Theodotus, Bishop of Ancyra

ANNO DOMINI CDXXXI

THEODOTUS ANCYRANUS BISHOP

NOTITIA

I. Theodotus, bishop of Ancyra in Galatia, mistakenly called Theodorus by Gennadius (a) and Honorius (b), flourished most notably for his piety and doctrine between the years of Christ 430 and 440. He is called a saint ^A by Sophronius of Jerusalem, ὁ ἐν ἁγίοις Θεόδοτος, in his synodical epistle found in Photius (c). At the time when the Nestorian heresy was raging, he aided Cyril of Alexandria remarkably, and for this reason was called his fellow-combatant (συναγωνιστής) (d). He is found to have spoken often before the Ephesian Fathers (e); but those remarks are especially noteworthy which he made at the arrival of the legates of the Roman pontiff in Ephesus, in praise of Celestine (f). In that venerable assembly of two hundred Fathers, he is read to have subscribed in the fifth and seventh place (g). Furthermore, he is reported to have been sent by the same council, with seven others, to the emperors Theodosius and Valentinian, in order to plead the cause of the Ephesian Fathers against the Orientals (h). Lequien (i) notes that in the year 438, Cyril of Alexandria wrote an epistle to him and to Acacius of Melitene and Firmus of Caesarea, in which he sought their counsel as to what needed to be done in the case of Theodore of Mopsuestia, whom the Orientals in their Antiochene synod had declared should not be condemned in the least. This epistle does not, indeed, exist in the edition of the Cyrillian works by Jean Aubert; but Binius (j) and Baluzius (k) produce it; and it begins: "It was not right, your holiness, that it should be hidden from you." See Fabricius (l). Finally, the same Alexandrian prelate, in his *Apologeticus* to Theodosius Augustus (m), extols our Theodotus and Acacius of Melitene with the highest praises, calling them holy bishops, possessed of testimony in every kind of virtue, and also most expert and thoroughly learned in the divine Scriptures. Cyril refers in these words ^B primarily to the conversation that Theodotus and Acacius held concerning the Catholic faith with Nestorius, which is recorded in the acts of the Council of Ephesus (n). However, the year in which Theodotus departed from this life is not entirely certain. He had certainly passed away long before the year 446, when Proclus of Constantinople departed from the living, as the aforementioned Lequien (o) argues. For Eusebius, the successor of Theodotus, when he happened to be in Constantinople, testified that he had been ordained by the blessed Proclus in the Council of Chalcedon (p): Καὶ ἐχειροτονήθην παρὰ τοῦ μακαρίου Πρόκλου.

II. Theodotus wrote many things, evidence of which has reached us partly from his own testimony (q), partly from the Ephesian acts (r), and partly from Epiphanius the deacon in the acts of the Second Council of Nicaea (s). We know from elsewhere, however, that Theodotus committed other things to writing as well, beyond what is gathered from the sources indicated. Whatever still survives, we have diligently collected and here present; concerning which, as we have arranged them, we must now briefly speak. First, therefore, we bring forward the Exposition of the Nicene Creed, mentioned in the second place by Epiphanius the deacon: τὴν ἑρμηνείαν τὴν εἰς τὸ σύμβολον τῶν ἐν Νικαίᾳ ἁγίων Πατέρων. This Exposition, indeed, was first transcribed from an ancient manuscript codex of the Barberini library and rendered into Latin by Lucas Holste ^C nius, who published both texts; his learned edition...

which compared both contexts with his own scholarly hand, he recorded in the note of the year 1651. This little work appeared at Rome in the year 1669, dedicated to the Supreme Pontiff Clement IX by the most eminent Francis Cardinal Barberini; and subsequently, Francis Combefis, with a new version and notes, and having also appended the Homily of Germanus, Patriarch of Constantinople, on the Dormition of the holy Mary, published it again at Paris in the year 1675. But this Combefisian edition, which not even Tillemont saw, though we sought it with the greatest zeal, we were unable to acquire; and thus we have sent to the press the Roman edition, revised in some places and with certain ^A small notes added. Fabricius conjectures that Theodotus had inscribed the work to Lausus, whom he addresses kindly at the end, using the words "dear head," and whom he also commends at the beginning for his piety and constancy of faith: to that Lausus, I say, to whom our prelate of Ancyra dedicated six books against Nestorius, now lost, as Epiphanius attests in the cited place.

III. The Council of Ephesus having now been celebrated, and Nestorius accordingly deposed, this work is argued to have been written against this arch-heretic from various places indicated below; where Theodotus attacks Nestorius himself, even by name: unless perhaps someone might prefer that Theodotus had set his hand to the same work while the Fathers were still detained in the council. For he writes thus: “The beginning, therefore, of the faith concerning the Only-Begotten is this exposition of the Fathers. For when the inquiry concerning the Only-Begotten was being instituted by them—which at that time was Arius, as NOW IT IS NESTORIUS; therefore the Fathers gathered at that time, AS ALSO NOW, etc.”: *καὶ τότε, καθάπερ καὶ νῦν*. (For so it must be read here, as we note below in the errata.) But that which must most especially be noted in this little book is what the learned Lequien ^B thinks he has observed in it, saying thus: “Theodotus in his Exposition against Nestorius seems to have prefigured the Eutychian heresy to a certain extent, in denying two distinct natures in Christ, *οὐκ οὐσίας διαφόρους*.” So much for him. This prelate of Ancyra is marked by a grave censure indeed. But how, pray, is Theodotus to be judged as having prefigured Eutyches, he whom, as we read in Photius, we find ranked in the synodical epistle of Sophronius of Jerusalem among the principal holy Fathers, whose testimonies declared a double operation in Christ our God? How, I say, is Theodotus to be called one who denied two natures in Christ, who openly acknowledged them in this very ^C opusculum against those who, as he admits in these words: “NO LONGER after the union of God to man do the Fathers think of TWO THINGS, rightly naming Jesus, signifying God the Word, and speaking according to the Theologian, interpreting the Visible Word as Jesus: NOT CONFOUNDING THE NATURES, but declaring the union”? The Fathers, therefore, after the union of God to humanity, no longer understanding two things, rightly when they say Jesus, designate God the Word; and speaking according to the Theologian, they interpret the Word who was seen by the eyes as Jesus: NOT CONFOUNDING THE NATURES, but showing the union. Behold Theodotus clinging to the holy Fathers who do not confound the natures, and thus himself professing two natures in Christ. But the same Theodotus a little before admitted that he did not admit *οὐκ οὐσίας διαφόρους* in Christ. I hear. What then? Has the prelate of Ancyra, having forgotten himself, written contradictions with but a few lines intervening, that what he denied there, he shortly after asserted here? There is certainly no reason why anyone should justly judge so. The passage therefore objected above should not be taken in the sense that Lequien takes it; but in the sense that Theodotus himself stated in the later opinion, *οὐκέτι δύο πράγματα*, that is, that it is no longer to be understood that there are two diverse and distinct things, or two persons in Christ: targeting Nestorius, of course, who, to use the words of Petavius, striving to introduce a fourth into the Trinity, secretly and craftily recognized two things separated and disjoined from each other in reality, that is, two persons, in Christ. Now indeed, Tillemont himself had gone over to Lequien's opinion: but, having read the little book more attentively, he rightly understood that Theodotus was undeservedly censured on that account. Wherefore, it is understood that the most ample Cardinal Barberini, in speaking of this work of Theodotus, with the best right pronounced it to be of the highest theological value, most sincerely orthodox, and greatly lauded by the ancients.

IV. The exposition of the Nicene Creed is followed by six homilies, ^D the first three of which we have taken from the acts of the Council of Ephesus. The first and second of these are said to have been delivered on the birthday of the Savior, and to have been read in the same council. And the first, indeed, is entirely occupied with attacking the Nestorian heresy. The second, however, which Epiphanius the deacon also mentions in the acts of the [Second] Council of Nicaea, overturns the errors of Photinus at the same time. But that which is third in order is said to have been delivered at Ephesus against Nestorius on the day of Saint John the Evangelist. Concerning these three homilies, you may approach, if...

is pleasing, Tillemont [j]. But as for the fourth homily, Combefis had indeed edited it in the Sirmondian manuscript among the works of Amphilochius [k], but with hesitation. For he thus records it [l]: 'It is indeed sufficiently learned; yet its style is less forceful than that of Amphilochius, with the times also excepted: for it fights against Nestorius, whom he calls by name 'homonymous' [m]: how could a holy and modest man, hardly before the deposition which he himself did not witness, while Valerian sat at Iconium and the Ephesian Fathers were sitting in deposition, especially established in that see, presume to call [him so]?' Such was Combefis: who, however, being subsequently better informed, and moved both by the trust of the Mazarinian manuscript and especially by the authority of Saint Nicephorus, who cites the same homily as an undoubted monument of Theodotus in his *Antirrhetici*, finally asserted it for Theodotus in various places [n], especially in his notes to the fourth oration of Saint Proclus, Bishop of Constantinople [o]. Therefore, admitting it into the census of the homilies of Theodotus, we have transcribed it from the Combefisian Amphilochius, and have placed the editor's annotations beneath it. Finally, the remaining two homilies, of which one is on the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ, the other on the holy Mother of God and the holy Nativity of Christ, the lauded Combefis unearthed from the manuscript codices of the Mazarinian library, and wove them in Latin only into his *Bibliotheca concionatoria* [p], from whence we have borrowed them. Moreover, it is pleasing here, at the end, to describe the judgment of the Roman editor, to whom we owe the Exposition of the Nicene Symbol, concerning the style or method of argumentation of Theodotus: 'The style,' he says, 'of all these orations, as also of this (Exposition) which we provide, is pure; the thoughts are sublime, but clearly proposed; the method of argumentation is sharp and concise, but eloquent; the arguments are most effectively deduced from the truly theological loci of Scripture and the councils: yet so that a certain mild placidity most sweetly seasons the bitterness of the struggle, and an oil of Christian and paternal charity always, as it were, keeps down the fires of anger, however just, against detestable heresiarchs: which things, since they are plainly apparent to any reader, I cannot indeed imagine whence Sixtus Senensis drew what he asserts concerning this our Theodotus [q], that he writes in a dialectical manner and very obscurely. See for yourself, reader, and judge.'

THEODOTUS, BISHOP OF ANCYRA

EXPOSITION OF THE SYMBOL

^C 1. The firmness and constancy in the faith of your soul, inflamed by the love of Christ, in no way fluctuates; even though enemies of infidelity may superimpose the tares. For since you have received the faith as though handed down by hand from your ancestors, you have piety as the safeguard and fortification of your life; since this true faith has both led the world to a better state, and extinguished error, and routed demons, and adorned the religious empire more splendidly than any trophies: and the very experience of things bears witness to my speech. For most pious emperors have overturned many tyrants, prostrated by their prayers from afar; and they have often fended off the madness of barbarians, armed with faith, and by the piety of their ancestors. For since

they possess a faith that is immovable, God preserves their kingdom from all plotting. For just as an incursion of barbarians ^A brings danger to the body, so the devil stirs up war against the soul, fighting against the truth with arguments of deceit. The Lord, however, signifying these things more gently, explained them to His own disciples in another way: He called the word of piety the good seed, but termed the doctrines of unbelief sown over it tares; and He calls the teaching a heavenly husbandry, and considers piety the fruit of those who have truly believed. For a farmer does not rejoice so much in reaping sheaves as Christ rejoices in reaping genuine faith from those who are steadfast. For since He Himself went forth to sow the word, He says: "I went forth from the Father, and am come into the world"; and by "I went forth," He indicates the condescension or lowering of His divinity; ^B but by "I am come," He signifies His own majesty.

II. Furthermore, He also shows the cause of His coming, when He says: "The sower went out to sow." But that good farmer indeed disseminated the good word of the true faith, showing Himself to be God who became man for the sake of men: not a man naked and adorned with a prerogative of honors from God, as some have supposed, but, as I have said, God who chose to have communion with men. For this is the greatest glory and salvation of men, that God, because of His love for mankind, assumed human nature. And these things He indeed affirms of Himself, ^C showing Himself to be both God and man: being the former by His own nature, but having become the latter by His love for mankind. For He descended to men, and for this reason He became man, truly being that which He appeared; and He remained what He was, not putting off the former while becoming the latter; not changing His divinity, but assuming humanity from the Virgin Mary; not ceasing to be what He was, but becoming what He was not. For He affirms both of these things about Himself; and by signifying that He is God and coequal to His own Father, while He says, "I and the Father are one," and, "He who sees Me sees also My Father"; and by showing Himself to be man, when He said, "Why do you seek to kill Me, a man who has spoken to you the truth?"—He does not indicate one person ^D by the divine properties and another by human passions, but He calls Himself one and the same, and shows Himself to be God and man. For He was one and the same, both being that and showing Himself to be this. For He shows Himself to be consubstantial with the Father, and equal in dignity to men; being the former by nature, but assuming the latter by His love for mankind. For humanity was not severed from divinity, as those who now divide Christ affirm, making the mystery one of equivocation, muddling the simplicity of our faith with the artifice of words, so that by separating humanity from divinity...

they might utterly destroy the dispensation by treating it as separate from that salutary union, using fabricated arguments of reasoning. Let them tell us, in what matter was there a "dispensation," if, just as always, so also then, God was divided from man? But we speak of a dispensation of God, and of a condescension through self-emptying, because God the Word himself became man, not ^A having changed his nature, but having brought about the union miraculously. And this dispensation has surpassed all human reason.

III. Therefore, the great Paul also attributes human sufferings to God himself, not teaching that his divinity is passible, but expressing the wondrous compassion of the good God toward men. For since God wished to suffer human things for the sake of men, and since he possessed a nature that is in no way capable of suffering, he descended to be united to the passible, so that the union might make the suffering also to be God's, ^B since the nature of God was not capable of sufferings. And the great Paul, indicating this, said: "We speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, the hidden wisdom, which none of the rulers of this age knew. For if they had known, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." And yet the Lord of glory is impassible; but he received the cross, having united to himself that which could suffer.

The great Peter also recorded this, when he healed the man lame from his mother's womb, and was marvelled at, the Jews looking intently at him and being astonished at the miracle; and answering them, he said thus: "Men of Israel, why do you marvel at this, or why do you look at us, as though by our own power or piety we had made him walk? The God of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers, ^C glorified his servant Jesus, whom you delivered up, and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he had decided to release him. But you denied the Holy and Just One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, and you killed the Author of life." And yet the Author of our life is immortal; but, he says, by being united to the mortal, he was killed. For the union with God does not permit the sufferings to be circumscribed in the man alone. And for this reason he calls the only-begotten Son of God Jesus, signifying that the name was imposed upon that infant born of Mary; and again he calls the same person both Jesus and addresses him as the Author of life, showing him at once to be the Creator of all things, and the man who tasted death.

IV. And so that you might not think this one person is someone else, ^D and that one person is another, Paul, by mingling divine things with human, declares both things about one and the same person; showing that God became man, and for this reason he attributes to the same person some things acting as God, and others suffering as man: God being in no way changed, nor the appearance by which he appeared being a deception. For the union that took place was miraculous; for if a confusion of natures had brought about the union, that which happened...

^A is in no way a miracle: but now it shows you a sign which is also paradoxical. Do not, therefore, seek a rationale for those things which happened and were wrought beyond reason by divine power; for even if it occupies the rationale of nature, it exceeds the thoughts of men. For if you cannot state the rationale of the birth according to the flesh—for the rationale of nature does not recognize how the same person is a Virgin and has become a Mother, but the power of God has shown it, and all who boast of being Christians would surely confess this with us—why do you seek by human rationale the ineffable union of God with man? But I think that it behooves a right-minded person to know what one should seek concerning God and what one ought to believe; for whatever He works according to our own nature, it is permitted to seek and to investigate by thought; but whatever He works miraculously beyond our reason and our nature, we ought to hold by faith, not to investigate by arguments. ^B Such is this very matter now before our discourse. God chose to suffer for the sake of men: He did what He willed. "For all that the Lord willed, He did." He did not become passible according to His divine nature—far be it!—but being able to do what He willed, He underwent birth from a Virgin, since before this He had undertaken to become man. He, therefore, who chose our race did not shrink from the birth. And the great Paul, indicating this very thing, says: "God sent His Son, born of a woman"; since He made the one who was and the one who was born into one through grace, with God working miracles, not changing natures.

V. Where, then, is he now who cries out: "Listen, ^C good man, did Mary in no way give birth to God?" You are undoing, O man, God's condescension toward men: for this is what it means for God to have condescended to men, that being God by nature, He underwent a birth salutary for men. Do you take away the birth? You have surely undone the salutary condescension as well. Do you reject the grace? Then you have destroyed salvation. Are you ashamed of what has been done? Then the Lord Jesus will also be ashamed of you in the kingdom of heaven. "For whoever," He says, "is ashamed of me and my words, of him I also will be ashamed before my Father who is in heaven." And yet, if it were not God who was undergoing human experiences, but a humanity separated from divinity like ours, neither of the natures would be working anything shameful. ^D For the man was preaching virtue, and God was healing infirmities. What then was it that He said we ought not to be ashamed of? Since neither the man was doing anything worthy of shame, nor was God undergoing anything less or more lowly than His own divinity. But because, being God, He endured human things, in order that you might not deem the sufferings a disgrace to God, and be ashamed of the dispensation which He wrought out of love for mankind, He says: "Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, of him I will be ashamed in the kingdom of heaven." Having heard these things

^A that great Paul cried out, saying: "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel." And what shame does the Gospel have, O admirable Paul? Through what suspicion are you led to say, "I am not ashamed of the Gospel"? You preach virtue, you teach the mercy of God, you heal the infirm, you cast out demons, you raise the dead. What is it, then, that you say boastfully, "I am not ashamed"? I speak, he says, of God who suffered human things for the sake of men; that which seems shameful to the many, I am not ashamed of. For I do not introduce a passible nature, but I teach the mercy of God toward men. "For we preach," he says, "Christ crucified; to the Jews a stumbling block, and to the Gentiles foolishness." And who is this crucified Christ? Tell me, I pray. "But to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, we preach Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God." These things are considered foolishness by the Greeks; for when the Greeks hear of the wisdom of God crucified, they break out into broad laughter, thinking that a passible divinity is being announced to those who believe. ^B

VI. Do not, therefore, consider God to be weak, by fixing your attention on the passions; but consider the greatness of His power, who, through what was believed to be weakness, dissolved our own infirmity. "For the foolishness of God—no, the weakness of God—is stronger than men," says Paul. And what, pray, is the weakness of God, if one does not consider my own infirmity to have become His? For how is the Creator of the heavens weak? What is the infirmity of Him who created all things by a word? What is the weakness of God, who bound the earth with hidden boundaries? But because He who wished to dissolve our infirmities made my infirmity His own, Paul says, "The weakness of God is stronger than men." ^C And since, "The foolishness of God is wiser than men," as the same Paul said, what could he have called the "foolishness of God" but that which we say about God, that He who is by nature impassible underwent passions? This is what the Greeks judge to be foolishness, since they do not know how to apply faith to the facts, but investigate everything too curiously with the thoughts of their minds. But we affirm this to be the power and excellence of God. But that which is judged to be foolishness by the Greeks, yet is believed to be wisdom by us, became wiser than men. For the wisdom of the world did not dissolve sin; it was this thing, thought to be the foolishness of God, that scattered it. This is credible to us, but is reputed as foolishness by the Greeks and the faithless. But we have the demonstration of the faith in the facts themselves, reaping the benefit of that weakness which is considered to be of God; for it is that which healed our own infirmities. ^D And that which was considered the foolishness of God conquered the wisdom of the world by piety. Do not, therefore, condemn the passion, nor disparage what appears as foolishness to the faithless; for these things which are spoken of by the faithless as the oic

oeconomia ^A have straightened. Why, then, do you seek the reason for God’s miracles, and pay no heed to what has been accomplished?

VII. But since some, abandoning themselves to the thoughts of the faithless, wish to be considered Christians, yet do not wish to believe in the miracles of God—those who say there is one Son, but understand two to be signified by the word “Son,” and who assert there is one Christ, yet treat this name as equivocal, so that they may disjoin man from God, and separate God the Word from man, and divide the union which God, by the oeconomia, accomplished and opened heaven to men; for God’s appearance on earth made men citizens of heaven—they [these men] abolish the honor of our nature, wishing to reject the communion of God, which was disposed out of love for mankind. For if God did not have dealings ^B in common with men, as He both willed and it was fitting, and if man was not united to the Godhead, but each was divided from the other by his own peculiar characteristics and nature, tell us, what was the oeconomia? What will you call God’s condescension? Who emptied himself, existing in the form of God? Who humbled himself, being in the height of the Godhead? Who became poor, while being rich according to the Godhead? How was the Lord of glory crucified, unless he had obtained union with the one who was nailed to the cross? How did the Jews kill the Prince of life, unless He was in all things united to the one who had died, being in no way separated from him? And how did the Son of man descend from heaven, unless He was ^C most strictly united to the one who descended, not so that He might remain below, but that He might raise up with Himself the one who was united and lying there? You shall not ascend, O man, together with God, unless you confess God’s condescension. “One is He who descended, and the same is He who ascended,” says Paul; no other and other, but he is one and the same; never divided, nor existing as two after the union. For He who descended, He says, is the same who ascended above the heavens, that He might fill all things. What once appeared as two, the oeconomia made one. Therefore, do not speak of two after the indissoluble union. What grace has united, let not thought divide.

VIII. This is also what the holy Fathers taught, having received from the apostles the mystery of the oeconomia. ^D This the three hundred and eighteen Fathers gathered at Nicaea decreed concerning the Only-begotten. While he who thinks that Christ is two affirms that he follows them, he contradicts their opinions, utterly denying their faith. For since they all assert as one Father, so also one Son, this man, while he maintains that two things are signified under the title of "Son," has denied the faith of those who speak of one Son. But so that what I say may be clearer, I shall set forth the very words of the Fathers, explain-

^A rendering their interpretation not from external sources, but from their own stated words.

The exposition of their faith is as follows: “We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, the Only-begotten, that is, from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God; begotten not made, consubstantial with the Father; through whom all things were made, both things in heaven and things on earth. Who for us men and for our salvation came down and was incarnate, and became man, suffered, and rose again on the third day, and ascended into heaven, and will come to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Spirit. But those who say: 'There was once when He was not,' and 'Before He was begotten He was not,' and that 'He was made out of nothing,' or who claim that the Son of God is of another hypostasis or substance, or that He is changeable or mutable, these the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes.”

These are the words of the Fathers which expound for us the faith concerning the Only-begotten and, like some standard, direct all human thought. As a rule corrects a sense that errs concerning the straightness of a piece of wood, proving its crookedness, so this discourse directs the intellect of those who desire to pervert our faith with their own thoughts. Let us follow them, believing the words themselves, not weaving intricate questions. For they say: “We believe; we do not bring forth proofs through arguments.” Let us therefore believe that the things said are as they are, and let us abstain entirely from all curious inquiry. For we do not correct what was believed by the Fathers; but we confess that these things were thus ordained by God, our faith confirming our ^B intellect. So that whoever thinks differently from this exposition is an alien to the fellowship of Christians, even if he seems to say something plausible about our faith. For not even one of those who are outside the Church demands that the principle of the sciences be demonstrated to him, but receives the principle on faith from his teacher, advancing no argument against it.

^C IX. The beginning, then, of the faith concerning the Only-begotten is this exposition of the Fathers. For since the discussion concerning the Only-begotten was instituted by them at that time, when Arius, just as Nestorius now, was sowing tares over the seed of piety, and was attempting to diminish the glory of the Only-begotten—saying indeed that the Only-begotten was the Word of the Father, but destitute of the Lord’s dignity and glory—for this reason, the Fathers who were gathered at that time, as also at this time, propound the law of our piety, shutting the ears of the simpler ones to all the sophistries concerning the Only-begotten. Therefore, when the inquiry concerning the Only-begotten was proposed to them, the holy Fathers set forth this rule of faith, having established the principle ^D that they abstain entirely from all curious disquisition; for we do not inquire into those things which have been believed by the Fathers.

^A Since there was never any question concerning God the Father, why did they begin the exposition with the Father, when there was no inquiry concerning Him? It was because, by a wise and great counsel, they were preparing a bulwark for our faith; for this reason they placed the Father in the first position. We shall recognize their wisdom if we attend to their words with precision: "We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible." For who among those who think rightly and use their natural understanding is ignorant of this? This is indeed manifest to all; but the Fathers begin their discourse in this way, not because they are stating a matter known to all, but because they knew one Lord Jesus Christ, just as they knew one Father. They place the one Father before the Son, so that, just as you have understood one God the Father Almighty, we might understand one only-begotten Son, and not think that two things are signified under the title of the Son. ^B For just as by saying "one Father," they do not indicate a twofold conception of Him, so too, by saying "one Son, our Lord Jesus Christ," they do not wish in any way to indicate a duality. For in respect of God, the title "Father" does not signify two, nor does the name of the "Son" indicate two signified objects. The holy Fathers, therefore, teaching this, and having begun from the doctrine concerning the one Father, add also the only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, that from the unity of the Father we might recognize that the Son is also to be understood as one.

^C But he who attempts to disturb the simplicity of our faith with a new artifice of words—though he has been hindered by Christ—asserts that the name "Son" and the name "Christ" are common to many, opening thereby a door to blasphemies against Christ. He affirms that in our Savior these names signify two different things, and he says that each of these is indeed one name, but two things; he says the appellation is one, but posits two signified objects. But look here, you: if, just as you say one name for the Son, you also understand one signified thing, you affirm one Son and you follow the Fathers. But if you say the name of the Son is one, and you posit the name of Christ as one, but you assert that by these names different substances are signified, you do not agree with the holy Fathers, who believed in one Lord Jesus Christ in the same way they believed in one God the Father Almighty. For if the inquiry among them had been about the name, and they spoke of one Son, your sophistry would have a place, for you posit one name but many signified objects. ^D But if the account concerning the names was of little concern to them, and they called Him one only-begotten Son, why do you abandon the signified object and cling to the name? And what they, attending to the thing itself, speak of as one, do you interpret as one name significant of many things? For Nestorius, interpreting this very expression of the holy Fathers concerning the Son, in the letters in which he replies to Cyril, Archbishop of great Alexandria, who had defended piety in free speech, and by means of a letter

^A of his, he had resolved to turn him away from his error, and toward conviction had set forth the faith of the three hundred and eighteen Fathers, Nestorius, writing back, says these very things: "Even if you should offer me your ears for fraternal healing, I shall set before you the very voices of those holy men, ridding them of the calumny which is imputed to them, and through them to the divine Scriptures." Then, setting down the statement of the Fathers, he says: "I believe, therefore, in the Lord Jesus Christ."

XI. Observe here at once, you, the most impudent theft being dared. For whereas the holy Fathers, wishing for the Son to be understood as one, said, "We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God," he steals the word "one" from the statement of the Fathers, so that he may have room to introduce two meanings for the word "Son." But you have been detected, O good sir, in having stolen that which is of supreme importance in our faith. For they did not say, "We believe in the Lord Jesus Christ," as you, a falsifier, affirm; but by saying, ^B "We believe in one God the Father Almighty," they subjoined, "And in one Lord Jesus Christ." You, however, having stolen away the "one" which was said concerning the Son, by this theft open a door to error: so that you may be able to say that there are two meanings for both the word "Son" and "Christ," and that one shows him glorious by nature, but the other by grace; and that by this reasoning you might be able to seduce Christians, so that they do not worship the one crucified for us, as one honored by God by grace above others. For those who possess something by nature have no need to have it by the grace of God. Wherefore it also occurs to me to marvel how Nestorius, having removed the crucial points of the Fathers' exposition in order to contrive these things, says that he agrees ^C with their exposition of the faith. For if he agrees with what is said, he should not steal away the most crucial part; but if he removes from the exposition of the Fathers that which most of all declares their faith, as being hostile to your own conceptions, how do you say you agree with those whom you do not wish to obey? But setting the authority of the Fathers as a lure for your own error, you draw the simpler ones into this selfsame error by this means; pretending indeed to put forward the ancient faith, but twisting this very thing toward your own error by the theft of words.

XII. Since, then, he himself calls the name "Jesus" the appellation of the human nature alone—for this name, he says, the Virgin appointed to the infant according to the announcement of the angel who said, "You shall call his name Jesus"—and, turning this constantly in his letter to the great and most holy Bishop Cyril, he says: "When Jesus had been born in Bethlehem of Judea," ^D and following that, "Our Lord Jesus Christ was born," and "They found Jesus in the midst of the teachers," wishing everywhere for the human nature to be called by the appellation "Jesus." See how the tradition of the Fathers with unanimous suffrage utterly overturns this opinion of his. For that very One, from

^A the Father, they called consubstantial with the Father, and Jesus, and Christ, and the Son of God; nowhere separating the one from the other by their properties. For when they said, "We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ," they added: "the Son of God," meaning this same person—lest you should understand this one as being different, and that Unigenite one, who is born of the Father, as someone else—but knowing clearly that the same one is He, that is to say, from the substance of the Father. For even if they say something that we do not understand according to nature, the union nevertheless demonstrates that it is true. Therefore, they also said concerning the Son, God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God, consubstantial with the Father, through whom all things were made. They understood this one to be that one, because since that one was first, this one has come to be. For this reason, they pronounce the name "Jesus" with the significance of the Unigenite, knowing one and the same to be God the Word and also made man.

XIII.

XIV.

^A in a union miraculously effected, not by a confusion of nature. For if the Virgin was not changed, and yet she became a mother: nor did the birth take place by the violation of virginity, since God miraculously brought about the birth for the Virgin; why do you marvel if God, wishing to accept passion in a passible nature, did not lay aside His impassibility? For He who had no need to break the maidenhead in order to make her a mother, being willing to suffer, had no need to change His own power. For He possesses a power that performs wondrous things beyond the laws of nature. On account of this, He remained God and became man, and is called Jesus, and Christ, and Word. And He suffers, yet remains impassible in His nature; and He is crucified, yet remains in His essence untouchable; and He receives death, yet holds dominion over death. The former things He performs as one being God; the latter He endures as one having become man. Thus, He both dies and is not held by death; and He suffers, and yet He dissolves [the power of] sufferings; the former He works through His divinity, the latter He endures in His own flesh. He Himself endures, not seeing another enduring. For these things Peter also, discoursing to the Jews concerning Jesus of Nazareth, said in these very words: “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus the Nazarene”—whom he calls [such] from his earthly homeland, but later signifies as the Son of God. For the end of the discourse shows that He is one and the same, both earthly and heavenly; the same both from these lower regions and proceeding from the glory on high. The one [He shows] as existing before the ages, the other as having come to be later for our sake. For he says: ^B “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man approved of God among you by wonders and prodigies and signs, which God did by Him in the midst of you, as you yourselves also know. Him, delivered up by the definite counsel and foreknowledge of God, you took and by the hands of lawless men crucified and slew; whom God raised up from the dead, having loosed the pangs of death.” Showing one and the same to be both man and God untouchable by death. For he says indeed that He died, and “it was not possible for Him to be held by death.” By the phrase “He died,” declaring Him man; but by “not being able to be held by death,” signifying Him God; declaring Him to be one and the same, existing as God and having become man.

XV. On account of these things, the Fathers at Nicaea, lest we should suppose Jesus to be some adopted Son of God, and another to be the Son by nature—for so those who are deceived think, ^D distinguishing Him who is by nature from Him who was crucified, so that while we accept the former, we might despise the latter; and while we adore that Son of God whom even Plato confesses, we might reject Christ; they designate only the honored nature of the man as Jesus, and they keep that appellation below, and they separate Him from that other [Son] both in reality and in the properties of nature—overturning their opinion, they say of Jesus that He is “begotten of the Father,” and they add: “that is, from His substance.” Which also the great apostle Peter

^A did, having been questioned by the Lord along with the other apostles. For since the Lord says to them: “Whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am?” some answered, saying: “Some say John the Baptist, some Elias, and others Jeremias, or one of the prophets.” Then, since the Lord showed that those who say such things honor the Son of man but fall short of the truth, He asks the apostles if they have any higher opinion of Him, and says: “But whom say ye that I am?” But observe that He says these things, putting the question concerning the Son of man. To which Peter, answering, says: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” He did not call Him a man honored by grace, as many do; but he confessed Him to be the only-begotten Son of God, who, it is understood, became man; and he recognized this very one, nowhere dividing the matters. What, then, does the Lord? Does He rebuke Peter as one who did not distinguish the natures, and did not separate the Son of man from the deity of the Word? Does He chide him as not having separated the natures of deity and humanity? Or does He rather pronounce him blessed, saying: “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven?” For since he spoke concerning the One who is seen, and did not learn it from visible nature, he is pronounced blessed; as one who did not learn the thing said concerning the flesh from flesh and blood, but from the Father who is in heaven. For to recognize the God Word appearing in flesh truly pertained to the knowledge of God and the Father. ^B

XVI. Wherefore also the Fathers at Nicaea called this Jesus, the Son of man, concerning whom the Lord also asked Peter, “Only-begotten,” and “consubstantial with the Father,” saying the same things about Him as the great Peter, and following in the footsteps of Peter’s dogmas. For they confess this Jesus to be the Son of the living God, begotten of the Father—that is, of His substance—consubstantial with the Father. For that those who are led astray might not think Jesus to be an adopted son, the holy Fathers added: “Begotten of the Father, Only-begotten.” Then, explaining the faith more accurately, they say: “God of God”—this Jesus, that is—“Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; by whom all things were made, both things in heaven and things in earth.” ^C They affirm these things concerning the Son of man, which Peter, having confessed briefly, was judged blessed. But since they declared that Christ Jesus Himself is the Son before the ages, see how they again show the Only-begotten before the ages to have become man; by these reciprocal attributions ^D proving the union of the saving dispensation, and showing one and the same to be God, being Only-begotten, and man, having become such for the sake of men. For since they have declared the Lord Jesus Christ to be consubstantial with the Father, the same one, and not another, for us men and for our salvation He descended

^A became incarnate, and became man, suffered, and rose on the third day. For since they said the only-begotten God the Word descended, so that you might not imagine a local transition of God—for the Godhead fills all things, not being separated from its own creation—they interpret that “descended,” saying: that is, “became incarnate,” not merely dwelling in flesh, but saying He became incarnate; by this word indicating the union of God and man more accurately. For this, they say, is what “descended” means: that the One who was without flesh became incarnate for the sake of the life of men, without the nature being changed. For again, let the dogmas be secured, closing every door of insolence to error. God did not become man by having his nature changed—far from it—but by performing the union miraculously; not having become passible in nature, but having suffered by the precise communion with that which is passible. For if the nature of God by itself ^B had received the passion, we would truly be convicting God of being passible; but if we believe that God indeed willed to suffer for the sake of men, yet since the nature does not receive the passion, He was for this reason united to the passible, and by this union accepted the passion: we do not call God passible, but philanthropic; not weakened by the passion, but capable of things beyond nature. For this reason the Fathers, having said He became incarnate, added, “became man,” as I said, positing by these words the supreme union of the Godhead and the manhood. For which reason they safely added concerning God, saying, “He suffered”; not so that we should understand the nature of God to be passible, but that God suffered, because He was united with that which is passible with precision.

XVII. And do not wonder when you hear words that surpass reason. He was superior to nature. For the nature of men originates from seed; but the Savior works miraculously those things which are above ^C our nature. For He did not need seed, and He became man. Do you marvel at this, believing it, and not investigating it with arguments? Therefore, believe also that which you have accepted to believe concerning the Virgin. For if the Virgin was not changed, and yet became a Mother, and if God was not changed and became man; just as you accept those things, marveling and not busily investigating anything, accept also these things, praising the condescension of God, and nowhere stirring up arguments of nature. Both these and those things were miracles of God. By one faith learn both, and do not cast yourself into endless questions; so that, by seeking such things, you may not sink to the bottom of the argument ^D and, being unable to swim forth, you may not perish by shipwreck, having been nourished in the simplicity of faith while in the very depth of the question. For by slandering us, he deceives the simpler ones, as though we were saying that the divine is naturally passible. Because, on account of the ineffable and unconfused union of God with that which is passible, we say that the passions became His own; which we say came to pass by a miracle of God, not by a change of the substance. For if we said that the passible suffered, the thing that has happened would not be a miracle; for that the passible should suffer, according to

the law of nature. But I am telling you of a miracle, so that you may believe by faith alone, just as in other things performed miraculously by God, and no longer fall back upon the logic of nature. For this is called passible and is recognized by all: that which possesses a nature capable of suffering, even if it does not undergo the suffering. For wood is combustible, even if it is never committed to the fire. And the body is called "cuttable," even if it is never exposed to the edge of the iron; for such appellations are obtained by things from their nature, not from their activity. How then do you call God passible, when you do not say that He has a nature capable of suffering? For He worked a miracle on His own behalf, in that He suffered, being miraculously united to what is passible, and did not receive it according to nature.

^B XVIII. For this cause also the most holy Fathers at Nicaea, led by the Holy Spirit to the agreement and concord of faith, say that God the Word Himself, who is consubstantial with the Father, and in His own nature—as we all know—impassible, descended for us men and for our salvation: that is, became incarnate, so that you might know that the Word became flesh. And if you do not yet understand what "became incarnate" means, they say He "became man." Then they proclaim that the same One is passible, insofar as He became man; for this is what it was to be man: to suffer human things. But he who, wandering in the faith, could not grasp this, but reduced the miracle to a disquisition of logic, thought that God was passible because He made the human sufferings His own, while in an impassible nature. But the passible is not passible in any other way than because it possesses a nature capable of suffering; ^C just as even the blessed Virgin is not a "man-bearer" [human-bearer]; for virginity does not yield to the birth, yet Mary remained a virgin and gave birth to God the Word, who became man. Is therefore every virgin a man-bearer, because one Virgin gave birth? By no means. Therefore, neither is God passible, because once, by way of dispensation, He sustained the passion in His own flesh. For that reason, the holy Fathers gathered at Nicaea boldly asserted that God had suffered, and yet did not teach that He was passible; for whatever has been wrought in a miraculous manner by way of dispensation and wisdom, no wise man attributes to the logic of nature.

^D XIX. After, therefore, the holy Fathers have spoken of the Only-Begotten born of the Father, that He was incarnate, made man, and suffered, they add, saying, that He rose again on the third day. For this was the benefit of God’s passion: this is the fruit of the death which God underwent for men; for in order that the Immortal might raise up mortal nature with Himself, He partakes of human things with us. And this the great apostle Paul, wishing to show clearly, said: "He co-resurrected us and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus." He does not say "He resurrected," but "He co-resurrected," so that it is not of a man alone that he signifies the death and the resu[rrection...

but also that you may recognize Him who raised Him up, ^A who endured these things by His own wisdom, and not by any corruption of His nature. Hence we call Him not mortal, but a lover of mankind; for by death He destroyed death, and by sufferings He healed that which is subject to suffering. Let them tell us: "Who emptied Himself even unto death, even the death of the cross," ^B if it were not God, who shared this with men voluntarily, not by the necessity of His nature? "For let this mind be in you," he says, "which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and being found in fashion as a man; He humbled Himself, becoming obedient even unto death, even the death of the cross." What are you saying, O admirable Paul? He who "in the form of God" exists, ^C and is therefore known as "equal to God," did He "empty Himself"? And what is the manner of this emptying? Tell me. "Taking the form of a servant," he says. But if He merely assumed the form of a servant, did He empty Himself? But consider the manner, he says, by which He assumed the form of a servant, and you will know that He first emptied Himself. For if God, not condescending to man, had assumed a man, He would have taken the form of a servant only, and He would not have emptied Himself. But since He Himself, he says, became man—"for being found as a man," says Paul, "He humbled Himself, becoming obedient even unto death, even the death of the cross"—rightly did he say that "He emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant."

XX. For how, existing in the form of God, and not thinking it robbery to be equal with God, did He empty Himself? Let those who deny the grace of the dispensation in Christ tell us. But they cannot say how God emptied Himself, claiming that Christ is a man honored indeed, but unwilling to confess that the Word became flesh. For this reason, also, he who has dared to preach this error publicly pilfers from the apostolic doctrine this very phrase ("emptied Himself"), fearing this statement as one capable of showing God's communion with human affairs, which he himself has entirely denied; ^D calling Christ not God made man, but a man deified by grace. For in replying to the admonition of the great Cyril with a contrary document, and mentioning in the letter to that great man this saying of the Apostle, he explains it with such art that he can lead those who are ignorant of the perversion of the speech into error. But that it may be clear what I am saying, I will set forth the words of the deceived one from that letter, where he speaks thus word for word: "The Apostle, intending," he says, "to introduce the things that pertain to passion, placing first the name of Christ, common to both natures, as I said a little before, he brings forward a statement appropriate to both natures." For what does he say? "For let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery..."

to be equal with God." ^A And having kept silent about what follows, as being contrary to him, he brings it in, saying: "But, so that I may not relate each thing, 'becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.'" And yet there were not many words of the Apostle intervening; for this alone is held in the middle: "He emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." But he runs past that as if it were a long passage; for the man is clever at obscuring the truth by the stealthy removal of words. For just as above, by removing "and in one Lord" from the profession of the holy Fathers, he granted himself the license to say that the name of Christ is common to several natures, so here he removes "he emptied himself" from the speech, as though sufficient to teach that God descended into the communion of human affairs.

XXI. But that impostor could not by any means evade being convicted, even if he did steal away the most important parts of the discourse. For since he was ashamed while furtively removing many things from the context, fearing to be caught in the theft, though unwillingly, yet by citing the following words of the Apostle concerning the Only-Begotten, he is manifestly convicted of rejecting the most important part of the economy, namely, the communion of the Word of God with human things. ^B For by saying about Him what Paul says: "Becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross," he is clearly convicted of corrupting the faith and wrongly attributing the passions to man alone. For if He who was "in the form of God" and "existing equal to God" "became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross," it is evident that He Himself was the one who suffered, not in the nature of His divinity, but in His own flesh, which He had most intimately united to Himself. But that deceived man, while he attempts to tear down all the boundaries of nature, by furtively removing some things and sophistically perverting others with false reasonings, opens a door of defense to the Jews, wishing to show their guilt concerning the cross to be light, inasmuch as they crucified only a man and dared nothing against God. ^C But the holy Fathers gathered at Nicaea say that He Himself, the Only-Begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father, and not made—that is, from the substance of the Father—consubstantial to the Father, was both incarnate and made man, and suffered; keeping silent meanwhile, for the sake of brevity, about the manner in which He who is impassible suffered. For they do not introduce a passible nature of divinity, but they teach the most intimate union of the Word of God with the passible nature; which they also claim to be the cause of God’s passion. And in order to teach the fruit of His death, they show that Jesus Christ, consubstantial with the Father, was for us and for our salvation incarnate, suffered, and rose on the third day, ascended into heaven, and is coming to judge the living and the dead. ^D For in order that we might have a judge who is a kinsman, the immutable God becomes man, so that we might be confident through the kinship of the judge, we who have no boldness from our own merits. For since He is terrible as God, He becomes desirable to us as man, so that we might at the same time both fear the same One and desire Him: the power indeed producing the fear,

as fear, while kinship excites desire. He comes, therefore, to judge the living and the dead, he who shares in human concerns with me, so that he may be a just judge, judging those to whom he himself once shared in their affections, and that he may be a merciful judge, according to the great Apostle, ^A “learning obedience from what he suffered.” For although the Only-begotten knows all things, being God, yet he took on experience of those things of which the nature of the Godhead was neither capable nor became capable. For having united to himself the nature taken from Mary, in her he receives experience of things of which the nature of the Godhead was devoid.

XXII.

XXIII.

^A are to be sounded out by human reasonings, they will leave no room for miracles; indeed, they will not even allow for any sign or portent to be performed by God, as these observers of nature force all portents and wonders into the mold of their own laws. For to investigate the reasons for all things is to dissolve miracles, and move God to anger when He delights in His miracles toward us. For this reason, God also condemned Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, to silence, because he questioned too curiously the mode of a grace miraculously performed, not giving faith to it as a miracle, but seeking after the reasons for God’s miraculous operation. And when Gabriel said, "Elisabeth your wife (for she was barren) shall bear you a son," ^B he sought the reason for the things that had been spoken, saying, "And how shall I know this will be?" But because he sought a demonstration of the miracle, he is condemned to silence: he receives silence as the demonstration of the things he sought; and the tongue of the priest, which had served his unbelief, is punished, so that the silence of Zacharias might teach us all to receive the wonders of God with silence, and might persuade all to believe in God who works miracles, and not to demand a reason for things that are renewed in a way beyond all reason.

XXIV. These things, then, concerning the Only-Begotten, the holy Fathers who were gathered at Nicaea ^C recognized and taught the Churches to believe. But concerning the Holy Spirit, since there was no question at that time, they were content to indicate the divine majesty in a few words, saying that we should believe in the Holy Spirit together with the Father and the Son. For those who say that we believe in the Holy Spirit just as we believe in the Father and the Son, signify the equal dignity of those in whom we believe; for a faith equal in honor and dignity shows the divinity of those in whom we believe to be equal in honor. For let no one think they teach us to believe at once in a servant and a Lord, or in a Creator and a creature, or in a greater and a lesser God; for to those between whom there is no communion of the same nature, ^D the same and one faith is not appropriately attributed by men. But let this be said now in passing concerning the Holy Spirit, concerning whose divine majesty we have disputed more fully in three other books; if you read these, you will learn from the sacred Scriptures that the Holy Spirit is glorified with equal honor with the Father and the Son. We, however, at this time, offer these gifts of our discourse to you, most beloved of friends; although we are not able to speak in accordance with the dignity of the matter proposed, yet we have sufficiently refuted those who now err concerning the faith—not indeed from our own store and our own selves, but partly from sacred Scripture and partly from the faith set forth by the holy Fathers gathered at Nicaea.

THEODOTUS, BISHOP OF ANCYRA, HOMILIES

HOMILY I. Delivered on the day of the nativity of our Savior Jesus Christ; which was also read at the same synod.

^A being substantial and subsistent, in choosing birth he destroyed not virginity. Therefore, what has happened is beyond the logic of nature. And no longer descend to the reasons of nature. It is a miracle I tell you; do not stir up your syllogisms. I tell you that God was born, choosing birth, not having commenced his divinity. Being God, he claimed the birth as his own; the birth did not make him God. Willing to become what he was not, he remained what he was. He chooses the birth as the beginning of the dispensation. He became man, not having undergone a change of nature, nor having moved the boundaries of the divine substance. "For you are the same, and your years will not fail," the divine Scripture says. And, "You who sit forever," by this it reveals the immutability of the divine substance. And again God says, "I am the same, and I do not change." ^B Therefore, the substance of God not having been moved, he became man, nor having been changed into another nature. For that which has happened would not be a miracle if, by a change of nature, he had taken on another nature; for many such changes of things occur among us. But in this God works a miracle, that, remaining what he was, he became what he was not. Which the great Apostle, signifying this, said, "Who being in the form of God"—he says "being," not "having once been," so that he might show the permanence of his nature—"Who being in the form of God, did not account it robbery to be equal to God." He says "to be equal to God," not "to have come to be" at some time. Then again he cries out, saying, "But he emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." Do you see how he both remains what he was, and emptied himself into the form of a servant? And being the former, and having become the latter, working a miracle, not changing his nature; willing it, not forced by a change of substance. For what God says, he does, even if that which is said is beyond the logic of nature. For he has the power also able to work a miracle, and not waiting upon the reasons of nature. For this reason he both is God, and is emptied into the form of a servant; and is equal to God, and becomes man; and is before the ages, and undergoes birth; and he works these miracles, which the logic of nature does not know.

^C III. Hence the mystery of Christ is reckoned as folly to the Gentiles, and the Jews call the doctrine of the dispensation a scandal, which Paul also indicated, saying, "We preach Christ crucified, to the Jews indeed a scandal, but to the Gentiles folly." Why folly to the Gentiles? "Because the natural man does not perceive the things of the Spirit; for it is folly to him." For he who is natural, clinging to nature, and examining all things by the syllogisms of the soul, reckons the miracles of God as folly, because they do not have within them the logic of nature. For the Gentile, hearing that the Savior entered while the door was shut, passing through this gross body which requires place, laughs, not believing in the miracle, but seeking the logic of the event. And hearing that... ^D

when a virgin has given birth, she remains a virgin, he considers the report foolishness, having not learned to believe in the wonder-working of God. Therefore, even when hearing that God became man immutably, he thinks the event impossible, requiring mutations of nature here as well. But Paul did not teach thus, saying that He who is equal to God became man; for he says that He emptied Himself, without losing the plenitude of His divinity. Hence also he said: "We preach Christ crucified, to the Jews indeed a stumbling block, but to the Gentiles foolishness." And why to the Gentiles foolishness? If a mere man is crucified, no one considers what happens according to nature to be foolish; if He suffers what He was naturally able to suffer, how is the narrative considered foolish? But since he says, "We preach Christ crucified," while again 11 we call Him the power of God and the wisdom of God—"for to those who are called," he says, "both Jews and Greeks, we preach Christ as the power of God and the wisdom of God"—in preaching Him who was crucified as the wisdom of God, we are thought to speak foolishness to the Greeks, who do not know how to believe in God who works wonders, but rather stir up reasonings regarding the nature of all things and presume that an injury is offered to God if we say He made the passions His own, in order to save what is subject to passion. For they do not see the end achieved, which is salvific and becoming to the goodness of God; but only that God yoked passions to Himself, they say, not observing the accomplishment of human salvation resulting from this. But nothing of those things which are salvific to man does injury to God; by these He is shown not as passible, but as loving to man.

^B IV. But, he says, I do not dare to attribute the passions of a man to God. If so, then you do not say that He saves man by His passions, nor that He hung the power of the devil upon the cross, nor that He nailed our sin to the wood, nor that He healed human passions by His own passions, nor do you say that He destroyed death by death. For if God did not make the passions His own, whence come such great achievements from the passions of Christ? How did powers come to be? How would death have been destroyed by death, unless God had made it His own? But these passions, having been made God's own, received the power of accomplishing such great things from His divinity, as things become God's own; yet they did not harm the substance of the divinity, which remains forever in its own ^C impassibility. For how was the handwriting of sin that was against us nailed to the wood, if a mere man endured the cross? Or how did the cross crucify sin, or death dissolve the tyranny of death, unless these were God's, and received power from Him who claimed our things as His own, not having endured passion by nature? And this the great Apostle signifies, saying that none of the rulers of this age has known the mystery of the Lord's passion. "For if they had known it," he says, "they would never have crucified the Lord of glory." ^D

^A V. Therefore we say that he both remained what he was and became what he was not. For while remaining in his substance what he was, he accepted passions, having united himself to a passible nature. He became subject, not laying aside his sovereignty; he became man, while remaining God and the Word. Being incorporeal by nature, he became flesh without mutation. How and in what manner? Not as you are able to think, but as he is capable of working miracles. For when I speak to you of a miracle, abandon your reasonings. For signs and wonders are confirmed by faith in God, and are not investigated by arguments. Nor is any other miracle of a kind that falls within our reason; and yet each has taken place, even if our intellect does not attain to the matter. The Magi also confessed these things, believing the star and not scrutinizing his nature. ^B Barbarians receive miracles by faith; and you, being a believer, why are you incredulous, falling back onto human reasoning? Those who came from Chaldea, as the evangelist has said, today showed the mystery by the very gifts themselves, if one were to consider the intent of those barbarians rightly. For they bring a threefold kind of gift: gold, frankincense, and myrrh. Gold, because he who is honored is a King; frankincense, because he who was born was God—for this they were accustomed to offer to those they thought to be gods; and they offer myrrh, by this, I think, announcing the passion of death. Do you see how even the Magi recognized that he both remained God and became man, accepting death? For he became what I am, that he might raise our nature to its own dignity. ^C For the union does this, joining the things of one to the other. Therefore, when he was God, he became man, that man also might become god, being raised by this conjunction to divine glory, so that the one and the same might be both glorified divinely and suffer human things. And these things they confessed with us, acknowledging both deity and humanity. For that which is united is no longer called two, but one. But if you separate them again by thought, and contemplate each one by itself, you are surely destroying the union. For it is impossible at once to preserve the union and to consider each one by itself. But that which was united has become one indissolubly, and they do not become two.

^D VI. But, he says, "I separate it only in thought." Then by that same thought you have also dissolved the union; for by that which you use to dissociate one from the other, by that same means you have severed the conjunction. Why then do you dissolve the saving dispensation, understanding two and rejecting the union? But as the great Apostle says: "Jesus Christ, yesterday and today, the same also into the ages," speaking of one and the same, both eternal and God, and a man having a beginning in time; of which the one was before, and the other was made later. But how, he asks, has the Only-Begotten become a servant, remaining what he was, and becoming what he was not? If you wish to learn this, learn that he became that...

which is known only to the Maker of miracles. For you cannot tell me how the river of the Egyptians became blood, while the nature of the water remained unchangeable. For while the Hebrews used it as water, the Nile became blood for the Egyptians, and it became that ^A which it was not, remaining what it was. Tell me the manner of it; but you cannot tell me, for it is a miracle of God, eluding our reasoning.

And how did the light in Egypt become darkness, not by being extinguished, but by remaining what it was? For it was day for the Israelites, and light shone brightly upon them, but for the Egyptians this same light became darkness; and though what was seen was one thing, it was simultaneously as both light and darkness, without having been changed from the one into the other. For it did not become darkness because the light suffered anything, but because God was working a miracle, not waiting upon the logic of nature. How then did the water of the Nile, while remaining water, become blood? Or how did the light, remaining in its own nature, become darkness? For this was not corrupted, nor that made into something else. The nature of the water was not corrupted—as the Hebrews demonstrated, who had it potable—but the nature itself remained within its own boundaries, and it became blood, which it was not, God showing the miracle beyond reason.

VII. The Babylonian flame

But since God was to save the world, do you doubt that he, remaining God, became man? He did not need to transform the flame in order to create dew; did he himself need to transform his own nature, wishing to become man for the salvation of men? The fire remained fire and became dew; and you say: "How does God remain God, and become man?" It is because God, wishing to save our nature, prepared our salvation not through others, but through himself; because every creature was weak toward our salvation, being possessed by ^D both wickedness and error; for the long habit of wickedness instead of...

^A nature held sway among men, and repelled nature. The prophet had prophesied, but the word was weak, being overcome by wickedness. Angels were made ministers of our salvation; and the great Paul bears witness to this, saying of the angels: "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?" (Heb. 1, 14). An angel, better in nature, was ministering toward our salvation; but man was not liberated while he was prone to vices with a willful heart. All things, therefore, were weak for overcoming the negligence of men. For the wickedness of the depraved surpassed the endeavors of the good—not because God is overcome, but because he commits virtue to the judgment of free will. For he does not compel you by necessity to right deeds, nor does he drag the will toward virtue, so that you, having acquired virtue voluntarily, might make it your own ^B achievement.

VIII. What then? Since both prophets had been overcome, and teachers were not succeeding, and the law was weak, and the efforts of the angels were in vain, the will of men not following what is good, the Creator of nature himself arrived, wishing to raise up a defeated nature. And he arrives not with a sound, clamoring as God, nor striking the ears with thunder, nor clothed in a cloud, and showing terrible fire within the cloud, nor frightening the hearers with the blast of a trumpet, as he once appeared to the Jews to strike fear; nor does he drive away the servant, but rather calls him ^C with grace and goodness. Therefore he does not come with imperial pomp, nor does he bring with him a retinue of archangels; he does not move the armies of the angels; for he did not wish to terrify the fugitive of his laws, but the Lord of all comes in the form of a servant, surrounded by poverty, so that he might not scare away the prey. He is born in an ignoble town, choosing an obscure village for his birth; he is born of a poor virgin, and takes on all things lowly, so that he might quietly hunt man for salvation. For if he had been born amid splendor and had arrived surrounded by great riches, the ^D infidels would surely have said that the bounty of riches had wrought the transformation of the world. If he had chosen great Rome, they would again have attributed the transformation of the world to the power of the citizens. If he had been the son of an emperor, they would have attributed the benefit to that power. If he had been the son of a lawgiver, they would have attributed the benefit to his precepts. But what does he do? Everything is lowly and common, everything modest and to most people obscure, so that the divinity alone might be recognized as having transformed the world. For this reason, he chooses a poor mother, a poorer homeland; he becomes destitute of money, and the manger indicates that poverty to you. For since there was no bed in which the Lord could be reclined, he is placed in a manger; and the need of necessary use becomes a brilliant sign of prophecy. For he was placed in the manger so that

he might signify that he would be food even for the irrational creatures. For the Word of God was drawing to himself both the rich and the poor, the eloquent and the slow of speech, living in poverty and lying in a manger. ^B Do you see how the destitution of necessary things brought about prophecy, and how poverty displayed Him who for our sake became poor as accessible to all? For no one was afraid, paralyzed by the overwhelming riches of Christ; the height of sovereign majesty did not prevent anyone from approaching Him; but He appeared common and poor, offering Himself to all for salvation. For the Word of God is laid down in a manger, and through the medium of the body, so that the rational and the irrational might both have the freedom to partake of the life-giving food. And perhaps this is what the prophet formerly cried out, expounding the mystery of this manger, saying: "The ox knows its owner, and the ass the manger of its lord; but Israel did not know me, and the people did not understand." For even if the text has a simpler meaning, showing the Hebrew to be more ungrateful than the very brute beasts, yet it may also signify this, pointing out the manger of the Lord, in which, being placed, He became food for those lacking reason. For the prophet does not indicate a manger indefinitely, but this very one; "the manger of its lord," he says: with that addition of the article, I think, he signifies the manger definitely. But let him who wishes philosophize about these things, and take delight in the varied contemplation of Divine Scripture.

^C IX. But we have demonstrated that He who was rich in the Word of His godhead became poor for our sake, making salvation easily attainable for all. This also the great Paul signifies, saying: "For our sake He became poor, being rich, that we through His poverty might become rich." And who was this one who was rich? And in what was He rich? And how did He become poor for our sake? Let them tell us, those who divide the human from the Word of God, and separate what has been united by a remembrance of the natures, saying that there are two Christs, and bringing forward that ^D alone in thought for their own defense. Tell me, who was rich, and became poor with my poverty? Was it the visible man whom you separate from the godhead? But he never became rich; he was poor, born of poor parents. Who then is the one who was rich, and in what things was he rich, who became poor for our sake? God, he says, was rich in His own creation. Therefore, God also became poor, making the poverty of that visible nature His own. For the same One was both rich in godhead, and for our sake became poor. For you could not say that the man was rich, being poor both by nature and by wealth; nor could you say that the one who was rich in the dignity of godhead became poor, if you do not attribute to Him the things that are human. For this reason, the Apostle also, attributing the glory of the godhead to human passions, not dividing by mere thought, nor wishing to separate by word what has been united, said that the same One was rich

in ^A godhead, and poor in sufferings; and that the one estate is of Himself, but the other He suffered for our sake. If He who is rich in divinity becomes poor with human poverty, how has He not also suffered other things, since He once chose to become man out of love for mankind? But let these things suffice for now.

^B X. But do you look for me at the very poor dwelling-place of Him who is rich in heaven; behold the manger of Him who sits upon the cherubim; behold the swaddling clothes of Him who bound the sea with sand; behold the poverty on earth, pondering in your mind His riches in the heavens above. For thus you will see the magnitude of His grace and kindness, if you consider such a condescension of God the Word. For even in this poverty, the riches of His divinity are revealed, since a star was pointing out the poor One to the Magi, and leading the barbarians to the manger of the poor One. Moreover, the angels, rejoicing, proclaimed this poor One to the shepherds, singing of the riches of His divinity. And indeed, the Magi offered frankincense to Him who seemed poor, as to God; not separating nature from nature, nor dividing by thought what is once united; but having once acknowledged in the miracle that He who appeared was God, they offered frankincense, by that gift indicating His divine dignity. But neither did the angels, with that subtle intelligence of yours, separate what was born from God the Word; but knowing Him to be the same, who was both seen and understood, they cried out, saying: "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men"; and they did not say one thing, as you do, while thinking another; and while in words they confessed one Christ Jesus, in thought they did not divide the same, as you do, having meanings that conflict with your words; but they glorify one and the same God. Therefore, both in poverty and in a manger He appeared to all. For this reason He is wrapped in swaddling clothes, and glorified by angels; and laid in a manger, and announced by a star; not that the star descended ^C to the Magi—for stars do not change their places—but because the land of the Chaldeans has many who look to the motions of the stars, a certain power that was more excellent, ^D leading the Magi, assumed the form of a star, in order that they might learn from those very things which the Chaldeans had learned, what they did not know; and while they were applying the study of astronomy, they might be taught the mysteries of Christ by the very stars. For the fact that it was not a star, but an angelic power leading the barbarians toward piety, the evangelist himself signifies, when he says that this star sometimes appeared by day, and at other times was hidden; and at other times, he says, it led the Magi, and went with them to Bethlehem; occurrences which no one would say any of the accustomed stars known to the senses could bring about, but rather a power appearing in the form of a star to the astronomers. And the fact that it says, "And it stood over the child," concerning the star, will clearly indicate that what appeared was a power. For no one of those stationed in the heavens would stand over the child; for it would not be any of those in the heaven...

of which the greatness of the distance, escaping the judgment of our sight, makes neither the station nor the motion of the stars manifest to our senses. "The star," it says, "stood over where the child was." Therefore, the appearing star, leaving its height, became humbler, so that by standing still it might point out the birth of the King. For the Magi were indeed seeking a king, asking about the birthplace of the king, and saying to the Jews: "Where is the newborn king of the Jews? For we saw his star in the East, and we have come to worship him." Do you seek a king, O Mage? And why do you offer frankincense as if to God? But I know a king, and I have recognized God. For this reason, I offer him both gold and frankincense, indicating by these gifts both God and king together.

^C XI. But this same One, who then drew the Magi by an ineffable power toward piety, has also now convened this joyful festival today, no longer being placed in a manger, but proposed upon this saving table; for that manger became the mother of this table. For this reason, He is placed in that one, that He might be eaten upon this one, and become a saving food for the faithful. But while that manger pointed toward this bright table, the Virgin brought forth these choirs of virgins; the vileness of the Bethlehemitic lodging built these famous temples, and the swaddling clothes in which He was then wrapped have become the release from present sins. Do you see the mighty works now appearing from that poverty of old? Do you see poverty having become the mother of such great wealth? Does that short-lived abjection of the Only-Begotten on earth, which brought such great wealth to the world, injure Him? Why then do you reproach Christ for the Bethlehemitic humbleness? Why do you bring poverty into the midst, without counting the gains for the world born from it? Why do you call a passion unworthy of God, which proved to be the cause of such great blessings? Why do you take away the wounds of the Only-Begotten, which poured forth such great salvation to men? Why do you cling to the passions, and not see how great the blessings are that now have proceeded from those passions? Why do you call poverty unworthy of God, through which the world has been enriched with piety? Why do you call death unworthy of God, by which God annihilated death? For what reason do you not call the cross God's, by which God triumphed over the malice of the demon? Why do you not call that alone God's, which nailed our sin to the wood? Do not disparage the passions, from which impassibility is born. Do not slander the abjection, by which the tyranny of the devil is destroyed. Do not reproach the blow to the cheek for God, by which He freed man from sins. Do not call the bonds of God unworthy, by which He resolved the bonds of sin. Do not say poverty is unworthy of God, because the devil, who was rich in error, was made poor. Do not condemn the cross, which destroyed the altars, nor despise the nails, by which Christ fixed the world into one mind of piety. Do not consider what is base, but what from

the one who suffered these things resulted—accomplishments which you would not say belonged to a mere suffering human, if you have any sense and are persuaded by what is manifest. And why do you speak of things as base, which God embraced for the salvation of men? For even if they are called, and are, passions by nature, yet they have become a remedy for our own passions. Therefore, do not call this a passion anymore, but rather the cure for our passions. And do not bring to me the members of the Virgin as a reproach to the Divinity. For their nature is not unworthy, even if the passions of dishonor that supervened have corrupted the nobility of the body. For the members are not base by nature, but are insulted through illicit desires. For if they were base by nature, God would not have fashioned them with His own hands; since God is ^B not a creator of base things, but of the most beautiful. For He saw, it says, “everything that God had made, and behold, it was very good.” For nothing of those things brought into being by God is evil by its own nature, nor did God fashion anything base; but we, having fallen from that original constitution, have insulted our nature with illicit desires. If, therefore, God is not blamed for having fashioned the members of a woman, neither is He insulted by dwelling within them; for God does not dwell unworthily in His own creature.

XII. Furthermore, if you say: How, leaving heaven, did He dwell in a womb? I also will say to you: Because, being God, He became man for the sake of men, remaining God, and without His substance being changed. I confess, therefore, the same Being to be God and man: God indeed before the ages, but having become a man, and having begun from birth; not two, but one; and let us not speak as one, while we understand a duality; for the intellect ought not to be contrary to the word. We do not contemplate two, but we confess one; for what is joined by dispensation and miracle, neither word nor intellect separates. But if any thought separates what is joined, it has understood it as dissolved, and the intellect becomes false, separating that which is always joined. It is necessary, therefore, that the intellect correspond to the word, to call Christ one, the same Being to be both God and man. Therefore, understand Him as one. If, however, you say "one," but you mentally contemplate "two," you have an intellect that fights against your word. Do not, therefore, speak of two, separated by some difference. For if you unite them in word, do not divide them in thought. But if you divide them in your thoughts, you have denied the union. Do not, therefore, bring your argument down to divided natures, when God has performed a supreme miracle of union; believe in the miracle, and do not examine by rational proofs what has come to pass. Do not destroy the miracle by contending to find the logic of it (for it is no longer a miracle, the logic of which is scrutinized). If the logic of a finished thing is known, it is no longer ^D a sign or a miracle. But if it is a sign and a miracle, leave behind logical proofs, and take up faith, confessing one Lord Jesus Christ, and the same Being to be both God and man, not separated by mental conceptions or by rational proofs; so that by separating with our minds things that have been united, we may not deny the saving dispensation. For if the union of God and

man is known through the dispensation, he who divides this union has denied the dispensation. Let us therefore believe in the dispensation, let us believe in the miracles, so that Christ in whom we believe may grant this grace to those who confess it, even the kingdom of heaven: which may we all deserve to attain (by the grace of Christ: to whom be glory and power for ever and ever. Amen). ^A

HOMILY II

A very beautiful homily, read in the synod in the presence of Bishop Cyril, on the birth of the Savior.

^B I. The subject of the present feast is illustrious, bringing common salvation to men; and illustrious also is the present assembly, receiving the grace with gratitude. Grace is given abundantly to those who receive it with thanksgiving. For the measure of the gift is provided in such proportion as is the magnitude of the gratitude of those who receive the grace. For when, having received a gift, you give thanks to the giver, you have not only repaid for what you received, but you have also bound the giver to bestow further favors upon you. Therefore, receive this grace with thanksgiving, showing this solemnity to be bright for us.

The subject of the feast is the manifestation of God to men; the visitation of Him who is always present; the oversight of Him who fills all things; the inspection of Him who sees all things. "He came unto his own, and his own received him not." ^C But rather, "He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not." Yet this ignorance does not carry the accusation of men. For God, by reason of the divinity of His nature, cannot be apprehended by human cogitation. For the intellect of mortals is not capable of beholding Him. The divine nature escapes the mind of men; it is higher than our reasonings. We are therefore losers regarding the knowledge of God due to [the limitations of] a superior nature; and in order that this might not happen, the Invisible (One) assumes a visible nature; He who is not held by touch receives a palpable body; the invisible God becomes visible; the Word of God is handled; the only-begotten Son of God, a nature exceeding the grasp of men, becomes related to the servants, that the nature which surpasses man may not escape the knowledge of men. ^D

II. And do not think that the Son was made alien to God. For the coming of God was long since prefigured; and He was always known, having been revealed by human forms, using elements which could be seen by us. Otherwise, let the Jew come into the midst; let him draw near who does not believe in the manifestation of God, having appeared to men in the nature of man: let him tell me, how Moses...

saw God. Did he see the invisible nature? By no means; for that is unattainable by human reasonings. How then did he see? Speak. He saw fire lit from the bush, and yet not consuming the bush ^A. Why then do you disbelieve the one born of the Virgin, and who did not corrupt her virginity? Or are you, when hearing that God speaks from the bush, and says to Moses: “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob,” and that Moses falls down and worships—you believe, not regarding the fire that was seen, but the God who was speaking; yet whenever I mention the virginal womb, do you shudder and turn away? For what is more lowly, tell me, the bush, or the virginal womb, pure from the passions of sin? Do you not know that the ancient things are a study for the later things, and for the things that have now come to pass? For mysteries are prefigured by those of old. Therefore the bush is ignited, fire appears, and it does not perform what the nature of fire does; it neither punishes ^B. Do you not see the Virgin in the bush? Do you not behold in the fire the philanthropy of the One who came to us? The Judge is among those standing trial, and yet no judgment occurs. The Judge is among those condemned, and nowhere is punishment seen. The Judge arrived not as judging, but as teaching; not condemning, but healing. Do you see how that gentle fire signified the philanthropy shown here? Do not marvel, if, being God, He is born through a virginal womb; for God does not consider it an insult, Who is the source of human salvation ^C. But do not you, for my sake, assume the nature of God to be so lowly, that it could ever be subject to insults. For nothing of those lowly things which He chose for our sake insults that nature; rather, He makes them His own, in order to save our nature. Since, then, those lowly things do not insult the nature of the blessed God, but effect salvation for men, how can you dare to say that the causes of our salvation have become the causes of insult to God?

III. Homily III

but if He preserved the integrity of His mother intact, He is recognized by those who reason rightly as God who is born. For God visited the world, not by migrating from place to place, but by clothing Himself in my nature; and, as I said, wishing to be seen, whereas by His nature He is invisible. Thus, the Word did not have a beginning of being God from the birth, but a beginning of appearing to men. For since He was God, He chose to become man because of His benevolence ^A toward us, so that we might embrace the Creator as a kinsman; and so that we might gain confidence, we who do not have boldness based on our own virtues. For when those who cannot rely on the defense of their own virtues are brought before the tribunal, they take confidence as if from the merits of their kinsman. What then? God visits as man, not by moving from place to place, but by showing the invisible nature as visible; and having been seen as man, He appeared to men as a kinsman, just as the evangelist also proclaims, saying: “The Word was made flesh.” [Baruch III, 38; John I, 14.]

IV.

for the miracle-worker ^A who makes his will precede nature, not he himself serving the law of nature, but drawing nature itself to the nod of his own will—do not look anymore to the weakness of human nature, and do not say: How was human nature able to contain God? How has God become man? How has God the Word become visible flesh? But believe that it has happened; and leave the mode and reason to the Creator.

V. But if you wish me to clarify the matter proposed by some example, I will indeed show you by what reason the incorporeal becomes corporeal, and the invisible becomes visible, and the impalpable becomes tangible, without its proper nature being changed, but having assumed a visible and tangible form. This proferrable word, I say, used by men when we have conversations with one another and explain our thoughts to each other, is a word that can neither be discerned by the eyes nor apprehended by the hand, but is perceived only by hearing. But when—for the sake of the example of the self-subsistent Word of God—I take this proferrable word of ours, let no one think that I call the Word of God proferrable; far be it! For when divine Scripture names the Only-Begotten the Son of God the Word, it insinuates his impassible birth; since the human mind also impassibly generates its word. For this reason, the holy Scripture sometimes calls him the Son of the Father, and sometimes names him the Word, and at other times calls him the radiance ^B of the Father: and it calls him by each of these names to this end, so that you may understand what is said concerning Christ without blasphemy. For it designates him by different names at different times, wishing to provide a doctrine befitting the glory of God.

VI. By way of example. Wishing to establish the consubstantiality of his nature, it calls the Only-Begotten born of the Father, the Son of the Father. For because your son is born of the same nature as you, the Scripture, wishing to show that the substance of the Father and the Son is one and the same, calls the Only-Begotten born of the Father, the Son of the Father. Furthermore, since generation and "son" among us denote the passion which accompanies generation, for this reason it also names this Son of God the "Word," expressing by this name the impassibility of his birth. But since anyone who has become a father, as a man, unquestionably precedes his son in age (for the very word "father" carries with it that a father is understood to have existed before the son), lest you suspect that this same thing has happened to the divine nature, but rather might confess that the Only-Begotten ^C coexists always with the Father, it calls the Only-Begotten the radiance ^D of the Father. For the radiance is indeed produced from the sun, but it is not understood to be later than the sun; but from the time the sun is, from that time we think of the radiance as having proceeded from the sun. Therefore, that he may signify to you the coexistence of the Son with the Father always, he calls him the radiance; the radiance

^A should signify the birth, and the Word should show the impassibility of the generation; the Son should insinuate the consubstantiality.

VII. But let us return to our set task, and let us demonstrate the manifestation of the Word born this day, and show by example how that which by its nature cannot be seen becomes visible; and what is not palpable because of its incorporeal nature, becomes palpable. For this word which we utter, which we use in mutual conversations, is an incorporeal word, born neither to be perceived by sight nor by touch. But when this word puts on letters and elements, it immediately becomes visible, and is grasped as much by sight as it is apprehended by touch. For suppose someone is speaking with another; is the proceeding word seen? Do we handle the uttered word with our hand? But if you have written what was said on a chart, you see afterward what you did not see before; and the form of discourse which you could not handle before, you now handle through the chart and the characters. Why is this so? Because the word, previously incorporeal, has put on the body of the chart and the figures of the elements. Since therefore the example already brought forward is clear, and you have been admonished by a sufficiently customary example, come, let us show how the Only-begotten Son of God, God the Word ^B, existing naturally before all ages of an incorporeal nature just as the Father, later having assumed human nature for himself, was born through the Virgin, not so that he might be God, but that he might appear as man, taking a beginning. For do not say to me: Since the Only-begotten was born from the Father, how is he born again from the Virgin? He was born from the Father according to the nature of divinity; he is born from the Virgin on account of the dispensation: hence he is God, hence he is born as man. For even your own word is a certain offspring of your mind. But after you wish to express in elements and letters this word which your mind has conceived and form it on a chart, you describe the letters with your hand, and you bring forth your word, as it were, anew through the hand: not that it then takes its beginning of being when it is written by the hand; or that it then at last begins to exist when the hand shapes the letters (for it had already been born from the mind beforehand), but that the word ^C then receives a beginning, so that it might be seen, through the hand (shaping the letters).

VIII. Since therefore this example exists as evident and renders a most well-known image, come, let us adapt this likeness to the prototype itself. Here, therefore, you see the mind; there, consider the Father; here, you recognize the word produced from the mind; there, contemplate the Word substantial and subsistent born from the Father; here, you behold the hand bringing forth the word through letters; there, understand the Virgin generating the Word through her body, not because she gave a beginning to the divinity by her birth-giving; far from it! But because she rendered God, having been made human, visible to human sights. For since he became that which I am, he was necessarily born ^D

and therefore chose for himself a birth; and for this reason he took the Word of God as his own, and greeted the Virgin as mother, and came through a womb adorned by virginity. For God abhors nothing of those things which he fashioned, since nothing of his works has become unworthy of him. All things are good, and very good, if we see them as the Creator saw them when they were brought into being. For God saw all the things that he had made, and behold, they were very good^A. Look upon all things with an eye free from disturbances, and if you see them as God sees them, you will find all things to be very beautiful. Cast off passion, and you will recognize the nobility of what was created. What wonder, then, if God wished to dwell in his own handiwork and house?

IX. But you say that it is fitting for him to dwell in the heavens, but you think man is unworthy of his dwelling, judging the nature of the matter not by the truth of reasoning, but by passion and anticipatory opinion. Tell me, I pray, what is more sublime, heaven or man? Do not now point out to me the splendor of the elements; do not prefer the natures of things on account of the elegance of their color; do not be stunned by the flashing rays of the sun; do not let it move you that I, according to divine Job, am clothed with skin and flesh; but consider the excellence of the rational soul, observe the constitution of man, and you will admire this creature. He has a mind able to master and rule over all other animals; he has received hands to serve the intellect’s wisdom, as instruments working every kind of craft. This animal alone among all others was created free from compulsion; God created man alone as master of his own will. Do you not see the sun revolving in its courses by a certain natural necessity? Do you not notice its constant and ever-uniform turning? And why is this? Because it does not have the power of its own will; but you walk about free, you do what you please; you suffer no necessity compelling you by force; you are established with a free mind. The sun is a slave to necessity, but man has been endowed with a free will. Who then, tell me, is better, the slave or the free man? The one subject to the yoke of necessity, or the one exempt from all necessity? There is nothing wonderful, nothing incredible or new, if God dwelt in man, whom he embraced kindly, having fashioned him in his own image^B.

X. For God declared his purpose toward man immediately at the very beginning of creation; taking dust from the earth, he fashioned him, and made him an image of his own divinity^D. But why, since he was going to decorate him with such great adornment, did he fashion him from so base a substance? Why did he not create man himself by taking matter from the splendor of the sun, but instead fashioned him from the dust of the earth, an element in any case the lowest of all and trodden underfoot by everyone? Do you wish to know the reason? Because he was about to honor man with his own image, he gave him a base nature, so that

excess of honor might not lift man up into pride; so that when He honors him beyond nature, he may be constrained by the memory of his nature, and recognize that the magnitude of the honor is not of his own merit, but of the grace of Him who gave it. Therefore, this too pertained to the kindness of the Creator, that the very image of God should have its origin of nature from the earth. For He held that nature as a pledge of a moderate mind. ^A

XI. Man is therefore a noble animal, even if he was later insulted by the passions that supervened. For do not look upon him after he has offended, but I would have you estimate that nobility of the divine image before the transgression of the law. Why then do you despise him who is fallen, having forgotten his first constitution, and not considering the ancient honor which God—having united His own image to Himself—has again restored to him with much generosity? Nothing, therefore, was done that was alien to His benevolence. For it is not shameful for a good master to share in certain servile things with his servant for the sake of the servant's benefit; since he who is good is violated by no injury through such things, but rather, what he is, is recognized through such things. And do not marvel at this matter; for even now, if you prepare yourself as a house for God, He dwells in you, even if not in the same way as in Christ: "For in Christ the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily." ^B But O, the miracle! The whole fullness of the deity dwells in one bodily, and yet it fills all things, and exceeds the creation, being whole in one, and separated from no creature. And let not what is said seem to you impossible; for I, too, now utter a word; this word is in one, and the word has become in all; and one has contained the whole word, and the word is not circumscribed by the multitude. If, therefore, a thing that comes into being and passes away is whole in one, and becomes in all, what seems wonderful to you if God is also wholly in heaven, and is found in all things? ^C

XII. The subject, therefore, of the present festival is that God became man, having chosen human things, that He might give divine things; and having made the passions His own, that He might grant dispassionateness; having entered into death, that He might bestow immortality; and He acquired as His own the things of men, not changing His nature, but by will making this His own; and He does this most appropriately, having proposed to save man. For what reason, then, has He made the passions of men His own? Because He wished to destroy passion with passion, and to abolish death with death, and by like things to overcome like things. He makes the cross His own, He claims the mockery, He has made the bonds His own; that God... ^D

^A might receive the power against the passions as having become His own. For neither is the nature of God harmed, nor did it receive the passions through a change in itself; but the passions receive from God the strength against those of like nature. For death henceforth, by becoming God’s, destroys death; and by dying, He dissolves the tyranny of death, since He was both God and man. For the Jews did not crucify a mere man, nor did they nail up only the nature that was seen; but they brought their insolence against the God who was within it, who made the sufferings of the united nature His own. And that this may become clear to you, let us lead our discourse back to the illustration mentioned at the beginning.

XIII

XIV

^A God henceforth avenges what has happened as His own suffering. But enough has been said. For one must also be mindful of your memory; for the multitude of things said, overflowing the understanding of the hearers, renders the hearer forgetful of what has been spoken. May it come to pass, by the grace of God, that you embrace even what has been said in your memory, and benefit others from these things, and inherit the kingdom of heaven in their place. May we all be granted to attain this by the grace of Christ, to whom be the glory and the power unto the ages of ages. Amen.

HOMILY III. Delivered at Ephesus against Nestorius, on the day of St. John the Evangelist.

1. That which a physician is to our bodies, a priest is to our souls. For since error is a disease of the soul, and having persisted has brought on the death of punishment, the grace of the Spirit has provided a healing for the soul, the holy priesthood, and it has cut off the member taken up ^B by the suffering; not sparing it, but sparing the remaining members. For because the continuous rot of the malignancy was causing a transmission of wickedness, it cuts off the member, so that it may cut short the wickedness. And this type is not cruelty, but therapy. For the physician cuts off the member with tears; yet, being unsparing, he has worked the excision as a therapy. This type of therapy is ancient and from above; thus the saints have taken care of this most venerable Church. ^C For the priest also possesses a sword, not that he may injure, but that he may heal. And the grace from above, revealing this of old, first signified it to Jeremiah, saying, “I have set thee this day over kingdoms and nations, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to build, and to plant.” For piety is not planted, unless wickedness has been rooted out. It is reasonable, indeed, first to water, to use agricultural care, to bring forward words of piety, to bring forward every kind of care to the member. But if ^D the wickedness should become stronger than the care, the excision is a remedy for those who are in such a state. For how could one take care of those who are in such a state, who reproach God with human circumstances, and regard the grace as a cause of reproach?

2. What sayest thou? Tell me. “I do not say,” he says, “that God has suffered.” If thou lookest to the nature, thou seest correctly; but if thou utterly deniest the suffering, thou deniest the dispensation. Do not reproach God for having suffered, but look at the achievements of the sufferings. God descended to humiliation, not having diminished His nature, but bestowing the grace,

^A for He remained what He was, and He took on what He was not. God remained God because of His own nature; He became what you are because of His love for you. Do not, therefore, consider the form of this care a reproach; do not reproach the physician if He has effected your health in the simplicity of a body. For this simplicity is not a reproach, but a sign of love for humanity. He descended to you, not to remain below, but to lead you up to Himself. Do not reject the descent, lest you lose the ascent (69); accept the reproach, which brought forth your glory. The nature of the divinity suffered no ignominy; rather, grace conferred upon you the benefits. Because of you, the slave who merited ignominy, the Lord is affected by ignominy. He took on what was yours, since you had abandoned what was His.

III. We fled from the pious Lord, and we did not accept the grace offered by the same. We had received the delights of paradise for our use; but by violating the law, and violating the Lawgiver, and doing the will of the enemy, we fell from honor. The fugitive was living in this earthly place, ^B and he did not lift his eyes toward the Lord; the sense of pleasure kept him weighed down; the very power of sin held the fugitive bound; he despaired that it could happen that the human mind might receive God. What, then? Shall my sluggishness cause God the loss of this most beautiful possession which is man? Far be it! For the God of all things did not allow this in any way. For it was wrong that envy should overcome the grace of the Lord; nor was it fitting that the gift of God should be overcome by the snares of the devil. What, therefore, does the Lord do? He comes to the fugitive: for the slave could not go to Him. He approaches the slave not with the majesty of a master, not sending ahead the retinue of angels, not rousing the phalanxes of archangels, not brandishing fiery orbs, not shaking the elements (for this would have been to make the fugitive flee from the approaching Lord); but He approaches in such a way as to catch the fugitive and recover His own possession. For He does not drive him away through a visible appearance; but by the humility of His person He calls him to familiarity and friendship: He is made a fellow-slave, so that you may be declared [His] master (68).

IV. For on this account that great Apostle says: ^C « Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus » (81). He calls Him Jesus here. Tell me, I pray, what name the mother gave the infant? « You shall call, » he says, « his name Jesus » (82). Where is he who divides Christ, who has reduced this mystery of ours to an equivocation? As if naming one Christ, but in reality positing two; one a slave, the other the Lord; one capable of suffering, the other incapable? What does a single appellation profit, where two things are posited? « Let this, » he says, « be the mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus. » Jesus ^D

names Him who was being seen, to whom the Virgin had given that name. Let everyone feel this in himself, which is in Christ Jesus. What then have we felt in Christ Jesus? ^B Truly this, that « though he was in the form of God, he did not regard it as robbery to be equal to God. » What is this that is said? He indeed who gains freedom by robbery endures nothing servile, lest he should inflict some prejudice upon his freedom. What then of Him? Since by nature He was Lord, He did not regard it as robbery to be equal to God. For the mystery of the dispensation did not harm the divinity. « Who, though he was in the form of God, did not regard it as robbery to be equal to God, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant. »

V. Explain to me the emptying of the Only-begotten. For how did He empty Himself, if He did not suffer human things? Yet when we say that God has suffered, we always except His nature from passion. For it is not that His nature is passible, but the union to that which could suffer made God passible (for into His nature no passion falls). For after the merciful God had resolved to sympathize with the slave, although He was by nature impassible, He fulfilled His purpose by uniting to Himself that which could suffer. In this way the Lord came to us; thus He stood by the fugitive slave: appearing as a fellow-slave, and dispensing benefits as a Lord; showing the form of a slave, and granting grace as a Lord; ^C hungering as a slave, and multiplying loaves as God; weary as a man, and walking upon the back of the sea as God; shrinking from the cross as a man; for by these sufferings He confirmed that which was seen, and by His miracles He demonstrated that which was hidden. Having thus appeared as man, He brought us all into His own intimacy. He set over us John as a teacher, the son of thunder, bestowed upon this metropolis, the common treasure of the world, who in a single verse has expounded the whole of piety: « The Word, » he says, « became flesh. » Being that which He was, He became flesh; He was this by nature, but He became that by the dispensation. Through whom, and with whom, to the Father be glory and power with the Holy Spirit, for ever and ever. Amen.

HOMILY IV

On the Holy Theotokos and on Simeon

I. Even now today, the prophetic word rouses and urges us to offer thanks to God. « Command, » it said, « from day to day to announce the salvation of our God; to declare His glory among the nations, His ^D wonders among all peoples. » For that marvelous man David, having known by the Spirit that it was the good pleasure before the just Judge, God, that those things hidden from those wise in the Law, and which for the books of the prudent had been silenced regarding the recognition of the truth, should be revealed to infants, all things were directed toward the spiritual joy...

^A Let us therefore, in persuasion and on the way, honor the sacred injunction; come, let us also, having become illumined in our souls, shout out the joyful and clear proclamation of the divine Musician: "Let the mountains receive peace for the people, and the hills righteousness; for a Child is born to us, a Son is given to us, whose government is upon his shoulder; and his name is called the Angel of the great counsel, a wonderful counselor, the mighty God, the Potentate, the Prince of peace, the Father of the age to come." He is born, he says, and is given. He was born in Judea, but he was given to the whole world. For so also did the oracle regarding him to Abraham contain: "In him shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." But "his government is on his shoulder," because his power is his by a singular right, and not adventitious or something that came to him as one born; his lordship is natural, not acquired; his divine glory is substantial, and not received by gift. Hence, in times past, the heavens also proclaimed the miracle by means of a star ^B to the Magi; and from that source the Magi proclaimed to Judea the referenced King, when they searched it out in order to worship him; and the angels proclaimed to the shepherds abiding in the fields the Savior Christ; and in the end, even the Holy Spirit proclaimed to Simeon the Christ of the Lord, whom he was anticipating.

II. Following this command, we too follow in order to proclaim it to the Church: not as if we were powerful, but as obedient; not as if wealthy, but as those who have obtained mercy; celebrating the prophetic words and chanting the apostolic ones, not bringing forth testimonies from ourselves as if they were improvised. "Therefore let us sing to our God, let us sing: for the Lord has made known his salvation, and in the sight of the nations he has revealed his righteousness." For it is truly an ecstasy and a terrifying thing that has happened on the earth; nature has seen ^C things terrible and unusual: "God seen on earth and having conversed with men," God born according to the flesh, and yet not moved from the heavens. "And who is sufficient for these things? Who shall declare the mighty acts of the Lord, or who shall cause all his praises to be heard?" The Virgin, that prophetess according to Isaiah, has brought forth Emmanuel without a man; him who was born to us without a father, before the ages, "Wisdom from God the Father, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption." ^D The prophetess has brought forth, not knowing the manner of the conception. Strange is the wonder and inexplicable. Maria the prophetess conceived the living God by hearing. For hearing is the natural passage for words. As for that former conception, brought about by the tongue upon the man, it withered the trunk of humanity as a flame. But the conception of this one...

^A springing forth through the womb, brought the fruit to life along with the trunk.

III. Therefore, as debtors and benevolent servants of God, let us offer the gift of the word in confession both to the Word of God and to the Mother, as much as we are able; not blushing at the insignificance of our offerings, but rejoicing in the goods of nature and adoring the excellence of the Master. For we do not perform this as a prelude, in order to enclose the subject matter in oratorical speeches according to human law, but so that we might be illuminated by the brilliance of divine memory. For while elsewhere to be defeated brings disgrace before opponents, here, to yield to those things which surpass comprehension brings true glory. Let us therefore draw near to the hymn piously; let us draw near rejoicing, singing praises, glorifying, and magnifying the mystery which surpasses mind and speech, taking as our guide the heavenly citizen Gabriel ^B in his divine salutations, and saying: "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee." With whom let us repeat: Hail, our longed-for joy; hail, the exultation of the Church; hail, name breathing sweetness; hail, divinely shining and most graceful face; hail, most venerable memorial; hail, saving and spiritual fleece; hail, you who are clothed in light, mother of the splendor that knows no setting; hail, most pure mother of holiness; hail, most transparent fountain of the life-giving stream; hail, new mother, and work of the new birth; hail, inexplicable mother of the Incomprehensible; hail, new volume of the new writing, according to Isaiah, of which the faithful witnesses are angels and men; hail, that alabaster jar ^C of the sanctifying ointment; hail, good merchant of the denarius of virginity; hail, as if a creature, but one which holds the Creator in its embrace; hail, most small container, which contained Him whom nothing can contain.

IV. And who shall recount the generation of Him who is more ancient than knowledge? What shall we wonder at? The divine and ineffable birth, or the inexplicable conception? Speech cannot encompass things that surpass reason. The mind cannot circumscribe things that are above intellect. For although a writer may presume to sketch with a pen the mother of the dispensation, he will by no means be able to express the manner of the conception. What, then? Shall we assign a beginning to the birth? But it has no standing. Shall we call Him who is born unchangeable, without beginning, eternal? Yet the birth according to the flesh shows an origin ^D of temporal duration. Shall we therefore call the One born an infant? But we know Him as the Ancient of Days and the Maker of the ages. The whole is a miracle. For when I look towards the humiliation of the flesh, the contemplation of the divinity lifts me up; but when I am carried up to the divinity, the measure and the indescribable nature of the flesh draws me down again; and the ineffable and unconfused union of the natures is to me a school of learning.

Such wonders the divine Mother and Virgin brings to us, her sacred rays forever shining. For ^A “With her is the fountain of life,” and the breasts of the rational and unadulterated milk; from which even now we have eagerly run to suck sweetness, not through forgetfulness of what has gone before, but through desire for the things of the future. For being frequently treated with kindness never prevents one from having a greater desire for good things; but rather, the brilliance of the gifts already bestowed and the joy they have caused becomes a thirst, kindling a desire for the pleasures that follow. For love does not at all permit ^B itself to cease from rising upward toward divine things.

V. But if anyone claims the name of Christian, and takes it ill and feels pained, as if struck by vertigo, at the dignity of the divine Virgin and that most illustrious and proper name of Theotokos, he vainly and falsely flatters himself with the appellation of holiness, while dissenting from the dogmas. For the name and the outward appearance of piety are of no avail to him, if he denies its power; since the great herald proclaimed that “the kingdom of God is not in speech, but in power.” For a “false brother,” and “brought in,” according to the Scripture, and one who ^C is a “spy of our freedom,” has neither become an obedient auditor of the divine teacher who instructs: not to legislate against the truth, but for the truth. It is therefore useful, for the strengthening of those who are pious and simple, to engage in a brief exercise of questioning with the adulterous and the factitious—for so one may rightly call those who are profane in their thinking. Tell us, then, as we ask you: do you agree with the divine Law giving instruction, even if in a Jewish sense, that Adam’s spouse was fashioned by the spotless hands of the Creator, just as the man was? And if indeed you deny it, are you not clearly an alien to us and a stranger to the Scriptures? But if you affirm it, why do you foolishly dissent from the truth, and refuse and reject the pleasure of God, which was ^D providentially arranged in the all-holy Virgin for our common salvation? For He who created the first virgin without reproach, the same also fashioned the second without blemish and crime; and He who made what is without fair, also adorned what is within, as a dwelling-place for the soul, in a holy manner. Why, then, do you dare to overturn with Jewish vanities that which was seen to be most sweet and most delightful to God, as if it were the most shameful thing of all, O most shameful of all men? Truly, indeed, O astonished and most senseless one: “Who are you, O man, that answers back to God?” For if it is even decorous for God to have fashioned her, even as He has dwelt in His own handiwork, as you say; then it shall also be that which it appeared to remain.

^A VI. And yet the divine Scriptures grasp and hand down even the matter of the formation. For nothing that is dear to God has any ignominy or reproach; away with the thought! For confession and magnificence, as it is written, belong to His divine and much-lauded work. It is necessary, therefore, to choose one of two things: either, just as you confess with readiness and gratitude the formation of Eve by God, so also accept and adore in the manner of the pious the incarnation from the Virgin, which was so sagely spoken of concerning Him, if indeed you wish to be a participant in these things; or else, impose upon yourself a Jewish and faithless name, since you are numbered among them. ^B For the Church is not accustomed to give birth to amphibious creatures; for Christians, being compliant to God, give ear to the divinely inspired predictions of the prophets, which everywhere cry out concerning the all-lauded Virgin: “The Most High hath sanctified His tabernacle; God is in the midst of it, and it shall not be shaken.” And again: “A man was born in her, and the Most High Himself hath founded her.” But the adversaries of the truth, being carnal and having not the Spirit of God, have thought in a carnal way about spiritual things. For true is that which was wisely said by the Apostle: “The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God.” ^C For this reason they chose to have the testimony illuminated from afar, and did not wish to understand from things among us the change of the Virgin unto sanctification. But the sight of things invisible is naturally inclined toward the most manifest things. For if iron, that black and earthy thing, having held converse with fire, puts away in a manner its unnatural stains, and in due time is established in the beauty of its nature; and very quickly, toward the active flame which has set it ablaze, it acquires a likeness, and becomes untouchable and consuming of all matter; how much more so, if the all-immaculate Virgin was set ablaze through the infusion of the divine and immaterial fire unto purity; and was cleansed of all material and unnatural things, and stood forth clearly in the beauty of her nature, so as to be henceforth impassable and unapproachable and invisible to carnal defilements? ^D And as one who receives the water poured upon his head, experiences the liquid nature filtering through his whole body from head to toe; so do we believe that the divine Mother and Virgin was anointed entirely with the holiness of the divine Spirit that descended upon her; and thus to receive the living

^A God the Word, within the chambers of virginity and sweet-smelling perfume.

VII. But let us bring our discourse back again, beloved, to the matter at hand, bidding farewell for the present to the one opposing the nefarious Nestorius and those who mimic his character. As for you, most dear friends, you have assembled together most excellently, both to honor the mysteries of God today and to consider the things previously announced in the divine Scriptures: namely, the Virgin, who in a manner supernaturally and worthily of God carries in her immaculate arms Him who by a word carries all things; and the aged priest, who approaches with longing desire to receive the expected High Priest and Lord; and the aged prophetess, receiving Him who had been foretold. For it was necessary that the first-fruits of piety and religion of both genders, masculine and feminine, should meet the Redeemer of both, and in themselves duly represent the future worshippers of both: just as Patriarch Isaac also foretold, when he bestowed his blessings upon his son, the patriarch Jacob, being led into a mystical understanding of future things, ^B and said: “And the sons of thy father shall worship thee.” Nor was the just man unaware, as if in a double yoke, of how his entire offspring was encompassed; and the sequence of his words bears witness to this. For after he had said: “Become lord of thy brother,” he then added: “The sons of thy father shall worship thee,” transferring Jacob from the carnal to the spiritual. So indeed he also spoke to Esau: “And I have made him thy lord, and have made all his brothers his servants; but what shall I do for thee, my son?” Therefore, it is a most mystical enigma of the father and the multitude of the sons, and of Him who is worshipped by such a company. Those who have been enlightened regarding the divine mysteries, John and Paul, explained this as they discoursed upon the divine: the one, saying, “But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.” And the other saying: “And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.”

VIII. Do you see, most beloved, the most clear agreement ^D of the Old and New Testaments? Do you see how we

also are followed by the good Lord with fatherly affection? He has deemed us worthy to be called brothers, and to be made sons of Him who is by nature His Father; not by an equality of status, as some who are carried away by a lack of attention have supposed. Away with their grandiloquence! For they have ignored what was long ago spoken by Him to Isaiah: “It is a great thing for you to be called my servant,” but [it is] according to a tempering of condescension and leading, by which we are claimed for the Father through Him. “For who shall be likened to the Lord among the sons of God?” says the divinely inspired Scripture. For Christ is not a mere man, such that the like should be inseparably consubstantial with the like. For even if we have been brought into kinship through the carnal relationship toward us by Him who has deemed us worthy, nonetheless, we who are unable to look upon Him, trembling, are ^B subordinated by Him, who rules by nature and by pure authority. For certain people, “not understanding either what they say or about what they assert,” claim that the Lord and Savior is compared to men, ignorantly citing in this matter the Dominical discourse regarding John the Baptist, in which He previously testified, saying, “Among those born of women there is no one greater than John; yet he who is lesser in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.” O unwise wise men, that they contrive to bring forth such a notion as is pleasing to themselves and alluring in appearance, to the detriment [of the truth]! For He said, "No one among the prophets is greater than John," as Luke testifies. Therefore, He did not compare Himself, but clearly compared a prophet to earlier prophets, as one who had seen what had been proclaimed by them. For concerning Himself He has said: "If I bear witness to Myself, my witness is not true.” But that which says, “He who is lesser in the kingdom of heaven is greater than ^C him,” signifies his namesake, John the Evangelist, declared by the Savior to be the “Son of thunder,” who, teaching about divine things above all others, excelled in the evangelical proclamation; which the Lord Himself, the Master of the kingdom, or the guide to that interminable kingdom for those who follow, named the kingdom of heaven. For He says, “Go, preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven has drawn near to you.” But the prophecy of David concerning these things also refutes them, saying: “God stood in the congregation of gods; and in the midst, he judges gods.” It announces Christ as the true God and Lord by nature, as standing in the midst of the holy disciples and judging the aforementioned Baptist, along with the older prophets, with the later John, and the herald of the eternal [kingdom]. ^D IX. And let no one take offense at the words “gods” when hearing of God; for it is written: “I said: You are gods, and all of you are sons of the Most High.” For Scripture does not compare the existing God with those who are nothing when it names them gods;

^A but those “who are led by the Spirit of God,” it has proclaimed sons of God and gods, just as Paul also has written. Christ, therefore, our Lord, not only by the reason that He is God, transcends all things, but also insofar as He has become man. Therefore it is also written: “Who is like unto Thee among the gods, O Lord?” For how shall a generative manner of birth be compared to a virginal birth? And how shall a mere man, or even one who is a god by virtue of grace, as Moses was named, ^B truly be compared to the true God who, for the sake of His love for mankind, was incarnate without change, or in a manifest character? This, indeed, He also says through the prophet: “As the heaven is distant from the earth, so are My ways distant from your ways.” This, too, is a head of what is said: the testimonies of the Baptist concerning the Savior, in which he has said: “I am not worthy, stooping down, to unloose the strap of His sandals.” And since “of His fullness we all have received”—when, therefore, both David the prophet and John himself have borne witness to the incomparable and divine majesty of Christ—who is so foolish as to undertake to fight against manifest things, and to equate and compare to those who receive Him the One who renders His presence in His own kingdom royally and with authority? But I tell the most Christian people to think and feel such things concerning those matters which surpass all things and are inexpressible. “For that which has been glorified in this part has not been glorified,” says the sacred word, “because of the excelling glory.” Therefore He also said: “If I glorify Myself, My glory is nothing.”

X. But let these things be enough, so that those who are of sound mind may be firmly persuaded as to where our principal standard stands. But let us return again to the proposed scope: wondering in word, and rightly examining the spiritual reverence and theology of the just ones, I mean of Simeon and Anna: and how the old man indeed opened his bosom for the descent of Him who has heaven as His throne and the earth as His footstool, ^C while the elderly woman expounded the prophecies concerning Him to those who were awaiting redemption. Oh, the miracles! Moses at Sinai was constrained by fear, and with fear and trembling approached the One speaking; but Simeon with holy boldness and without wavering approaches the One who gave the oracles to Moses, and receives Him into his arms, and carries about on diligent wings Him who sits upon a cherubic throne, and sends up the twofold canticle: “Now Thou dost dismiss Thy servant, O Lord, according to Thy word, in peace: because my eyes have seen Thy salvation, which Thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples; a light to the revelation of the Gentiles, and the glory of Thy people Israel.” Well did the spiritual man announce the spiritual light of the world, ^D bringing it in and reconciling it. For they who were sitting in darkness and the shadow of death were in need of the twelve-hour and dead day. Because it darkened—

^A the diabolical mist had covered the human race and turned it upside down, and had corrupted those who became liable to judgment through the transgression, and had alienated them from their Creator as if they were adulterers. Therefore, the day of light that followed, having spontaneously transferred those who had been upset into evil by a mocking delusion back again in mercy to the good, sent out—as if they were beams of the sun's light—the twelve apostles to the ends of the inhabited world. As the prophet Habakkuk says concerning the Savior and the apostles: "You will mount your horses, and your riding is salvation." And again: "You have caused your horses to ride into the sea, troubling many waters." Regarding these, the Jewish mob in Thessalonica, being indignant, cried out: "These men who have turned the world upside down have come here too; and all these act against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus." And this is not strange to the madness of the Jews; for it is their custom to incite constant new disturbance ^B along with the holy ones. For they insulted even Moses as he was praying for them, as though he were doing them an injustice. They forced Aaron to make the calf. And they threw Jeremiah into a pit of mire. And now, raging against the apostles, they call them disturbers, and they call them tyrants against Caesar. But why do you reject the things that bring salvation, O Jews? Why do you stir up crowds against your benefactors? For how long will you liken yourselves to a lightless night? As it is written: "I have likened your day to night." And again: "And you are a squalid tower." The pious proclaim Jesus as King, saying what is right: not that he obtained the kingdom tyrannically, but naturally: "For through him kings reign," ^C and tyrants rule the earth.

XI. But tell me, you accusers of the truth: What kind of manner is the kingdom of Jesus? How did he lead an army against the tyrant? How did he ravage the tyrant's rule? How did he overthrow the one who was strong against us? How did he plunder his spoils—meaning us, whom he used for every impropriety? What was his arsenal? What was his panoply? But those who are hostile to Christ and who turn away from life do not endure to describe the strange newness of the miracle. For they know that this turns back to their own condemnation. For men, a varied suit of armor crafted from iron is prepared for the protection and safeguarding of the fleshly and stale weakness; but for King Jesus and God, who is powerful, it would be an opposition if the battle line were arrayed according to human standards. ^D For, having hidden his own power through the most weak flesh, he reveals himself openly to those who are stirring up war, having put on a breastplate...

of righteousness, according to Scripture; but as a helmet, judgment without hypocrisy; and as an unassailable hope, holiness. And in that he seemed to be held fast by his adversaries through the flesh, he triumphed over those who held him, finding them empty and devoid of strength.

XII. Such, O Jews, is the battle array of our King Christ, even if you prepare your own refutation. Moreover, he also sent into the inhabited world those who would tear up error: leaders unarmed, without defense, bloodless; who, by the proclamation of piety alone, were tearing down every height exalting itself against his divine union, and illuminating the whole race of men, as the prophet says: “In the light shall your arrows go forth, in the brightness of the flash of your weapons.” For this reason also the most divine Apostle cries out: “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty in God for the pulling down of strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.” O miracle! O ineffable and adorable goodness! O the divine and inexpressible love of the Lord for us! ^B How, by legitimate order, and not by the compulsion of power, with reason and persuasion, did he provide salvation for those whom that thief of the race had led away from life; and brought them back successfully to the place from which the first parent had withdrawn. Once they had spat out and cast off in knowledge the mockery and error of the hateful enemy, they acknowledged one profitable rule, namely, to prefer nothing to piety and religion. From that point on, they drifted away imperceptibly from the myth-religion of the Greeks, which places its hopes in dead abominations and idols as if they were among the living. From Jewish folly, moreover—in that it did not acknowledge the just and most radiant manifestation of the ever-living and immovable divine substance: I mean the subsistent Word and most manifest Son—they ^C drew further away, and grasped hold of the right and firm knowledge of the truly existing God. Confessing the living God, who in the living God at once, and in the good Son at once, and in the divine and consubstantial Spirit, revealed to us his undivided Trinity; who, in his Son, testified as consubstantial and immutable with him, brought forth and openly established the manifestation of the paternal hiddenness; who exhibited to us Jesus Christ our Lord, the fruit of all divine prophecy; perfect in deity, and perfect in humanity, and worshipped on earth by angels as in heaven, according to him who said: “And when he again brings the firstborn into the world, he says: ‘And let all the angels of God worship him.’” That is to say, let them worship ^D

those who were ^A first placed at the manger; and after them Simeon and Anna receiving their second turn in the temple; and later the Magi in Bethlehem; and subsequently throughout the whole world, those who have been adopted as sons, according to the foreshadowing of Isaac concerning Jacob, concerning whom Paul says: “We have received the spirit of adoption by which we cry, Abba, Father.”

XIII.

Homily IV. On the Holy Theotokos and Simeon

And how? Hear. Paul was first an unbeliever in his ignorance; and finally, having learned the power of Christ, he ingenuously preached: "I am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of Christ." Again, Thomas doubted, and having become a palpator, he later confessed the one longed for as his own Lord and God. The sons of Joseph also were once unbelievers, as the evangelist testifies; but having been taught the truth by experience, James and Judas have written to the whole world that they are servants of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ; of whom may we all become partakers, by the grace of Him who chose them to be apostles, Jesus Christ our Lord and our God; with whom, to the Father, together with the Holy Spirit, be glory, honor, and adoration, as it was from the beginning, and now, and always, and unto the ages of ages. Amen.

HOMILY V. On the Birthday of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I. Today’s solemnity is the parent of all solemnities. For from this festive day, the circle of all festivals arises. For whether we keep the memory of the martyrs, He is born today to whom they proved themselves witnesses, providing this as the beginning for those festivals; or whether we celebrate the passions of Christ, from which we claim healing for ourselves, ^C today He who endured them arrived as a man in this world, that he might become a companion to us in those things. Indeed, He was God even before His birth, and was with us, but was not visible to us. He was with us, but we did not see Him. "For He was in the world," it says, "and the world knew Him not." Wherefore, He was indeed among us, but was not seen by us; but after His birth, He is present just as He always was, and we see Him. Therefore, we call His advent a manifestation. For He was present with us even then, when we were in no way able to see Him. He arrived for those who did not know Him, when He became known to them. Quite rightly. Truly, His nature was present before; yet to me, so that He might be seen, He was not present. But now when He has been seen by us, He has also arrived for us, who was with us even before. For because we are held fast by ignorance of Him, since He is in no way visible to us ^D so that we might be able to attain to who He is, He becomes man, He who by nature remained invisible. And He who is always, is born today, that you might know Him to be who He is, not that He might begin to exist, having been produced by the nature of things. Therefore, whether we keep the memory of the martyrs, today’s solemnity is the parent of such-like solemnities. Or whether we celebrate the passions of Him who deigned to suffer for our sake, who willed to suffer and came into the world today, today's...

HOMILY V. ON THE DAY OF THE NATIVITY OF THE LORD.

^A ...makes the feast more ancient than the sufferings. Whether we are recalling His life-giving death, now arrives He who was to be handed over for us unto death. Or, finally, if we celebrate the great feast of His resurrection, which He for our sake provided, making Himself the first-fruits of those who are to rise (for in Himself He awakened the entire human race, making a promise of the resurrection of that entire human race): the feast of today exists as even more ancient than that. For it was on the third day that the Savior rose from the sepulcher, not only opening His own sepulcher, but also unsealing the sepulchers of many saints. For with His own, He also opened the sepulchers of the saints, providing His resurrection as an earnest and pledge of the common resurrection. Rising from the sepulcher, He opened the sepulchers; and born from the womb, He did not open the womb. For emerging from death and the bosom of the earth, He opens the monuments; but being born from the Virgin, He does not open the womb, but is both born and leaves the Virgin's bosom closed. Why, I ask? For I see that you too are gripped by a desire to know this. Could that be correctly called the reason why monuments are opened, yet the virginal womb was not opened? Namely, because His resurrection existed as the cause of the resurrection of all; but the birth was a miracle solely of Him who was produced by it, not as though any other person were to be brought into the nature of things in such a manner of birth. For He alone, while He was and was present, was born; we, however, arrive into this world after birth: and we indeed are for the first time when we are poured forth in birth; He, however, was visible to the eyes for the first time when He was born. Since, therefore, the resurrection was common, but His birth existed as singular: the sepulchers are opened for all, but the uterus is not opened, preserving that wonderful manner of parturition only for Christ. For this reason the Virgin remained a Virgin, even though she truly obtained the name of mother. For she was made a mother, bringing forth a suckling child; she remained nonetheless a Virgin, bringing forth the Word made flesh. And so, the Virgin manifested as both man and Word Him who was born: as man, she manifested Him by being made mother; but she also revealed the same as Word by remaining a Virgin, as He was before. For she did not lose that, and assume this. She remained, therefore, a Virgin, what she was; and she was made a mother, what she was not: for she was about to give birth to Him who, having been made man, remained God.

II. Do not, therefore, now knot the nodes of your questions with the miracles of God, nor fatigue the wondrous dispensation with these trifles, regarding which you have shipwrecked, having followed them in faith. For trusting yourself to mere reasonings, and like a ship abandoning the most safe faith, and desiring to traverse the sea of God's signs with your questions, you necessarily suffer shipwreck; for you have abandoned that which was safe, nor can you overcome the sea as great as it is. You ask of me, how did God remain? In turn, I also ask how did she remain a Virgin, if she was a virgin and existed as a mother? These things you see; those things you believe.

^A Quod enim oculis conspicuum est, ejus est probatio quod conspicuum non exsistit. Verum ad evangelicum sermonem animum reducamus, quo inde petitis narrationibus jucunde vos excipiamus.

III. "Jesu Christi," inquit, "generatio sic erat." These things says Matthew the evangelist, who also knows Christ as God, anterior to the ages, and who now narrates His generation. Therefore, he says, know this: I am describing in discourse Him who both is always, and has been made. I am narrating, He says, the generation of Him who is for ever: the birth of Him who exists as co-eternal with the Father. I speak of the generation, not by what method it was, but by what manner it afterwards existed. Therefore, I tell you of my generation, which my Creator has fulfilled. "For when His mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, before they came together, she was found to have in her womb by the Holy Spirit." Why, truly, it is worth our effort to discern why the Lord was to be born of a Virgin, not of her who was not betrothed, but of her who was betrothed to a man. For many tell us these objections, who would wish to know the utility of His wise counsel. Why was He not born of an unbetrothed virgin? Why did not her virginity, which was about to serve the Lord who was to be born, remain exempt from all suspicion? ^C The matter, in plain truth, stands otherwise: for the Virgin would have been suspect, had she not had Joseph, who had betrothed her, as her guardian. But the just man receives her as his spouse, that he might exist as the guardian of her virginity and the witness of the birth. Wherefore, even the guardian, coming into suspicion of her, although he had thought he had kept his betrothed well, desired to put her away privily. Indeed, he himself is made the witness of the Virgin, who in wise counsel disposes the miracle. For He says in dreams to Joseph: "Do not fear to take Mary thy wife: for that which is born in her is of the Holy Spirit." No fraud has befallen you in guarding the Virgin; for the mystery of the birth exists of the Holy Spirit. It is not adultery that which has been so done, but the removal of adultery. The Virgin is a Virgin. ^D God the Word is He who is carried in her: who even if He is to be born, because He has indeed been made flesh, does not, however, damage the virginity of your spouse. Joseph was therefore made the guardian of Mary and the witness of her virginity, greater than any exception. For this reason, then, the Lord is born of a betrothed Virgin, making the spouse the witness of her virginity.

IV. Furthermore, since the mystery must come to pass in a mystical and hidden manner, it was necessary that the miracle of the incarnation be exhibited in a new and unusual way. It had to be that grace should be made manifest to men who were to attain salvation through it, and the same should be rendered obscure to the devil who always plots against the goods of men. Mary’s virginity was indeed clear to those who wished to consider what the reality held; but the betrothal had deceived the devil, as though there had been a commingling of a body, and as though the Emmanuel, whom the prophet Isaiah announced would be born of a Virgin, had not yet been born.

^A Verily, in speaking these words: "Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is God with us." Because the devil had heard that common salvation would be born from the Virgin, he laid snares for her virginity, never allowing it to persist. Indeed, there was no virgin among the Jews, nor did the heathens hold the thing in honor, with the demon contending to extinguish this virtue among men. Since, therefore, virginity was sought after by the snares of the demon, and since he pursued virtue with hatred and also feared the saving gift to the human race, [Joseph] espouses Mary, and the appearance of marriage is exhibited, so that the Virgin might remain a virgin, unknown to the devil, keeping her virginity for the divine ordinance; and let the Virgin become the instrument of the Lord about to be born from her, while the snares of the demon are hidden by that veil of betrothal. For this reason, therefore, he took Joseph as a spouse.

V. Truly, ^B the angel said to Joseph: "Do not fear to take Mary your spouse: for that which is born in her is of the Holy Spirit." Here the dignity of the Holy Spirit is shown, and His creative power is openly proved. For the Holy Spirit is signified by the angel’s speech as the Creator of the fetus, and the child born from Him is proclaimed by the angel. But who, and in what way? For because Christ was made the second Adam, God amending the earlier transgression (for Christ is called the last Adam, given that the Apostle calls Him so; he says, "The first Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam a quickening spirit"). Nor does he say "second Adam"—although he was not ignorant of distinguishing the second in opposition to the prior—but he calls Him the last Adam, lest you hope for a third or fourth other. Therefore the Lord was the last Adam; and because the former was fashioned by the Father, the last is fashioned by the Holy Spirit, so that He might signify the equal power of the Holy Spirit and of the Father. Yet the first was not fashioned without the Spirit or without the Unigenite cooperating, nor was He created by the Father alone: for it was the Holy Trinity that created man, and for this reason the Father also said: "Let us make man in our image and likeness," using His Unigenite and the Holy Spirit as aid and counselor: that is, He Himself holding discourse with Himself, with His own wisdom and sanctifying power. Christ indeed is the power of God, and the wisdom of God; ^D but the Holy Spirit exists as the sanctifying power of the Creator. Therefore, no other counsel was taken with another, but He took His own wisdom as a partner and helper of the counsel; and He assumed that sanctifying power for the work of creation, whose office it is to preserve what is created, and to impart holiness to them.

VI. The generation of Jesus Christ, therefore, was on this wise. For when his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Spirit. He did not say, "She had conceived in the womb": for it was not from virile seed that she bore that which she carried; but, "She was found with child." Clearly, because He who was made was the invention of a saving dispensation. For he says, "She was found with child of the Holy Spirit." He was "found" by those who, by faith, received the miracle of the incarnation. He was "found" by the faithful who were about to attain salvation, and by those who were not offended by that which was visible. He was "found" not having taken the principle of His existence from man, but produced in a new and unusual way from the Holy Spirit. Truly, the first Adam had been fashioned from virgin earth that had not known a plow; and from the virgin womb is fashioned the last, so that in this part also the Lord might be created an Adam for the faithful, that He might amend the fall of Adam.

VII. But Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to expose her, was minded to put her away privily. ^B The newness of the mystery loosened his memory a little. For Joseph did not consider the magnitude of the miracle. He did not think as was fitting, of that which even transcended nature and reason; but he held the Virgin in suspicion, thinking she had secretly suffered the loss of her virginity. He thought her virginity was undone, seeing the wonderful fruit in her womb. He suspected an incautious loss of virginity, [rather than] an admirable economy. Joseph did not know what new thing had come to pass, and he wanted to put the Virgin away privily, following the custom of the ancient law. But the angel corrects what he so suspected, forgiving him who had been deceived. He grants pardon to the suspicion. For the mystery was not of such a kind that it could be attained by human reasonings. Wherefore, he does not rebuke Joseph as one who is plotting a calumny, but teaches him how the matter stands, granting pardon for the ignorance. For he says to him: "Joseph, son of David." By honoring his nobility, he commemorates [it], curing his suspicion. "Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary your spouse: for that which is born in her is of the Holy Spirit." Therefore, when the mystery was known to Joseph, and he quickly had faith in the angel, concluding with certainty that Emmanuel born of the Virgin, and understanding that the Lawgiver was present through the Virgin [as a] mediator, he left the law, nor did he break the bond of betrothal, who would himself willingly approach this ministry of the mystery. Therefore he takes the Virgin, no longer as a spouse, but as an ark; bearing not the law, but the Lawgiver Himself. Joseph therefore held the Virgin, serving the mystery, and keeping her virginity. He recognized what the prophets had spoken before. He understood the sermons of the prophets: for he was a just man, and had learned by habit to meditate upon those words.

VIII. But let us see also the prophecy, so that it might sign this wondrous birth. Let us bring into the middle the prophet, explaining the birth of God, who was to bestow salvation upon the human race. Therefore, let us repeat the prophetic discourse more deeply, and more fully explain the prophecy to you. Therefore the prophet Isaiah says: "The Lord said unto Ahaz: Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God in the height, or in the depth." Ask,

^A he says, of God a miracle and a sign, which may demonstrate that He is the Maker of all things. Seek a miracle, that you may know the power of the Creator. Ask for a new and unusual thing, which may teach virtue concerning God and make you a faithful servant of God. What, then, does the faithful Ahaz say? To me, he says, faith is sufficient. I require no proof of it that consists in the showing of things. I am a son of Abraham who was justified by faith and did not seek miracles. Abraham did not need the proof of miracles to be taught about God. He had no need of prodigies by which the Maker of all things might be declared to him. To me, therefore, he says, paternal inheritance is enough. I wish to be a faithful son of a faithful Abraham. I accept the faith of my ancestors; I do not inquire more curiously. "I will not ask," he says, "and I will not tempt the Lord." I shall no longer take a test of divine power. Faith teaches me how great God’s power is. Such was King Ahaz. But because the lineage of David, descended to the Jews, was daily demanding signs and miracles and omens from God, and proofs of miracles for the sake of providing knowledge of God, the prophet says to the house of David what the king had said. Hear, he says, now, O house of David, what Ahaz says, that he does not seek a sign so that he may have faith in God: but you set struggles for the Lord, demanding from Him proofs of miracles, and, as it were, you draw God into a stadium and a contest, seeking out works of power, and not believing unless you see signs. Which the Lord also says concerning the Jews: ^B "Unless you see signs and wonders, you do not believe." This Isaiah signified, rebuking the family of David. For he says: "Hear now, O house of David: Is it a small thing for you to set a struggle for men, and how do you set a struggle for the Lord?" He argues against the perversity of the Jews, and their madness in seeking miracles to provide faith for the truth. "But because you," he says, "daily hold out arenas and struggles to God by seeking out miracles, the Lord Himself will give to you a sign." Having said this, he subjoins, saying: "Behold, a virgin shall have in the womb, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel." This sign He will give, which the world will indeed believe, and the Jews alone will altogether deny faith; which the nations will receive, and the race of Israel will reject. He will give a sign that is saving to the nations, but which will be the cause for the unbelieving Jews that they be dispersed. He will give a sign which those who are perishing will seek, and which those who are being saved will believe. Certainly, this is also what the great Paul says concerning the cross: "The word of the cross is to them that perish foolishness: but to them that are saved, that is, to us, it is the power of God." This same thing we also say, expounding that new birth. For we preach the birth of the Virgin: to the Jews indeed a scandal, but to the faithful salvation. "The Lord will therefore give you," the prophet says, such a sign; which will indeed bring salvation to the nations, but to the Jews will create a scandal. Do you see that the birth was an exhibition of a sign? From these things, therefore, learn the refutation of the Jews, who were corrupting the prophecy. ^C For after the mystery of Christ was manifested (for it signified the virginal birth leading us to God—for Emmanuel, He who is carried in the womb and brought forth by birth, in interpretation signifies God with us), the Jews, twisting the prophecy from this sense and abstracting the discourse from the advent of Christ, do not hear: "Behold, a virgin shall have in the womb," but, "Behold, a young woman shall have in the womb," adulterating the prophecy so as to obscure the testimony of Christ. For some indeed say: "Behold, a young woman shall have in the womb"; others, "Behold, a maiden shall have in the womb," wishing to separate the birth of Christ from the prophecy. But the prophet says: "Behold, a virgin shall have in the womb, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which is interpreted, God with us." But you also consider this in the prophecy. Behold, the prophet says, announcing something future. Behold, he says, as if seeing what was afterwards to be future. For the prophetic eye is something of this sort, seeing that which is future as if it were happening in the presence. Seeing thus, he speaks thus. Behold, in place of the fact that it is, I see what you hear today. "Behold, a virgin shall have in the womb, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel." Neither Joseph shall call him, nor his mother: they who were thought to be his brothers shall not call him so: for even they were offended; ^D but the nations shall call him, who, of course, will outstrip the Jews in faith. Those who were furthest away will call him, having come near to grace, to whom Paul also was saying: "You, who sometimes were far off, are made near by the blood of Christ." Therefore, they will call the infant Emmanuel before the Jews, and will recognize him who was born as God with us. IX. These things, indeed, the prophet says; not so Paul, but he says: "For He sent," he says, "His Son made of a woman." What do you say, Paul? The prophet says "of a virgin," and you preach the birth to be "of a woman"? Clearly, he says, I give back a common blessing, wishing it to belong to the whole female sex. I do not say "of a virgin," lest I restrict the blessing to virgins alone. I say "of a woman," declaring grace to be of the universal sex, so that the whole female sex may reap the blessing, and from them grace may pass to men: so that from whence perversion happened, from that same source also grace might proceed, granting to the human race the kingdom of heaven: which may we all attain by the grace and kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ: with Whom to the Father and the Holy Spirit be glory and power unto the ages of ages. Amen.

HOMILY VI. On Holy Mary, the Mother of God, and on the Holy Nativity of Christ.

^A and by its rays meeting its fellow-servants, admonishes us to celebrate the common Lord with songs of praise as the rule of debt demands; but it also touches the face of the earth, which it finds drunk with rain and infused with dew, and imbues it with fatness. Such, too, are the venerable solemnities of the feasts that shine upon us. For they illuminate the minds of the pious with spiritual light and excite them to songs of praise; and by refreshing them with the divine dew of the apostles and evangelists, they contribute bountifully the fruit of good works. But since these things are so, and the Mosaic law forbids [Exod. XXIII, 15.] us to appear empty-handed before the face of the Lord, what are we to say or do, who are most insufficient and have nothing worthy that we might contribute to the subject of this sacred day? Is it worth the effort, I ask, that we who are needy should flee for refuge to the Lord who of His own accord calls us by the abundance of His goodness, just as He says: "Open your mouth, and I will fill it" [Ps. LXXX, 11.], and thence draw the liquid, both drinkable and life-giving, for the pupils of the Church? This, indeed, we shall certainly do: for the solemnity is conducted about Him, and to Him the prayer we are about to have is referred.

II. Come, therefore, let us recall to memory the wonders of God from the beginning, and let us meditate on all His works, just as it is also commanded by the apostolic laws, when they say at one time: "Announce his virtues who called you out of darkness into his admirable light" [I Pet. II, 9.]; at another time they testify: "Nevertheless, to that to which we have attained, let us also remain in it" [Philipp. III, 16.], and not rashly rush into those things which have not been handed down, as if, forsooth, the truth, concerning those things which it concerned us to see made manifest, had left nothing hidden from us from among those things which are known of it. For we have arrived at those things which many prophets and just men desired greatly to see. [Matt. XIII, 17.] But why do we speak of just men and humans? "Into which even the angels desired to look." [I Pet. I, 13.] What, then, is that? It is, clearly, the reconciliation of men with God; the conversion of the whole world to Him who created it; the harmonious confession of all; one way of worship acceptable to God by the one consent of souls; pious concord; the renunciation of impiety: all of which the manifestation of the salutary God in the flesh has operated, as the divine Paul taught, saying: "The grace of God our Savior has appeared to all men, instructing us, that, denying impiety and worldly desires, we may live soberly and justly in this world" [Tit. II, 11.]; concerning which we shall discourse in a brief speech, as ability permits, where, rendering what was promised, we shall pre-laud the wonders effected in us by God from the beginning. For this is also received in the customs of the Church, that during sacred feasts it should recount to the hearers the history of the world created; whereby it might, forsooth, show the cause of Adam's migration from the place of pleasure unto death, and how great has been the inclination of the Lord toward us. ^B For since God Almighty had once, with the heavenly chambers, beautifully and ^C compoundly set in order the terrestrial variety of things, and had distinguished them by a common counsel with His co-eternal Son and Word, co-substantial, subsistent, and endowed with equal power, and undivided from His nature, and had sanctified them with His most holy and co-substantial Spirit, at the extreme limit of creation, He magnificently appointed that palmable man, worthy of admiration, as head and prince over all that was created on earth; and since he had received existence as new from Him; having been fashioned from the earth by the immaculate hands of the Lord, and having obtained life and splendor by the divine breath, according to what that great Moses [Gen. I, 26.] wrote by the divine Spirit, so that he might rule over the creatures subject under heaven, and govern the world in holiness and justice. He, therefore, building a royal palace worthy of such a magnificent work, and separating from that creature which is under heaven in Eden, that is, in a place of pleasure, the best Creator, brighter from the beginning, illuminated by light and filled with immense riches; and wonderfully adorned with the paradise of pleasure planted beside the watercourses, and with the sweet fragrance of flowers diffused throughout the circuit of the meadows; and finally, luxuriating ambitiously with rivers rich from that interior abundance; so that by that exterior magnificence He might confer upon man, created by Himself, a fitting greatness out of abundant goodness: He had placed him there as if in royal chambers, gifted with the crown of free will, and having all the things of the world subject to his feet. Because, truly, the end of the best leadership was that there should be someone who would be a monitor to the leader, and who would fittingly compose him, and as a guardian of the scepters, lest it happen that he sin through ignorance, would exist; He gives a salutary precept of wisdom distinguishing a matter of this kind, for him and his wife a safe companion, a parent of goods, and directing toward the best; in one word, embracing the whole series of virtues; that, namely, he might have a care for those caring for themselves, and keep those keeping themselves, and make the simple intent toward these things; truly, to those who excelled in lower matters, as excelling all, and to whom He had granted honor, He might teach obedience to the Lord; and teach those similar in sense to the angels to think modestly, and deter them from seeking to be tyrants, and for the reward of all virtue, render them acceptable to the Creator.

III. But because things were thus, and while the heavenly beings were leading choirs at the terrestrial royal palace, and were praising the threefold power, and singing of the threefold magnificence, and blessing the threefold potency, and extolling the threefold dominion with clear proclamation, and were adoring the one deity subsisting in three, and the terrestrial things were subject around the king and leader and governor divinely with all equity and concord, and were placidly receiving congruous appellations as certain duties; and, to speak in a word, all things in the order of

^A beautiful institution were happily conducted. But he could not endure, with an imperturbable and not malignant eye, to behold that brightness in man, which had grown to such a height by the obsequies of the whole world; he who, like a spark thrown from a lantern with the resulting soot, had been cast down from the celestial splendors because he stood with an erect neck before the omnipotent Lord. Instead, immediately, as one bearing it heavily, when he saw his adversary, inflamed with malice, and with an envy lurking in his soul, he flared into wrath, and thought he would easily be suffocated by that internal lividity unless he faster plundered the brightness of that splendor and, snatching him away from the suitable commandment, thrust him into a pit equal to his own. Being wise, however, to do evil, as it is written, and knowing from what had occurred how hateful pride is to God, he whets this against them to bring death upon those who were best. For, feigning a benevolence as if on a stage, as if he were one who seemed to care, he suggests a design to the woman as one more easily deceived, declaiming with open mouth against the healthful commandment, and belching forth a lie against the truth, as if truly to debar them with great harm from a food that would exalt them to the equality of God: by which it came about that the seduced woman easily snatched at the suggestion and most promptly ran to the forbidden fruit.

IV. The Fall of Eve and Adam

IV. Thus, indeed, thus that author of evils ejaculated his own little glory, and as if a novice in every variety of evil lured them into the snare of hell; plotting the very same thing as those jesters who, when they wish to mock simple children, throw something intended for eating with an exhortation, and out of a more vehement greed, by the speed of the run to the thing thrown, they willingly cast them headlong to the ground. Accordingly, just as the woman was ^B deceived by error, being easier, and was puffed up in heart by those things which she had heard from that whispering enemy (for speech entering the soul, as if some seducer, is of greatest strength in persuading to do what is forbidden); so she also armed her reckless hand against the tremendous command, and drove the forbidden food into her belly, no less than a double-edged sword: and with a diabolical sense, full with his will, she proceeds to her husband, equipped with snares; and, teaching him to grow insolent against his own salvation, she that had been badly taught pretends the lot of death. Come, she says, with all alacrity, O worm, and by me you shall taste the fruit that makes a god. Perhaps the Creator labors with envy against us, fearing that force must be brought to bear upon Him if we became as gods. Vainly, surely, did He think to keep us from the most beautiful fruit of all. Come, let us tear away the treasure, and let no one exist superior to us. Thus, therefore, she who had been seduced by guile, now seducing, and like a scabby sheep sprinkling the stain from which she herself suffered upon him who approached her, she took her husband as a partner in her design. For she is an animal most fit for dissolving the man’s spirit and inclining it to whichever part she wishes. Yet far be it that the earth should ever again produce an Eve, the author of her husband’s death! May no creature ever again ^C see a woman who casts out her husband with the sword. Let obsolete and unseemly memories cease: let what had been a sin to happen be put to silence.

V. But what of that wise man, the divine image, the venerable head of the world, the tongue of nature, emitting sounds like an angelic lyre, the ornament of the earth, when he had heard this? He was in like manner elated in spirit. For who of us would bear the hope of glory? And with truth abandoned, he pursued an empty spectrum; and longing for a brightness constant only to a dream, he departed, obscure and conspicuous for no brightness. And, to repeat with the words of Scripture what belongs to Scripture, he became of an obdurate and blind heart, and as one driven by the rein of arrogance, he rejoiced in the fornication of the divine precept. But he was led as an ox to the slaughter, and as a deer wounded by a shaft fixed in its breast. Just as a bird, speeding into a snare, in which it is brought down by sluggish negligence, not knowing that it was running to the hazard of its life. For, the food having been tasted, he was wounded in a miserable manner. Hence, fearing the disgrace of his foolish design, he meditates flight, and thinks with himself where he might hide his crime; where, I say, he might overwhelm the shame of being so conquered. Not otherwise than those who, having fallen into the nets, in vain beat themselves in every direction, by which they might extricate themselves; so also Adam, having received the wound of conscience, anxioously ran about the blessed stadium of that place, and seething with the anxiety of those things which had been presumed. But why do you plot flight, O head and root of the human race? Who will escape Him whom no one has ever escaped? Who has been hidden from Him who contains all things? “The Lord approaching, our Lord God, and not a God from afar.” Shall anyone skulk in the hidden places, and He not see? Does He not fill heaven and earth? Why do you hide under the fig tree like a thief, you prince and citizen of paradise? Why do you lurk under the tree, O ruler of the world? Come, proceed, confessing your sin against you to the good Lord. Repentance is a swifter propitiation; salvation is quicker by supplication. The merciful Lord, once besought, does not delay; He knows how to raise up those who have been broken; and so it was wholly necessary to act, and not indeed to weave excuses in sins.

VI. What, then, does Justice, that most swift to mercy and most tardy to wrath, look to in all these things? She calls him who thought he was hidden, as a ^D good shepherd calls the wandering sheep, and gives time for him to ingenuously confess his fault, nor does she immediately extinguish him who had ratified the sentence of death upon himself. But because he who was guilty of the fault did not proceed to words of lamentation, but to excuse; she indeed refutes the whole design more mildly, so as to show that nothing is hidden from her; yet she leaves him to those things which he chose, casting him out of paradise; and she condemns him to contend with difficulty against the adversary who had been a deserter, that she might not permit him to penetrate further to undermine the head of the one who lies in wait: and indeed, for the combat that follows for the prize of the robe, for the one stripped after he was dead...

^A moving him to clothe himself in the skin of a living creature; but in place of the solid food that had been preserved for the well-trained senses in perfect condition, he handed him over to be tormented by the labors of the age. Burdened by this, the transgressor is placed outside the royal courts, offering a pitiful spectacle of a creature subjected to him, with the King and Sovereign surely wounded in the battle.

VII. Furthermore, let us hear these things, we who are lovers of truth; and you, cultivators of piety, perceive with your ears how great an evil it is to be pierced by pride. Let us beware, brothers, let us beware of imitating those whom it is clear were rejected for that reason. "Let us not think more highly than we ought to think." For he who thinks himself to be something, when he is nothing, deceives himself. "Let us introduce humility to one another." Let not the teaching of Paul be foolishly reproved. Let no one among us boast in the words of a lie, ^B claiming for himself a pre-existence before the formation which is in this age. For the game of Gentile tales and the illusion of diabolical wickedness exist, which teaches its followers these obscure things, regarding whom it is aptly written: "Why do you pride yourself, earth and ashes?" Our leader and master, therefore, beseeches you now also through me: "Walk not as the Gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: who, being past feeling, have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness in greediness." We, however, have not so learned that man was created, and his generation; but in the way that Moses narrated beforehand. But if someone falsely accuses Moses, he refers him accordingly to the One who gave the oracle, as is that Egyptian scandal, namely Origen. O deep ignorance! O immense impudence! O demented spirit! Christ, who is God over all, He who is faithful and true in all His words and works, who is sufficient for Himself in all things, worthy of all acceptance as a witness, as far as He is concerned, validates the writing of Moses; and garrulous men are proud against the prophet and insult him, as if he did not perfectly narrate the things that belonged to man! But let no one (who follows the root of evil with a shoot) be offended by yielding to arrogance, so that he may feign for himself a return and complete restitution, such as belongs to souls. Let no one among you think what the tyrant thought, when with excessive temerity he said to God: "I will be like the Most High." Let there not sprout among you, as a ^D root of bitterness, that which existed similar to this in Adam, in that the arrogant man, who is an abomination to the Lord, is high-hearted: but rather feel this among you, as those who are most Christian, "which was also in Christ Jesus: who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant" and was pleasing to God. For those who recognize themselves are wise. Those who have introduced those things into their mind—it cast some headlong from the heavens, and others it relegated from the place of pleasure; but those who, like Christ, have preferred to be wise, He recalls them to the fatherland of paradise by a late return. "It is not grievous for me to say these things to you, but for you it is necessary." "Be not wise in your own conceits," nor stretch yourselves to those things that exceed your measure. "For God resists the proud." Let us obey the doctrine of the Scriptures, which everywhere cry out: "Do not boast and do not speak sublime things in pride; and let no big-talk proceed out of your mouth." Let us walk in those things in which we have been reborn through baptism and the coming of the holy and life-giving Spirit, as having been created from them in the beginning, and as those about to receive in them an eternal state, such as God the judge shall eventually bestow.

VIII. That we were not before our bodies were formed, as those have thought who have fallen from piety; let it suffice for you, who are wise, that the divine disputation which arose for the common good concerning Job, who was famous for his manifold struggle, cleanses the mind of all elation and teaches that neither did man exist before the earthly formation, nor did he know anything of human affairs. "For where," He says, "were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell me if you have understanding." But the righteous man does not answer the question in the manner of the most impious, who knows from that source that he was created later than the earth. For a lie will not enter before God. But if man was nothing before the earth and the things that are contained by the earth, he does not therefore rejoice in an antiquity equal to souls, insofar as he existed prior to the world. In vain, therefore, are the miserable, and those who think these things, inventing and dreaming up storms. And that created things are not changed by God through a certain vicarious return, the divine Scripture confirms, when it says thus: "He established a commandment, and it shall not pass away." In another place: "Have you made all the sons of men in vain?" Therefore "we look for the Savior," He who came immutably to our nature, the Lord, not to restore [souls] to spirits, as the heretics babble, but "who shall transfigure the body of our humility, as the great Paul says, that it may be conformed to the body of His glory, according to the working whereby He is able even to subdue all things to Himself," so that death may no longer rule over him; that he may no longer be subject to corruption; that he may no longer suffer the tyranny of sin; that passions may no longer hold sway in him, but he may have the Creator God working all in all. But I speak these things about those who in that judgment shall be placed incorruptibly on the right hand. But let us again reduce the discourse to those things which have been instituted.

IX. Therefore, laying hold of that human race—

or rather, the man who had been cast far away from the path of uprightness and had been rendered alien to the knowledge of God—the hater of mankind creeps within against the overcome, dragging his whole host with him; and within the fortifications of the breast, sending forth far and wide, as with the blast of a trumpet, the extreme sounds of impiety, he disturbed the composite rule of the better sovereignty with an uncertain power; and sowing illegitimate offshoots and weeds in the Lord's field, he commanded things that are contrary to nature to flourish along with those that are agreeable to nature. On account of which matter even the admirable Paul lamented, saying: "But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my members" (Rom. vii, 23).

^B How is it that the one who was radiant in his right hand is now wasted by sufferings? How is it that he who was in a perfectly healthy body is now full of sorrow, he who once possessed great admiration? How is it that the sacred tabernacle has become a dwelling for robbers? How is it that he who was guileless and free from deceit has yielded to a shop of deceit for the most wicked? How is it that the dwelling-place of light has become a cave of darkness? How is it that the house of prayer has become a scene of vanity? How is it that the bridal chamber of hymns has become a common shelter for thieves? How is it that he who was upright in heart has stood with a double mind? How is it that he who was enslaved to divine law is deceived by his adversaries? How is it that he who was formed in the image of God has been compared to beasts and made similar to them? How is it that he who was created in the divine image has become similar to vanity? And these, indeed, are but a few of our own points; yet as for those things that are against us, any speech is too brief to be able to recount them. For although many have scrutinized many things, prophets, just men, and historians have all alike proved unequal to the struggle. Nor, indeed, should anyone think God the author of evils. For the cause of him who is accused of the crime is immune from every crime, as it is written: "God did not make death, nor does he delight in the destruction of the living: for the impious have summoned it with their hands and words" (Sap. i, 13). Wherefore the heavenly beings were hostile toward the earth-born who had stumbled into vice; and the earthly creature, not willingly, was subjected to the vanity of the human race, as the divine Apostle speaks (Rom. viii, 20), but because of him who had subjected it in the hope of that liberty which seemed to be laid up in hope. But thus far regarding the worse things, lest, when the joyful day has shone forth, we burden our ears more than is just by rubbing again those things which bring distress. Let us, therefore, approach that which presses upon us and is of the institution.

X. Truly, I cannot bear to pass over that stupor of our first parent without a sense of pain. For the evil is common, and therefore the mourning is common. For this reason, the senses of my heart have been consumed. Rising tears interrupt the course of my sermon. For it is necessary to remember in few words those sad things that have happened to us, in order that with greater desire and more intense gratitude—as usually happens in longer illnesses—we may look hereafter toward the salvation brought to us by the Lord’s piety. Let us, therefore, recall with mournful lamentation what things belong to Adam, so that we may rejoice in what belongs to Christ. Let us lament the condemnation, so that we may celebrate the justification with festive joys. Let us mourn the reward of sin, so that we may be turned to hilarity by the gifts of grace. Let us weep for the fall, so that we may glory in the excellence of the resurrection, just as the Lord says: "Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted" (Matth. v, 5). Alas, my soul! For the heaven was astonished and the earth shuddered, as the affairs of the first parent so suddenly changed. The sun took up mourning when it saw the work formed by the divine hand become a mockery and a plaything for the devil. The virtues that had been joined by friendship were saddened by that unexpected change. How is he to be deplored who once enjoyed unblemished happiness? How is he to be lamented who was distinguished by the clarity of his name? How is he without honor, who was in honor? How is he infirm, who was powerful? How is he in sin, who was just? How is he in servitude, who flourished in liberty? How is he enslaved to tyranny, who was powerful? How is he bound by vice, who was innocent? How is he without order, who rejoiced in compounded order? How does he lead a sad life, who led a blessed one? How is he in death, who was immortal? How is he addicted to corruption, who lived immune from corruption? How is he in pain, who was of joyful mind? How is he in calamity, who was burdened by no care? How is he laboring under shame and disgrace, who flourished with confidence? How is he divided by strivings, who was peaceful? How is he held in hatred, who was supremely desirable? How is he a culprit, who was just? How is he nursing evil thoughts, who was accustomed to good ones? How is he in punishments, he whose right it was to judge those to be punished? How is he in war, who had peace? How does he labor under an evil reputation? ^{C D}

XI. Since, therefore, the tyranny of the devil was prevailing against us and raging, and was subjecting every soul to slavery—since no one could inhibit the course of vice—it pleased the most powerful and most wise Lord of all that, like an excellent physician, he should apply a visitation to the infirm as an opportune aid, and through that very nature which had succumbed to the most wicked one, by his own inclination toward it, he should vanquish his adversary and bring him into subjection, just as it is written: "For what was impossible for the law, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and of sin, condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom. viii, 3). When, therefore, the fullness of time came, and that time approached in which God was to be propitiated, then also were remedies clearly revealed through him who is powerful, of whom it had already been predicted before by the prophetic oracle: "I have set help in one that is mighty" (Psal. lxxxviii, 20). For in place of the dragon, the author of evil who had brought sorrows into the world, the archangel, bearing the joyful message of gladness, precedes the Lord's descent from the heavens: and in his place, he who "thought it not robbery..."

^A to be equal with God," who is by nature God and Lord, the governor and author of the regeneration of that nature which He had created, exists: instead of the Virgin Eve who had been the minister of death, the Virgin most pleasing to God and full of His grace is chosen for the service of life: a virgin caught in the female sex, but devoid of female wickedness: a virgin innocent, without spot, lacking every fault, undefiled, unpolluted, holy in soul and body, [sicut lilium inter medias spinas germinans]: untaught in the evils of Eve; not defiled by womanly vanity; not instructed in old wives' tales; her ears not dulled by perverse hearing; her tongue not polluted by dishonest speech, her eyes not infected by illicit sight; who does not mar her natural complexion with applied colors, nor cover her cheeks with paints; nor procure brightness for her neck by gems fashioned into necklaces; nor bind her hands with bracelets and her feet with golden chains; nor be softened by the perfumes of ointment-makers; nor have she received a splendid robe from men as a bride; nor have she engraved in her heart the images of error: let these and similar things be far away (for there is no communion between darkness and light): but she who, even before she was born, was consecrated to God the creator; but born as a monument of a grateful soul, she was offered as a sacred fosterling to dwell in the sanctuary and temple, a disciple of the law, steeped in the Holy Spirit, clothed in divine grace as with a cloak, wise in soul, betrothed to God in heart, breathing the splendors of holiness with her eyes, sounding with canticles in her ears, with honey-dropping tongue, with lips dripping with ^B the honeycomb, beautiful in her steps, more beautiful in her character; venerable in speech, more venerable in action; gentle in character, gentler in her movements; good in the eyes of men, better in the sights of God; she who carried God in her womb, and truly gave birth to God in her delivery; and, to speak in a word, all beautiful as her will is inclined, and all sweet as a cell of ointment.

XII. Divine providence has given us this woman, worthy of the Creator, a conciliator of good things, not one who incites to disobedience, but who exists as a leader toward obedience; not one who offers the death-bringing fruit, but who provides the bread of life; not one who easily grows wanton in soul, but who exists with a robust sense; not one soft in thought, but firm in mind; who conversed magnificently with the archangel, and who confounded the author of evil; who, indeed, at the sight of the angel, was wondering, like one unlike the grand-daughter of Adam; who nevertheless, with a mind prudent and cautious, attended to these things which the messenger was bringing, lest perhaps the one who was falsely benevolent might visit her as he visited her in the temple—just as he did in paradise; lest the injurious violator might leap rashly into the house of God, as he did into Eden; lest the auspicious message might be a deception. What then, heavenly messenger? Guessing her internal holy affection and the cleverness of her mind from her conspicuous appearance, and admiring her composure of prudence, and from the double ^C extremity, weaving for her a crown of joy and benediction, as it were of flowers, standing erect, he offers praise, waving his hand and shouting with his word: "Hail; full of grace; the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou, the most beautiful and fairest of women. The Lord is with thee," thou who art all-venerable, all-glorious, all-good. "The Lord is with thee," thou venerable, incomparable one, surpassing all brightness, all composed of the light's flashes, worthy of God, to be blessed. I marvel greatly at your modesty, O most exalted one. "Fear not, Mary," bride of God, and pledge brought up in the holy place. I am not about to announce to you a conception in iniquities, or a birth in sins, but I am going to set forth a joy that may take away the sadness of Eve. I do not announce a birth in pains, or a delivery full of mourning, but I prefigure a nativity that may console and bring gladness. Do not weigh what is divine by the human custom. For I do not signify a mournful childbearing or a bothersome delivery, but I preach beforehand the rising of the light of the whole world. For because of you the sorrows of Eve have ceased; through you evils have perished; through you error has departed; through you the curse has been abolished; Eve has been redeemed through you. For the thing that is born ^D of the holy is Holy; Holy, and the Lord of all saints; Holy, and whose it is to impart holiness; an excellent thing, which is born from an excellent mother; inexplicable, which proceeds from the inexplicable; "the Son of the Most High," because He arises from the Most High; not the work of flesh desiring, but the showing of the Holy Spirit; not the culture of a man, but the power of the Most High. What proceeds is the good will of God. It is not a mere man that is born, but God the Word incarnate. Not the fruit of your autumn womb, but the offspring of immortality. Not a harvest granted by the gift of nature, but a flower sprung from God who sows. For you shall bring forth the beginning that is without a beginning; the infant, superior to times, more ancient than the ages, the offspring of the Virgin; the everlasting one, suckling at the breast; the one older than his mother, in need of milk; the one who nourishes all things, dressed in human form; the splendor of God, appearing poor; the king, having no one to succeed him. "Hail, therefore, Virgin full of grace; mother among virgins, and virgin among mothers; the figure of both, and one who has surpassed both in reality.

XIII. When, therefore, the reasoning of the conception of the time of the Most High has been completed, and the King of glory is born in the flesh, the meeting of things celestial and terrestrial comes to pass. For the angels, lowering their eyes from the heights, see the star from Jacob; but the Magi, with their countenances lifted on high, behold the star which is in Bethlehem, and at the same time, gathered in the cave, with a number equal to the three spiritual and sensible gifts, they worship the one of the Trinity: with whom let us also fittingly give praise: "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace; goodwill toward men." Let them confess to the Lord his mercies, and his wonders to the sons of men;

^A because he sent his Word and Son, and snatched us from our destructions. You who fear the Lord, praise him; because nothing receding from the Father inclined the heavens, and descended; and it pleased him that the fullness of the Godhead, which cannot be contained, should be contained in the Virgin’s womb. Sing to the Lord a new song, for he has done marvelous things. For the Splendor of the glory and the Image of the more hidden paternal substance deigned to assume flesh from an inviolate Virgin. Rejoice to God, all the earth: say to God, How terrible are thy works; for he who is in the form of the Father willed to become conformed to us in our poverty indivisibly; indeed, begotten before the daystar, in the last times he claimed a mother for himself; and subsisting as the Wisdom of the Father, he built for himself a temple in the womb of the venerable Virgin, not made by hands, and dwelt among us, for the reason that the Most High does not dwell, as it is written, in things made by hands; and he came to be with us, ^B who is not separated from the paternal bosom; who sits above the cherubic throne, and is praised by the celestial orders; that Prince of princes, Lord of lords, the power of the powerful, the free capacity of those using it by mere right, the life of all, who alone with the Holy Spirit knows the Father, and is known by the Father and the Spirit alone: who sits on the equal throne of the kingdom, abounds with equal power, enjoys the same splendor of honor, is undivided in nature, who is in all and above all, King of kings, Lord of lords,—alone having immortality with the Begetter, and dwelling in inaccessible light; whom no one has seen with naked deity or can even see, he came with his servants: not repaying just as the offense, so the gift, but inducing a grace far more abundant than the evils, and bestowing things far more blissful upon the ill-fated, magnificently granting most holy things to the wicked. For he who is powerful, joining our infirmity to himself, made it stronger than death, and assuming to himself the nature which, conquered, had yielded to corruption, he strengthened it against corruption with his own powers; and bearing the guilty image of Adam, he rendered it a victor over sin: and to speak in a word, he liberated those liable for all crimes by that adorable inclination of his, so that as sin reigned in death, so his grace might reign in us unto life eternal.

XIII. But if some lover of contention, and one of the stiff-necked Jews, should think he could refute the discourse as if it were not true, and has ears to hear, let him hear their more recent interpreter Aquila, thus introducing Jeremiah as a patron to the Christians, when he says: "The Lord created a new thing in the woman"; this indeed was created for the planting of a new salvation, and not the old. And this indeed is Aquila. But the Septuagint exposition declared the matter thus: "The Lord created a planting in ^C new salvation, in which salvation men shall walk."

Truly this is a mystery of truth, surpassing all magnitude and magnificence, which was manifested in the flesh, and worked a new salvation in the midst of the earth; in which men walked, having abandoned their conduct in their ancestral error, and having turned to the living God. O admirable thing! O what power of Christian piety, that it can even transfer those who are exceedingly studious of contention to itself! This, indeed, is read to have happened to that old Balaam: who, from a profane prophet, was transmuted into a prophetic oracle, God thus changing his tongue, so that he might announce to the Gentiles true things. "For there shall arise," he says, "a star out of Jacob, and a man shall rise out of Israel, and shall strike the princes of Moab, and shall devastate the sons of Ammon." And what do I say of Balaam? Consider, I pray, beloved, even in Greece and among the barbarians, the truth of the Christian faith announced, for the condemnation of those who spurn it. For they say that when a most grievous plague was hanging over Greece and consuming the entire region, and the citizens were pressing hard with more abundant supplications and sacrifices, by which they thought their false divinities should be placated: as therefore there was no voice, or any hearing, as the Scripture speaks, they entered upon another plan, not at all inconsistent or less prudent; for it was that they should transfer their treaties of peace to an unknown God; to him who indeed was, but whom they, unworthy, did not know. But when that which had been consulted was effected, propitiation followed, discerning the exterminator and the living along the way. But what do they say he did then? Surely, they entreated him whom they had previously honored in vain with sacrifices, that he might give an answer, by which they might adorn the altar erected to the unknown God as with a title. These, furthermore, were the Athenians, men entirely gaping in this, that they might either say or hear something new. But the mention of this altar is in the book of the Acts. The inquiry indeed holds it thus:

"Prophet to us, prophet, Titan Phoebe Apollo, whose house will this be?"

But while the one who was impelling both to this did not permit them to be silent, that divine power, she utters with a sincere oracle that which she had heard predicted by the prophets of truth, saying thus:

"Whatever things are congruent to truth and honesty, these do: For I declare a God supreme, King three-in-one; Whose incorrupt Word, conceived in the womb of a placid maiden, Passing through the midst like a fiery dart, Will offer the world to the Father, catching the universe. This house shall be; Maria, moreover, is the name he possesses."

This, clearly, this was inscribed in Athens on stone tablets for an everlasting memory before the gates. But we shall add also something else to these things which have been said, from Virgil, the learned poet among the Romans, a man not at all obscure, or [the]

one whose wisdom is praiseworthy. For indeed, in the book where he writes the Idyll, where he makes mention of the Sibyl, he adds these words: Now a new offspring is sent down from high heaven. ^A O miracle! "Who shall declare the powers of the Lord, [and] make all his praises heard?" For he has forced our adversaries into our own camps; and it has pleased Him to arm the truth with His enemies' own weapons. Let Nestorius be confounded, who abolished the virginal birth. Let Arius be ashamed, who divided the Trinity. Thanks, however, to God for His ineffable gift, "who has delivered us from the power of darkness and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of His love." Thanks be to God for His ineffable gift, "who called us with a holy calling unto the acquisition of glory," and life. Thanks be to God for His ineffable gift, "who has blessed us in the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has graced us in His beloved Son." Thanks be to God for His ineffable ^B gift, who, because of the great love with which He loved us, sent His only-begotten Son into the world. Thanks be to God for His ineffable gift, "who made Him who knew no sin, to be sin for us, that we might become the justice of God in Him." Let us draw near, most beloved, to the love of Him who loved us. Let us receive with such great faith the humanity with which He shone upon us. Let us celebrate the day with spiritual joy and reason. Let us use abundance of liberty for piety. Most willingly let us glory in the confession of faith. Let us boast of the Christian truth. Let us celebrate a spiritual rejoicing. Let us constitute choirs which befit the saints. Let us shout with the voice of the prophet: "Know, O nations, and be overcome; listen even to the furthest part of the earth. You who have prevailed, be overcome; and let no word ^C whatsoever which you have spoken remain among you, because God is with us." To Him be glory unto ages of ages. Amen.

Fragments on the Acts of the Apostles, provided by the Catena of Cramer (Oxford, 1838) under the name of Theodotus.

II, 17. "And it shall come to pass in the last days, says God, I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh." [He is] declaring that [the Spirit] was placed upon the infant, and was His; and again he calls the same person man, and styles him the Author of life, showing him to be at once the Maker of all things and a man who has tasted death.

XIII, 40. "Beware, therefore, lest that which is spoken in the prophets come upon you; behold, you despisers, and wonder, and perish; for I work a work in your days."

Theodotus of Ancyra. But indeed, he did not specify the time; for the energy of the Spirit and the accompanying divine power sufficed to reveal the time indicated, which was shown by the very events themselves, ^D existing as it did in the days of the Apostles. It is shown, therefore, through all things, that this is the time spoken of by the prophet; for the Jews cannot, even if they act shamelessly, contradict this; for they do not have any other time to point out besides that one in which these things came to pass.

III, 15, 16. "But you killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses; and by faith in His name, this man whom you see and know, His name has made strong."

Theodotus, Bishop of Ancyra. And indeed, the Author of our life is immortal, but, having been united to the mortal, He was killed, he says; for the union towards God does not permit the sufferings to be ascribed to man alone; for this reason He calls Jesus the only-begotten Son of God, [and] also the title which is from Mary, signifying that the one who [was] made partaker in the infant became His own; and he calls the same person again man, and styles him the Author of life, showing him [to be] at once the maker of all things and a man who has tasted death.

Theodotus of Ancyra. These things seem to be said historically for the present; but the meaning of the words is as follows: The prophet Habakkuk diverted the discourse from the injustice of the judges to a universal economy, as things so situated required wonderful care, which strikes and destroys the despisers. But what wonderful care could we speak of, other than that which came to pass through the economy and advent of Christ, in which He primarily destroyed the harsh demons who are the despisers of our nature; He also bridled injustice, so that what is said in the Psalms might be fulfilled: "Arise, O Lord, let not man prevail; let the nations be judged before You; appoint, O Lord, a lawgiver over them; let the nations know that they are men."