the order of the events which preceded this work, it will be permitted to arrive in some way at the time around which it was composed. In truth, some letters of Dionysius of Alexandria against the Sabellians, published under Pope Xystus, gave the occasion for that accusation. D Thereupon, some Catholics, moved by this—the Alexandrian prelate himself being unaware—rushed to Rome and reported to the Roman pontiff those things in his writings that displeased them. Dionysius of Rome immediately admonished Dionysius of Alexandria. He, however, endeavored to satisfy him first with brief, and soon with longer letters as soon as possible, as Athanasius notes. Therefore, nothing prevents us from believing that this *Apology* of Dionysius pertains to the year 262. The learned Tillemont also thinks that it can be referred to the end of this year. And enough on the Great Dionysius.
FRAGMENTS OF THE BOOKS ON THE PROMISES
ST. DIONYSIUS, BISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA WHAT SURVIVES OF THE FRAGMENTS OF HIS WORKS AND EPISTLES PART I Containing various fragments of the works of the holy Father.
I.
FROM THE BOOKS II ON THE PROMISES
Against Nepos, a bishop in Egypt. (Euseb. Hist. eccl., VII, 24, 25.)A I. But since they bring forward a certain book of Nepos, upon which they rely heavily, as if it demonstrated beyond contradiction that the kingdom of Christ will be on earth; in many other respects I acknowledge and love Nepos, both for his faith and his industry and his study of the Scriptures, and for his many psalms, in which B many of the brethren until now take delight—
A but truth is beloved and most preferred of all. We must praise and agree freely if anything is said correctly; but we must examine and amend it if anything does not appear to be written soundly. And if he were present himself, and were to proclaim his opinion by word of mouth, a simple conversation without writing would perhaps suffice, whereby through interrogations and responses the adversaries might be convinced and recalled to their former concord. But since the book has been published, and it seems to some to be most apt for persuasion; and since certain teachers make the Law and the Prophets of no account, neglect to follow the Gospels, and despise the Apostles' Epistles: while they sell the doctrine of this book as if it were some great and hidden mystery, and do not allow our simpler brethren to think anything sublime and magnificent, either concerning the glorious and truly divine appearing of our Lord, or concerning our resurrection from the dead and our gathering together and assimilation unto Him; but rather compel them to hope for certain paltry and mortal things, such as men are now wont to expect, in the kingdom of God: it is necessary that I also, as if he were present, should hold a discussion against my brother Nepos.
II. Having interposed a few words, he proceeds to say: B When I was, he says, in the Arsinoite prefecture, where, as you know, this opinion has long since become prevalent, to such a degree that schisms and defections of entire Churches have occurred; having convoked the presbyters and teachers of the brethren in the villages, and with those brethren present who wished to attend, I exhorted them that this doctrine should be examined openly in the assembly. And when they brought forward this book to me as if it were some shield and impregnable wall, I sat with them for three successive days from dawn until evening, and set myself to discuss whatever was written in it. C And there I was overjoyed at the constancy, and the most ardent truth-seeking, and the intelligence, and the tractability of the brethren, as, in order and with moderation, we conducted the questions and the difficulties and the agreements.
A For we truly renounced the practice of clinging obstinately and contentiously to views once held, even if they appeared correct; neither did we brush aside contradictions, but we endeavored, as far as was possible, to approach and strengthen the subjects at hand. Nor, if reason dictated, were we ashamed to change our opinion and agree with others. But rather, with a good conscience and without any hypocrisy, and with hearts B opened to God, we accepted whatever was confirmed by the most certain arguments and the authority of the Holy Scriptures. Finally, Coracion, who had been the author and leader of this doctrine, in the hearing of all the brethren present, confessed and testified to us that he would no longer attend to this, nor discuss it, nor remember it, nor teach it, since he had been sufficiently convinced by the arguments brought against it. The other brethren who were present rejoiced at this common discourse and at the approach to all in agreement and mutual understanding.
C III. Furthermore, descending next to the Apocalypse of John, he speaks as follows: "Some, then, of those who were before us, have rejected and altogether dismantled the book, refuting each of its chapters, and declaring it to be unintelligible and irrational; they maintain that the title is false. For they say that it is not John's; and indeed, that it is not a revelation, seeing that it is covered by the thick and opaque veil of ignorance; and [they affirm] that not only was no one of the apostles, but not even any one of the saints or of those from the Church, the author of this writing, but that Cerinthus, who D established the sect named after him, [was the author], wishing by his own name to give credibility to his own fabrications. For this to be the dogma of his teaching, that the kingdom of Christ would be earthly; and that, being a lover of the body and altogether carnal, he would dream that it would consist in those things after which he himself particularly lusted—in the satisfyings of the belly and those parts beneath the belly, that is to say, in foods and drinks and marriages, and by means of which, more speciously..."
he imagined that these things could be prepared, namely, in the feasts and the sacrifices and the slaughter of sacrificial animals. A Yet I would not dare to reject the book, since many of the brethren hold it in high esteem; but, receiving a higher opinion regarding it than my own understanding, I suppose that the interpretation of each part is something hidden and more wonderful. For even if I do not grasp it, I suspect nonetheless that a deeper meaning lies within the words; not measuring and judging these things by my own reasoning, but attributing more to faith, I have thought them to be higher than what I can comprehend. And I do not condemn the things which I have not been able to understand; rather, I marvel at them the more, because I cannot grasp them.
IV. After this, having examined the entire book of the Revelation, B and having shown that it is impossible to understand it according to the obvious sense of the words, he adds, saying: Having at length completed the whole prophecy, so to speak, the prophet declares blessed both those who observe it and himself as well. "Blessed," he says, "is he who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book; and I, John, who saw and heard these things." That he is called John, therefore, and that the book was written by John, I do not deny. For I confess that it is the work of some holy and divinely inspired man. But that he is the same person as the apostle, C the son of Zebedee, the brother of James, whose is the Gospel inscribed "according to John" and the Catholic Epistle, I would not easily concede. For from the character of both, and from the style of their speech, and from the whole arrangement [(20)] and disposition of the book, I conjecture that they are not one and the same writer. For the evangelist nowhere writes his name; nor does he proclaim himself, either in the Gospel or in the Epistle. A little further on, he adds: John, however, nowhere [proclaims himself], neither as speaking of himself nor of another. But he who wrote the Revelation, at the very beginning of the opening D sets forth his name, when he says: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which he gave to him, to show to his servants quickly, and he signified it, sending by his angel to his servant John; who testified to the word of God, and his testimony, whatsoever he saw." Then he also writes an epistle: "John to the seven Churches which are in Asia, grace to you and peace." But the evangelist did not even prefix his name to the Catholic Epistle; but without any wordiness or indirection, he started from the very mystery of the divine revelation: "What was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes."
A For upon this revelation the Lord also declared Peter blessed, saying: "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father who is in heaven." But not even in the second and third Epistles, which are commonly ascribed to John, although they are very brief, does the name of John appear; but strictly without a name, he is inscribed as "the Elder." Moreover, that other one did not think it sufficient to have mentioned his own name once to proceed thereafter with the narrative, but he repeats it again: "I, John, your brother and fellow-partaker in the tribulation and kingdom and in the patience of Jesus, was on the island which is called Patmos, on account of the word of God and the testimony of Jesus." And at the end of the book he adds these things again: "Blessed is he who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book; and I, John, who saw and heard these things." That it is John, therefore, who writes these things, must be believed because he says it himself.
B V. But who this man might be is uncertain. For he did not speak of himself—as he is often described in the Gospel—as "the disciple whom the Lord loved," nor as "the one who reclined upon His breast," nor as "the brother of James," nor, finally, as "the one who saw and heard the Lord." For he would surely have said one of these things mentioned, if he had wished to reveal himself clearly. But he stated none of these things; rather, he called himself only our brother and fellow-partaker, and a witness of Jesus, and blessed on account of the revelation he both saw and heard. C I believe, indeed, that there have been many who shared the name of John with the Apostle, who, on account of their love for him, and because they admired and revered the man, and desired to be loved by the Lord just as he was, embraced this same name, D just as we see in the children of the faithful that many are called by the names of Paul and Peter. There is also another John in the Acts of the Apostles, named Mark, whom Barnabas and Paul took along with them, concerning whom it is said again: "They had also John as a helper." Whether this person is the one who wrote the Revelation, it is not clear to me. For he is not reported to have come into Asia with them: "But when they had sailed from Paphos," it says, "Paul indeed went on to Perga in Pamphylia; but John, withdrawing from them, returned to Jerusalem." Therefore, I believe it is some other one of those who were in Asia; since they say that there are two monuments at Ephesus, and each is said to be of John.
VI. From the thoughts and words and...