Four Books Against the Manichaeans

A NARRATIVE BY THE SAME MOST HOLY PHOTIUS REGARDING THE RESURGENCE OF THE MANICHÆANS

SERMON I

^A I. Since we see that it is unknown to many whence that detestable and newly-manifested system of the Pauliciani received this name, and that many vague, inconsistent, and conflicting notions regarding this matter are spread about everywhere, I considered it not inappropriate to recount in a popular and brief discussion what I have learned from those who have detested the crime of this apostasy and have washed away its stain with the tears of repentance, and to add those things which were innovated and devised by their successors beyond the original doctrines of the ancient Manichæans. ^B II. Samosata is a city of Syria, where in former times...

the God-detested mind of the Manichæans flourished. In this place there was a woman named Callinice, who had gathered into herself the entire filth of this heresy. She bore two sons—would that God had averted it—whom they named Paul and John. These sons, having become no less children of that wretched heresy than they were of her womb, received the poison of the apostasy in its undiluted ^B form. And, as they excelled others in impiety and were active in doing evil, the initiates and mystagogues of such detestable wickedness sent them forth into the country now called Armenia. The village of Phanarea, having received its name in the local tongue, welcomed them before all others and nourished the seeds of impiety; from which fact also, one of the neighboring villages was assigned the name Episparis. Therefore, from one of the aforementioned men, who bore the name Paul, the lovers of the apostasy changed the designation that is derived from Christ to the name of "Paulicians," ^C though others say they did not receive this barbarous denomination from one, but from both names joined together, and that because they ought to have been called "Pauloioannes," they were instead called what they are now named.

III. As time flowed on, the senate of that apostasy ordained another teacher for them, who, drawing his name from his parents, Constantine, changed his own name to Silvanus. And indeed, those ^D of the apostasy, who were the bodyguards of that apostasy, held him in much greater...

VARIOUS READINGS AND NOTES

^A honor. This man—he, I say, who was most skilled in committing acts that were not even to be dared—did not dare to commit his heretical dogmas to writing. Yet, by means of frequent teaching and having secured those who were initiated into his mysteries, he taught them to hold fast, inviolate, the orgies ^B of his impiety. He embraced the Gospel and the Apostle, which the divine assembly of Christians honors and cherishes, and he handed them down in writing to his followers, having made no significant change in the terms and names, nor corrupting the form of the language, as Valentinus ^C and others had done; instead, he fundamentally subverted and corrupted the pious sense, leaving nothing undone to draw all these things toward the opinion of his own apostasy. And he gave them the texts of the divine Gospel to hold—as has been said—without ^D openly vitiating them with parentheses or additions; but he subjected to them meanings with which the sacred utterances have no affinity. No congruity is perceived between these; on the contrary, they fight against one another, and by this, the consistency of the apostolic and evangelical words is all the more clearly demonstrated. Having established these things, he laid down the decree that nothing else should be read by them besides the Gospel and the Apostle: but he himself, having passed a certain time, perished more in soul than in body.

^A IV. After Silvanus, Simeon gets hold of the leadership of the impious doctrine, having himself also renamed himself Titus. Next was an Armenian by birth, Gegnæsius by name, who had changed his designation to Timothy. The fourth was Joseph, who had changed his own name to Epaphroditus. Then came Zacharias, whom even a not insignificant portion of the heresy considers a mercenary and unworthy of their teaching chair. Sixth among them comes Baanes the filthy, after whom there arises a seventh and final evil, Sergius, who also transformed his own name into Tychicus. These, from the time when that rebellious and Christ-hating faction received the name of Paul, were the masters of the defection who, up to our own time, have progressed to such an extent. ^B But one must carefully observe and know this: that the present children of this defection, when someone demands of them that they renounce the leaders of such a detestable sect, willingly anathematize Manes, and Paul, and John, and certain others; yet they can by no means endure to strike with anathema Constantine, whom they call Silvanus, or Simeon, whom they call Titus, or Gegnæsius, whom they call Timothy, or Joseph, whom they call Epaphroditus, or the filthy Baanes and Sergius, whom they call Tychicus. Instead, they embrace and accept them as if they were apostles of Christ and teachers of piety. However, not all of them, nor even all of those aforesaid, do they treat in the same way; but those who have descended in succession down to Baanes and Sergius, they acknowledge equally as divine men. ^C From that point, however, they have split into two opposing parties, some deifying Baanes, others Sergius; from this they are stirred up into such mutual contention and sedition that their disputes even proceed to the point of murder.

V. They claim for themselves six Churches, the first of which they call Macedonia; the second, Achaia; the third, Philippi; the fourth, Laodicea; the fifth, Ephesus; and the last, the Church of the Colossians. But these are indeed the names of cities which ancient history sets forth and the divine Paul mentions. Yet they, having in mind to leave nothing sincere, nothing unadulterated, and not even being covered in shame by things explored and noted as false by sight itself, call a certain small town of Colonia, which is called Cibossa, "Macedonia"; where Constantine, called Silvanus, was the master of the defection. ^D The village of Sa-

Samosata is Mananalis ^A, which was the place of the teaching of Gegnesius, who is also called Timotheus. They apply the name of "Achaia" to this place; and as many as were disciples of Joseph—also called Epaphroditus—and of Zacharias the hired shepherd, they bestow upon them the name of the Philippians. To those who dwell in the small town of Argaus, they give the name of the Laodiceans. Those who reside in Mopsuestia they transform into the Ephesians, just as they also refer those called Cynochorites to the Colossians. They attach and attribute both the system and the doctrine of these three churches to Sergius, who is also called Tychicus. But the teachers and their so-called churches depend on these; and this intricate frame of apostasy is composed not of one error, but of many and various ones. ^B

VI. They confess two principles, just as the Manichaeans do. They say that one is God, the heavenly Father, whom they remove from the power of this entire universe, assigning to Him only the dominion of the world to come; and they say that there is another, the Creator of the world, to whom they grant the authority of the present age. ^C And those who are truly Christians, these thrice-accursed men call "Romans," while applying to themselves the name of "Christians," from which they are completely alien. They speak of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit—words godly in themselves—but they subject them to the most extreme impiety. For they do not think or speak as the catholic and apostolic Church of God does. But having torn the words from that source, they apply them to the most ungodly concepts, and readily say: "Anathema be those who do not believe in the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit," meaning by "Father" not the Almighty and Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible, but… ^D

rather—adding the heavenly one—they ^A assign to him neither the authority nor the power over heaven and the things that are in heaven. Some, however, entrust to him the oversight of heaven, but no longer that of the things contained therein. And this is the first article of their impiety.

VII. ^B Furthermore, those men, who deserve to perish not once but thrice, do not shrink from uttering blasphemies against our all-holy Lady the Theotokos—things which it is not lawful to commit to writing or even to hear—saying: "We believe in the holy Theotokos, in whom the Lord entered and went forth." By these words, they hint at the Jerusalem above, and say that Christ is the forerunner who entered into it for us, just as the divine Apostle says (Heb. xii, 22). Sometimes, however, when they are compelled to confess that Christ proceeded from the Virgin, and when they are pressed quite hard, they monstrously claim that he brought his body down from above, but that he passed through her as if through a conduit, and that this immaculate and pure Virgin, after the saving birth, bore other children by Joseph. In the same way, they shower the communion of the precious body and blood of Christ our God with endless insults; they say that they do receive the body and blood, while applying monstrous interpretations to the words of the Lord, which they say he uttered when he handed it to the apostles: "Take, ^C eat, and drink" (Matt. xxvi, 26); but they claim he offered no bread or wine at all. Reviling the life-giving cross, they say that they do adore and accept the cross itself, claiming as they do, these deceivers and sorcerers, that the cross is Christ himself. For he, they say, stretched out his hands in the shape of a cross. But they say that one should not adore or embrace the true cross, since it is wood, and an instrument of evildoers, and lies under a curse.

VIII. Moreover, they turn away from the holy prophets and all the Old Scripture and the other saints, calling them robbers and thieves, especially the

coryphaeus ^A of the apostles, Peter, whom they malign, saying that he became a denier of the faith in his master and Christ. And this, although their master Manes cries out to them openly ^B and says: "I am not so unmerciful as that Christ who said, 'Whoever denies me before men, I will also deny him.' But I say that whoever denies me before men, and provides for his own salvation by a lie, as if he had not denied me, I will receive with joy, and I shall consider his backsliding and his lie as a guarding and preservation of my confession." Yet, while they hold this position and, when fear stands before them, easily deny the confession of their own dogma, claiming that they are liable to no crime even if they should repeat the denial a thousand times, they nevertheless rule that he who, for a short time, when the fear of so many dangers surrounded him, suffered some human frailty and slipped into denial, is completely to be cast off and rejected—not for the feigned cause they allege, but for another which they keep silent and conceal; for it was regarding their apostasy that he beforehand proclaimed, saying: ^C "Make haste to be found by him in peace, without spot and blameless, and consider the long-suffering of our Lord to be salvation, just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his Epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable pervert, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction." For these words of the coryphaeus openly proclaim their audacity and impiety; for they accept the very words of the Lord, and the apostolic and other Scriptures, I mean the Acts of the Apostles and the so-called Catholic Epistles, except those which are attributed to the coryphaeus (Peter)—for they do not even receive those in word. These, I say, are they who truly pervert and distort things to their own destruction. And not all of them harmonize the Acts of the Apostles and the Catholic Epistles ^D with the others, but some among them count them with the rest. But concerning the prophets and the Old Testament, and concerning other holy men, the beginning was our Lord, the first of the apostles, to whom the Father first revealed the Son, whom Christ rightly called blessed, the called and the elect, the table-companion and fellow-traveler, the good and proven disciple.

^A Yet regarding the prophets and the Old Testament, and those other holy men who shone forth according to it, and concerning the pillar of the apostles, they are thus maddened.

IX. They call their own assemblies ^B a "Catholic" Church, especially when they move toward pious arguments and discussions. For they call their assemblies among themselves "houses of prayer." Furthermore, while they spit upon the saving baptism, they feign to receive it, submitting the words of the Gospel to the vocal utterance of baptism. For they say, "The Lord said: 'I am the living water.'" Nevertheless, when they fall into some violent bodily ailment, they place upon themselves the venerable and life-giving cross made of wood. Afterwards, having obtained healing, they break it or trample upon it and cast it away. Indeed, even their children (when they are held by the presbyters of the Church in captivity, as often happens) they ask to be illuminated with the saving baptism, foolishly thinking that the cross and baptism benefit the body—for they are men certainly unworthy of any benefit or aid—but they do not believe their power and operation confer anything toward the cleansing of the soul, nor any other such benefit. Indeed, not a few of them also share in the communion of the venerable body and blood of Christ our God. But they partake of this only to deceive the more simple-minded. ^C Furthermore, regarding what has been said, they do not accept the presbyters of the Catholic Church, nor the rest of the priests. For, they say, the council against Christ was composed of the priests and elders of the people. However, those among them who hold the rank of priests they do not call priests, but *synecdemos* and notaries. These men, moreover, exhibit no difference from the multitude in appearance, nor in diet, nor in any other way that would demonstrate a more venerable manner of life. ^D

^AX. The Gospel which is held among us, they do not hesitate to venerate, though not, indeed, where the figure of the venerable cross is delineated, but in the remaining parts of the book where the image of the cross is not marked. They say, however, that they venerate the book because it contains the Lord’s discourses. But in all that pertains to the theory of their dogmas, they are thus impious, and both against the truth and altogether discordant with themselves. Their manner of life is full of licentiousness, and full of unspeakable pollutions and unimaginable filth. For they use commixtions of both ^B natures, being shameless regarding every unmentionable practice. Except that they say some of them abstain from sexual intercourse with their own mothers; but they deliver their whole life over to drunkenness and debauchery, and pursue every other corruption of morals. And why should I go through each point? But this nonetheless must be said: that their life in no way differs from their doctrine.

XI. And so much for those matters. But if any wish to look into their impiety from the beginning, and whence its first seeds were sown, Cyril, to whom the steering-oars of the sacred city were entrusted, will be their guide in history, as will the great and miraculous Epiphanius, and indeed not a few of those who recorded ecclesiastical ^C histories. Titus also, the bishop of the Bostrenes, and Sarapion of Thmuis; and Alexander,

^A who held the archbishopric of Cyropolis. Besides these, he who triumphed over all of them and most powerfully refuted the impiety in question is Heraclianus, bishop of Chalcedon, who instituted contests in twenty books against their apostasy. But it did not seem to me inappropriate or useless to review cursorily and briefly certain of their tenets, which contribute to a most thorough understanding of this subject, for those who possess the necessary knowledge.

XII. A certain Scythianus, Egyptian by fatherland but Saracen by race, lived in Alexandria, neither consorting with Christians nor embracing the doctrine of the Jews. He, having become skilled in the language through Aristotelian books ^B which he poorly understood, composed four books, of which…

VARIOUS READINGS AND NOTES

…my most learned colleague, the illustrious Jacques Basnage, is about to exhibit, or rather has already exhibited, in the new edition of the *Antiquae Lectiones* of Canisius, which he is preparing, the specimen of which was published last year and presents, among other things, the commentaries of Titus and Serapion. For he observed in the prefatory note that the Holstenian Hamburg manuscript is in many places mutilated and, owing to an inverted order, disordered; yet he has restored it following the lead of the index of arguments prefixed to Titus's own treatise, so that the three books now appear complete. Moreover, the author himself frequently uses philosophical arguments, but rarely uses more divine Scripture.

^C …in the manuscript, which others render more correctly as Serapion, of whose name others among the Greek writers, especially a certain sophist and comic poet, not to mention the others, also exist. His treatise exists with us in Greek along with that of Titus of Bostra, contained in a 21-page folio, and will appear in the repeated edition of the *Lectiones Canisianae* alongside the Latin version of Turrianus. Meanwhile, in the second and third pages of our manuscript, various things are missing, rendering the sense broken. Serapion took it upon himself to refute only one error of Manes, by which body and matter are peddled as evil in themselves. That the Reverend Sebastian Gottfried Starch possessed ^D a Greek transcript of both commentaries, Titus and Serapion, is attested by the Reverend Martin Dieterich in his funeral program.

…published by Fr. Combefis in volume II of the *Auctarium Novissimum*, Paris 1672, folio. From this [manuscript], hitherto unpublished, Alexander Morus cites a certain passage in his *Notes on the New Testament*, p. 243.

…our Photius in the *Bibliotheca*, codex 85.

…acquired by the work and learning of the celebrated Jo. Albertus Fabricius, in *Biblioth. Graec.* lib. V, p. 289ff. You might perhaps wonder why no mention is made here of Petrus Siculus, whom the chronologies make almost contemporary with Photius, whose *History of the vain and futile heresy of the Manichaeans, who are also called Paulicians*, was published by Matthaeus Rader at Ingolstadt, 1604, 4to. And since a comparison of the work of both, Photius and Siculus, shows to the eye that one used the work of the other, I would not hesitate to affirm on this basis that the Siculus wrote his down after Photius, who otherwise would seem to have been about to mention him with the others.

…in *Catechesis* VI, § 13; which even Petrus Siculus recorded in his *History of the Manichaeans*, p. 20ff. Both depart in many places from the words of Cyril, on which, however, Petrus Siculus insists more than Photius. The Reverend Thomas Milles compared them with each other in his edition of Cyril, p. 92ff. Therefore, in our judgment, this Scythianus was the first among Christians who was the author of the foolish opinion concerning two principles, which very thing Archelaus in the *Disputation with Manes*, p. 95, and Epiphanius, heresy 66, and others relate. Theodoret (*Haeret. Fabul.* lib. I, c. 35), Cedrenus (p. 259) seem to depart from these; and hence perhaps, because he uses the same words, Suidas (vol. II, p. 491). For there they all write that Manes was also called Scythianus, which many have accepted in the sense that they judged Manes and Scythianus to be the same person. In my judgment they wished to indicate by this appellation of Scythianus the primary origin of the error, especially because the cunning genius of Manes and his happy success in business seemed to abolish the memory of Scythianus and Terebinthus, his predecessors. I would certainly rather suspect this than to think, with the very learned Pearson in his *Adversaria Miscellanea* (c. 35, p. 355), of either a "fault of memory" or a "scribal error" of the author. You may deservedly wonder that this Scythianus is referred by Archelaus (l.c.) to the times of the apostles, since his own narrative implies that between Scythianus and Manes there intervened only one Terebinthus, a disciple of the former, so that consequently Manes, if he had been more advanced in age, could have seen Scythianus—which the fragment of the letter to Scythianus, if it is the same as ours, written by Manes, which you have in the illustrious Fabricius (*Biblioth. Graec.* lib. V, p. 285), could have persuaded us.

…a most excellent interpreter of the Greek language. But it seems Photius was thinking here rather of the Aristotelian doctrines and the skill of propounding them to others. This is suggested by the phrase of Cyril himself, who, instead of what Photius has, writes "having imitated an Aristotelian life," that is, as I interpret it, "having followed the Aristotelian method of philosophizing." For Tzetzes, commenting on Hesiod, and Menagius, on Diogenes Laertius (p. 439b), pointed out long ago that *bion* is also used for "craft" or "art and discipline."

…in *Manete*, p. 96. If it be compared with the words of Siculus, it will be clear that one has followed in the footsteps of the other. For since Cyril (l.c.), whom both read, enumerates those four books briefly and nakedly only as to their titles, each of them adds certain things similar to each other. Here is the description of Petrus Siculus for you: "He composed four books..."

^A one he called the Gospel, in which he combined certain acts of our God, pernicious and abominable, impious and hateful to God; the second he inscribed as the Chapter, and the third he dignified with the name of Mysteries, in which, as seemed good to him, certain subversions and calumnies are formulated against the Law and the prophets; the fourth, which produces death of the soul, is inscribed as the Treasure of Life. Now, to this Scythian there was a disciple named Terebinthus ^B. And when the master had perished by a bitter death in Judea, to which he had migrated, the disciple of iniquity succeeded to the inheritance of his money and books. But dwelling in Palestine and Judea and condemned by the judgment of all the pious, and unable to bear the disgrace, he departed for Persia, having changed his name to Budas. For already his fame, being bruited about, had gained hatred for the impious man even before he came into the company of anyone. ^C But he did not receive the benefit of a changed name. For when, on account of his works and doctrine, he had become known to those who previously did not know him, he was refuted and driven out by the learned men among the Persians—men who indeed did not think piously, but who nonetheless maintained a better opinion concerning all things than did he. From there, a fugitive, he insinuated himself craftily into the house of a certain widow, seeking lodging. Afterwards, having climbed upon a certain roof, he invoked demons with shouting, according to his custom—those whom even ^D today the lovers of the Manichaean defection are accustomed to invoke when they celebrate their detestable Ischada. After this man had finished his detestable initiation, he became the object of a divine and truly just warning. For, thrown from the roof, he was crushed in his whole body amid his very impiety and execrable mysteries, and he exchanged life for death; and thus another beast of impiety was cut down. The widow, however, did not reap any good fruit from her impious guest.

^A For when she saw herself bereft of her husband and children and the rest of her family, and that a legacy of wealth had come to her, she bought a boy for a price in silver—Cubricus by name—as a consolation for her solitude. ^B Having adopted him, she had him schooled in the disciplines of the Persians, and sharpened a bitter weapon against the human race. For when the widow had passed away, he became the heir to both her wealth and her impious books. But he changed his status-derived name of slavery ^C into Manes, so that the stigma of servitude would not be rubbed into him. In the Persian tongue, this name signifies someone eloquent and strenuous in argument. And yet, to many, he seemed to be worthy of being called "Manes"—deriving it more from the Greek language than from the Persian. For in reality, he was, as if truly a ^D receptacle of madness, if ever anyone was, having contained within himself the whole spirit of error and being impelled by it—he who even frenziedly dared to call himself the Paraclete and the Holy Spirit, having adopted such a manner of mimicry from those who had led the way for him. For indeed, among those predecessors, Scythianus had dared to call himself the Father, and Terebinthus the Son of God, born of a Virgin (oh, the godlessness that knows no bounds!)

^A He gathered twelve disciples, to whom he sent out as heralds of his error. But that thunderstruck Manes, having become notorious for his wickedness, reached the ears of the King of the Persians through rumors. And he (for the King’s own child was suffering from an illness), when he heard that Manes was promising to rescue the child from the disease by prayer, received the arrogant man for the child’s healing. And so, this man—having dismissed the physicians who were present, even though they were promising an easy cure for the child—at once performed a prayer and destroyed the life of the child, who would not have suffered this had he not promised the cure himself. Thus, at any rate, the godlessness and arrogance of the wretch were swiftly and clearly exposed, and the impostor was sentenced to inhabit a prison for evildoers. But, being a servant and skilled in servile artifice, and knowing that he would soon be punished for the murder he had committed, inasmuch as he had destroyed the King’s child by his impiety, he fled from the house and became the cause of death for the prison guards; for because they had not guarded the miscreant carefully, they were all put to death.

XIII. But this servant, this wanderer, this murderer and prisoner who had fled his bonds, reaches Mesopotamia and begins to sow the tares of his apostasy once more. Now, the Bishop of the Carrhae ^B (his name was Archelaus, a holy man, and highly skilled in both divine and human discourse), having assembled an audience of Greeks—so that the truth might not seem to have triumphed through the favor of those judging, as if they were Christians—having initiated a pious debate against the man named after "mania" (madness), he so shamed and refuted the thrice-wretched man that he immediately fled from there, and the seeds of his apostasy could take no root. But having fled from there, he occupies a certain village of the most lowly kind. And there, once again, he schemed to foster and showcase his own impiety. ^C But that fervent champion of piety and true shepherd, Archelaus, not bestowing common care upon his sheep, was not sluggish in pursuing him who had risen up to tear apart the flock, fiercer than a wolf. For this reason, that man named after madness, who could not endure the presence of such a man without great anxiety, fled again and kept moving from place to place. While he was wandering in this way, the satellites of the King of the Persians, who were then searching everywhere for sects, caught him and led him away in chains to him. ^D

And he, having mocked and reviled him greatly for his deceit and his flight, took one punishment for all things, inflicting upon him a death which was suitable for this deceiver alone. For although it was in no way fitting for human nature to either suffer or do such things, yet it was not unmerited for the unsurpassed impieties of Manes. For while the wretched man was still among the living, they flayed his body like a wineskin, thus tearing him apart and rending him from life; they threw the rest of his body as fodder to the beasts, and the skin itself, having filled it with air like a bag, they hung before the gates. Such was the end of life that this apostate and thrice-cursed man received.

^B XIV. Another, living but a short time before him, and equal in impiety, named Zaranes, also caused not a few injuries to the human race by his impieties. Yet the disciples of that ill-named Manes numbered twelve: Sisinnius, who received his authority for upholding the impious doctrine; Thomas, who composed the Gospel named after him; Budas, and Hermas; and Adamantus and Adimantus, whom he sent into different climates of the world as heralds of his error and apostasy. His expositors and, as it were, commentators were Hierax, Heraclides, and Aphthonius. In the choir of those discipled by him were also numbered Agapius, who composed what is called the Heptalogus, and Zaruas and Gauriabius. The chorus of those of the impiety who flourished at that time was so extensive, and how could one tell of their deeds or go through their doctrines? For they proceeded to such a point of every uncleanness, every filth, and every godless opinion, and their books are so full of such pollutions and absurdities, that not even those who have come forth from them ^C and the most...

^A sluggish in their piety can endure to keep or accept them any longer, neither bearing the unsurpassable filthiness of their decrees, nor having the capacity to submit the absurdity of their rules to reason, nor wishing to endure the reproach, mockery, derision, and hatred they incur before all men, as if they were wary of them and were turning away from them.

For this reason, this newly emerged offshoot of the seeds of that ancient filth, as we said before, does not even love or cherish what was written down for them by those masters of old. Yet they craftily and cunningly pretend to cleave only to those [scriptures] in which the Lord’s oracles and the Epistles of the great Apostle Paul are recorded; and they also admit some of the Acts of the Apostles and Catholic Epistles, except those which are of the Coryphaeus (Peter). ^B They pretend to defend such sacred discourses, so that they may the more easily deceive those who are duller or more unskilled regarding pious religion, as if they had received from Christ Himself and His disciples those things which their own insanity of defection has produced.

XV. It was, therefore, in the ninth year of the reign of Valerian and Gallienus, who held the imperial power of Rome, that this Manes, the leader of so great a defection ^C (for nothing prevents us from pursuing what the sequence of history previously omitted), after having escaped from his confinement in Persia and having arrived in Mesopotamia, was assailed by the divine Archelaus, a holy man who was then the bishop of the Carcharites in that region, with many and great arguments against his impiety. And being filled with unexpected shame from this, he fled as a fugitive to Dioris, a village of the Carcharites. There he encountered a certain Tryphon, a zealous and holy man, who held the rank of presbyter, and he met with a similar fate. Nay, even Archelaus himself, when he learned that the seducer had withdrawn to that place—for he was a sharp man and moved by pious zeal—instantly made his way to the village; and after he had thrown that seducer into ^D great straits and into the shame from which he was shrinking, and had overthrown and confuted his execrable dogmas, and had held him up to be derided and detested by all, he once again drove him to flight, in which, as we have said, to those who seek...

him and track him down, he paid to the king of the Persians that bitter penalty.

^A XVI. But when he had brought his life to such a miserable and wretched close, after some time had elapsed, certain disciples of his impiety scattered the tares of the Wicked One as far as Samosata in Armenia. And ^B after no long interval, this corrupt sowing was seen to sprout up as far as Phanarea. From this, the wicked Callinice, filled with filth—as I have said before—brought forth Paul and John, a brood of vipers, for the destruction of the human race. From that point, through the successive heirs of this impiety down to the times of the emperor Constantine (who was a great-grandson of Heraclius), this godless conflict progressed without any change. And although many exhortations and admonitions were made, albeit with useless results, and although many pious emperors had taken vengeance upon the apostates with the sword, yet the course of this impiety did not cease. There then came upon the apostates an Armenian named Constantine. His fatherland is reputed to be the village of the Samosatenes named Mananalis, which even to this day serves as a nurse and dwelling-place for the Manichaeans. Now this Constantine ^C entertained for not a few days a certain deacon of the Church, who was returning to his own country from captivity in Syria; the captive brought with him from Syria two books: one of the holy Gospel, and the other of the great Apostle Paul, which, in return for his hospitality—and while ignorant of the impious religion of his host—the guest bestowed upon him as a gift. But when the Armenian Constantine ^D perceived that his own impiety and defection were abominable, and hateful and loathsome to all, he devised this scheme by the counsel of the devil: he casts off and rejects all those books which his own religion held dear and embraced, yet, while retaining his dogmas stripped of their writings, he seeks to accommodate and attach to them the sayings of the Gospel and the Apostle. Wherefore, having condemned every book that exposed his own impiety, he decreed and determined that one must attend only to the Gospel and the Apostle, so that by such perverse trickery, covering up the filth of his apostasy, he might be able to mix the deadly poison of his opinions with many. Yet it was only in appearance and by a sort of pretense, as has been said, that he banished the books of the Manichaeans; for he perceived that the laws of the Christians submit those who use the books of the apostasy to the sword, and consign those books themselves to be consumed by fire. Therefore, from his own dogmas, those which pertain to impiety

tem opportuniora et perfectiora erant, fovens et ^A amplectens, nullam non machinam et contentionem adhibebat, ut eas Dominicis apostolicisque dictis subjiceret adaptaretque. Valentini autem portentosam de triginta æonibus et diis doctrinam, et Cubrici abominandam de pluvia fabulam, Basilidisque sordes et lascivias, nec non putidum quodque similium hominum cœnum, æque confidenter et palam amplectebatur, neque secundum sententiam et mystagogiam suam rejiciebat, sed velut quidam recens novusque legislator, ex meretrice et ex varie commista impietate dogmata gigneus, apostasiæ dux et præfectus in extremam obtemperantium perniciem declaratur. Quamobrem hodierni Manichæi, ut superius dixi, Scythianum, Budem et Manetem libenter anathemate feriunt, Constantinum vero maxime celebrant et colunt; ejusque successores pares apostolis Christi, ne quid amplius dicam, ^B prædicant.

XVII. On Silvanus, who set out for Mananalis and Cibossa.

XVII. Hic porro Constantinus, qui et Silvanus, mutatis sedibus, Mananali Cibossam profectus (o impiam animam, mentemque impudentiæ atque mendacio deditam!) se Silvanum esse dicebat eum, quem divini Pauli Epistolæ memorant. Quid vero dicetur tanta insania dignum? In quantam absurditatem delapsus; quanto pudore convictus perfundetur is, qui ab ipso principio per manifestam ^C fraudem et insaniam prorumpere non erubuit? Attamen, licet ita conspicue portenta confingeret ac mentiretur, non defuere, qui ejus dictis pellecti ipsi obtemperarent. Et ille quidem Macedonas vocabat discipulos suos, seque, ut supra dictum est, Silvanum, seque a divino Paulo missum jactitabat, aliaque similia multa effutiebat. Sed postquam monstrum illud seducendo populo natum viginti septem annos in dictis locis manserat, incolarumque multos in eamdem traxerat perniciem, in impietate deprehensus sua, cum jactu lapidum pœnas dedisset, in infernum ingressus est. Re com- ^D [alt-version omitted]

^A For the Emperor Constantine, having learned the situation, sent a certain man named Symeon to bring the deceiver to justice; and to hand over to the Churches of God, for instruction in sound doctrine and for the further recognition of their apostasy, those who had shared in his error but had since abandoned it and were striving with all their heart to make amends by repentance. When the messenger arrived in the region where the workshop of error had been opened, and had taken with him one of the local officials (the man’s name was Tryphon), he arrested both the deceived and the teacher of ruin himself. Those who were wholeheartedly looking toward repentance, or appearing to do so, he handed over to the overseers of God’s Churches; but having gathered together those who were still breathing apostasy, and having said what was fitting for such people to hear, he set the leader of the error as a mark for them and ordered them to cast stones at him. ^B Now, the others set about the work somewhat reluctantly. But a certain Justus by name, who had been adopted by Constantine as a son, and by whom he had also been instructed in the Manichæan heresy—recognizing, as is likely, into what a chasm that master had cast him—took a stone that fit in his hand and, striking a fatal blow against the wicked teacher, miserably deprived the wretched man of life. After him, the rest of the multitude, putting their hand to the work, heaped a pile of stones upon the corpse; whence it has come about that to this day that place is called *Soros*, or "the Heap."

^C III. Now, those who had been entrusted to the Churches of God for the most part showed themselves incurable, rather than turning back; and the wretched Symeon, being unlearned in saving doctrine and otherwise light-minded and easily led, while inquiring and asking about the affairs of the apostates—instead of calling them back to a godly state of mind—himself crossed over to their destructive religion. ^D Having done, therefore, what has been stated, and having returned to the Emperor who had sent him, while secretly concealing and nursing that beast within himself for three years—since what had been consumed within him was already on the point of bursting forth and forcing its way outward—he stole away from the imperial city. Having arrived at the aforementioned Cibossa, he gathered the companions of Constantine, whom he himself had killed by order, and, constituting himself the teacher and successor of the apostasy, he changed his name to Titus. Having spent three years in such error, and having led many away from the true religion, he was then seized in such deeds and paid the penalty by fire.

^A For the aforementioned Justus, by whose hand the apostate was put to death, after many other discussions and questions, as is usual, brought forward this apostolic saying: “For in him were created all things that are in heaven and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by him and in him; and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.” Having set forth this text, he stood up against Symeon, saying that perhaps they themselves might be deceived, and might be leading their followers into the same deception, by not acknowledging the true Creator of heaven and earth and the Father of our Lord Christ, but rather attributing it to some other being, whom the apostolic words do not know. ^B From this disturbance, a quarrel and irreconcilable strife arising between them, Justus went to the bishop of Colonia, so that he might more clearly understand the meaning of the apostolic text; and he revealed to him all that had occurred between himself and his companions. The bishop reported the matter to the Emperor (it was Justinian, who had succeeded to the empire after Heraclius), and he ordered that these matters should be submitted to investigation and just judgment—so that those who were unwilling to repent, or who had long ago promised repentance but nonetheless persisted in their apostasy, should undergo the punishment of fire. And the rest of the multitude, together with Symeon, who was also called Titus, thus bitterly lost their lives.

XIX.

^A And impiety, having divided itself, fell to devouring both of the brothers, the mother and the impiety alike; the one saying that the grace sent down from the Father from above was received by him from the one who had received it, and that he did not yield the privilege of impiety to the second; while Theodore pulled this to himself, saying that he did not receive it from the hand of him who had received it as a second gift from the Father, but had drawn it from the primary gift, and from the same source whence the father had drawn it. And so this sedition and contention remained until the loathsome end of their most godless life. ^B Now Leo, who was from Germanicia in Syria, at that time held the scepter of the Roman empire; and upon learning of the deeds of these most godless men, he summoned Gegnaeus. But, not having the discernment to investigate such matters—and being well aware of this—he did not himself examine the accused, but sent him to the one who, in his turn, held the presidency of the priestly thrones, so that he might be examined regarding his religion. Many discussions, therefore, having been held with the apostate, and while he would escape from some of the charges of impiety by denial, as was their custom, and in others would cover his sentiment of defection and apostasy with orthodox words and a manifold change of vocabulary, and so deviate from the crime, the judgment of the hearers was already inclined toward declaring him innocent; and the man, full of every impiety, was deemed guiltless and pure of every crime. But the form of the colloquy, for example, was of this sort: ^C "Hark you," said the Patriarch, "why have you denied the orthodox faith?" The apostate replied that anyone who denied the orthodox faith was anathema, calling his own impiety 'orthodox.' When a second question was then proposed: "Why do you not adore and embrace the cross of Christ?" the apostate again countered with the same curse against the one who would not adore the life-giving cross, the man who was worthy of all execration, and who turned everything upside down, calling Christ himself the cross, [the one] who traced the cross by the extension of his hands. And the words indeed were theatrical and common, but those things which were signified by the words were proper to his apostasy and mystical. He was asked again: ^D "Why do you not deign to accord to the most holy Theotokos the honor and adoration that is her due?" And he, in his usual manner and that from which he never departed, cast an anathema against those who would not adore the holy Theotokos, adding that he embraced and worshipped her, in whom our Lord Jesus Christ entered and from whom he issued, and that she is the mother of us all. This the wily man said with his lips, according to his execrable initiation and opinion, by which he feigned and pretended that the Theotokos was the heavenly Jerusalem, into which

as a forerunner for us, our Lord Jesus Christ has entered, fulfilling the doctrine of the Apostle. ^A A fourth question was proposed for his answer: why he insulted and spat upon the immaculate and terrible body and blood of Christ our God, and would not partake of them. That thrice-accursed scoundrel once again anathematized anyone who would insult the body and blood of Christ our God and remain outside their participation; but the detestable man understood by "body and blood" not what our common Lord taught should be called body and blood, but rather the Lord’s sayings themselves. ^B Being questioned further about the Catholic Church, he gave a similar response; by "Catholic Church," he meant and revered the assemblies of the Manichaeans. The sixth question, concerning baptism, asked him whether he considered it to be a purgation of the soul and of the soul’s defilements, and a bath for the remission of sins. By the same artifice, he eagerly gave an answer that appeared to revere and accept baptism; but by the word "baptism," the man who confounded and mixed all things, suggested our Lord Jesus Christ, for it is written that He is the living water.

Thus that crafty and evil-contriving monster, while holding nothing at all of the apostolic and ^C Catholic Church, but rather cherishing, following, and venerating all that is contrary to it—since he appeared not to oppose the ecclesiastical words used by those present, under the veils of which he hid the deadly poison of his own defection—appeared, as we said from the beginning, not guilty of impiety, but a follower of ecclesiastical doctrine. Therefore, he was acquitted after his examination, though he was worthy of double punishment: both for his ancestral impiety, and for the deceit by which he perverted the just judgment, and, godless as he was, won for himself the glory of our true religion. But since he had been acquitted in the trial by such artifices, he requested and obtained from the emperor a decree by which he was granted the liberty ^D to live securely at home, to conduct his own affairs without hindrance, and no longer to fear the tongues of his accusers. Having therefore departed from the imperial city and betaken himself to Episparis, he summoned the disciples of his defection; and from there, the fugitive, with his associates, arrived at Mananalis, from which the aforementioned Constantine had previously emerged. And having stayed there for many years, after he had corrupted many a wretched soul, he closed his life in death by the plague that was raging at that time, after he had been the leader of his impiety for about thirty years. This most wicked man, from a secret act of unchastity, fathered a son by the name of Zacharias.

whom, as we have said, some of those who honor the Manichaean tenets consider a hireling, unworthy of the title of shepherd and alien to the chorus of teachers. ^A

XX. Furthermore, when Gegnesius had passed away, the crowd of disciples was split into two parts; some joined themselves to the society of Zacharias, while others followed Joseph, whom some denounced as a bastard. Many contentions arose among them, while one claimed that the entire power and operation of the Holy Spirit resided in him, and the other sought to draw the same into himself, striving to prove his adversary empty. But what kind of spirit could it be that would visit such men, if not the evil and impure one, worthy of such receptacles? ^B However, as the strife grew for the reasons mentioned, and as it began to be decided by hands and blows, Zacharias, feeling very aggrieved that he was being driven from his paternal inheritance, struck Joseph so hard that he brought him into danger of death. One of the leaders having been almost prostrated, each faction pressed upon the other, and they watched the outcome of the battle, considering within themselves that they were engaged in an uncertain struggle. ^C After a short time had passed, it seemed appropriate to separate one faction from the other, lest in the uncertain outcome of the fight they might destroy themselves by mutual slaughter. But when, after such a conspicuous dissension, they were exposed not only to mutual vituperation but also to the reproaches, taunts, and derision of their neighbors, they consulted among themselves to change their abode by a secret flight. ^D Meanwhile, when the Saracens were raiding the borders of the Romans and conducting an expedition in the manner of war, Zacharias, seeing the attack from afar, fled with all his might; leaving his disciples exposed to the enemies and their swords, he alone escaped, so that while the entire multitude of his followers was slaughtered, he himself emerged unharmed; hence it came about that he was called a hireling by many instead of a shepherd. Joseph, indeed, who did not trust so much to the velocity of his feet...

as did Zacharias, but was faster at weaving wiles and artifice, and who did not wish to know of any difference in faith (for he happened to be running away at the very moment of the enemies' incursion)—Joseph, then, trusting in these mentioned qualities and having caught sight from afar of the enemy force advancing, reverses his own flight, and orders the pack animals and wagons to turn back for his followers. And having indeed fashioned himself and those with him into the likeness of deserters, he drove straight toward the enemies as if he were approaching them willingly together with his followers; and through his dissimulation seeming plausible, and having sworn that he would cleave to their affairs, he was—with his followers—released from death ^B and he did not suffer the loss of any of his other possessions. Keeping watch for a time for his escape, once he found a moment suitable for his intended purpose, he fled with his followers and arrived at the often-mentioned village of Episparis; there he was hospitably received in grand style by the inhabitants (for the village was, in fact, a workshop for those devoted to apostasy), so much so that at his entry lamps were lit for him and other signs of honor were added, such as are owed to the disciples of Christ. Thus, having been received in a friendly manner, he spent some time there, deceiving others and being deceived himself, and dragging his own followers into the abyss of destruction. There was, however, a man named Cricoraches, who was numbered among the local magistrates, a man pious in doctrine, honorable in character, admirable in his zeal for religion, and who detested those enemies of God; when he learned that the deceiver was living in that village and that the apostasy was increasing all the more, he gathered a band of soldiers and betook himself to the place where the mysteries of the apostasy were celebrated. ^C Having besieged the house, he was unable to capture the leader of the impiety himself, as tends to happen in sudden expeditions of this kind, while others turn to other things; for they slipped away in flight. He did, however, seize his disciples, and checked and dissipated the pestilence of so great an evil that was spreading. But that fierce teacher of apostasy, Joseph—who was also called Epaphroditus—having been driven by force from that place, as has been said, and having slipped away in flight into Phrygia, shortly thereafter betook himself to Antioch in Pisidia; where, being a foreigner, and completely...

escaping the notice of those who would have savaged him—as he had kept at a very great distance from them—he demonstrated to many of the locals the work of his own corruption, and was deemed worthy of much hospitality by them. And having preached his impiety for thirty full years, he at length brought his most cursed and loathsome life to an end in a suburb of the aforesaid city, not far removed, and which bears the name Chortocopium. ^B

XXI. But while this thrice-polluted man was still alive and flourishing in his impiety, a certain woman familiar to him, who was joined in marriage to a husband, did outrage to the inviolable marriage bed and gave herself over to fornication. Furthermore, they say that he who violated the marriage of another was one of the disciples of the deceiver, one who had converted from the Hebrews to this godless religion. Yet from such an unjust and loathsome union there is born to the adulteress that scandal-ridden and abominable stain, the filthy and unclean Baanes. This most wicked Baanes, therefore, succeeds the aforementioned Epaphroditus; and he, while retaining all the dogmas of the previously established impiety, strove to obscure his predecessors by the impurity of his life and by unspeakable bodily mixtures and other unlawful acts, and persevered in passing down the destructive teaching to his followers. ^C And at the same time, there was growing up alongside this multiform and loathsome beast another one, similar to him and full of the venom of a dragon. His native place was the village of Ania, which is situated near the city of Tabia, and the wretch’s name was Dryinus—a name that indicated the poisonous and destructive serpent lurking within a human body. To this beast a son is born, taking his origin, I think, more from the very poisonous seeds of the primordial serpent than from his own parent. To the offspring he has begotten, the father gives the name Sergius, as the subsequent events demonstrated that he was a vessel capable of containing the entirety of diabolical wickedness. He was born for the purpose of infiltrating and preaching impiety; he was skilled in concealment, as the circumstances of the time suggested, and was disposed to simulate virtue. ^D

^A Skilled in weaving snares and drawing human souls toward destruction, and, to speak concisely, he was the most clever and persuasive of all who had ever before him committed themselves to this apostasy, in every kind of artifice and most apt at persuasion. This cursed man, among the many other things he handed down to his deceived followers, did not hesitate—and felt no horror—in gradually presenting himself in a lofty manner regarding what should be thought of him, and persuading them to believe: O what a tongue, and soul, and mind, and mouth, inimical to God! He did not hesitate to call both himself and them the Holy Spirit. Furthermore, this impious man taught them to think and speak thus secretly and mystically, claiming that those outside were unworthy of such a rite and such mysteries. And those most wretched ones, truly worthy of his instruction, neither rejected nor detested such an enormity of wickedness; but they accepted it, although no greater impiety had ever existed, and they confirmed it with their own pens and votes. Thus, that wretched animal, man, when he departs from his Creator and separates himself from His providence, ^B immediately becomes a prey of the evil spirit and is carried off, ensnared in every wickedness. That vilest of men even called himself a "shining star," and many other things which ought rather to be hidden in silence than published. ^C But this God-blasted Sergius, although he was born of a most impious father, as I have said, was not initiated into the mysteries of the apostasy by his parent; rather, while he was still of a tender age, he was seduced by a certain woman who maintained and preached the pernicious dogmas of the Manichaeans; and having been initiated by her and perfected in impiety through long-continued practice of these mysteries, he became the forerunner of the Antichrist. For it was fitting—it was fitting that the teachers and heralds of this loathsome and God-hating apostasy should be proven to be, some of them the offspring of the Hagarenes, others branded with the shameful marks of slavery, others the fruits of adultery, and others disciples of womanly madness and frenzied doctrine. But, to speak briefly, Sergius begins to receive the discipline of the apostasy in this way. The aforementioned Manichaean woman, when she first entered into conversation with him, said: "Why, tell me, do you not read the divine Gospels?" But he, because the poison of apostasy had not yet been planted so deeply in his heart, said that it was not permitted for one who held the rank of a layman to approach the reading of the fearful oracles so impudently; for that was the office of the priests. ^D Then he heard from that frenzied woman that he exhibited such reverence in vain, for there is no respect of persons with God, who wills all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. But, she said, that you are so reverent concerning the Lord's oracles is not for honor, but rather it is a good thing to do.

^A For it is the artifice and trick of those who among you are called priests, who, wishing to adulterate the word of God and taking care that you should not be partakers of the mysteries which are in the Gospels, forbid you to read them just as they do themselves. For by taking the things which they read in your hearing from the whole series and tearing them apart, they thus intercept you, O listeners. In this way, with cunning, that ^B maenad first made a trial of him, who was already prone to a fall, shaking and enticing the wretch’s mind, and again she asked: "What does that saying of the Lord mean: *Many will say in that day, Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in thy name, and in thy name cast out demons, and in thy name do many mighty works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity*?" Who are those to whom the Lord says: "I know you not"? While she was asking these very things, he, who was still one of the common herd, a man unrefined and entirely unskilled in divine oracles, kept silent in confusion, and sought from her who had asked the question the solution to it. But she did not give the explanation immediately. For the female sex is cunning in capturing a desire to learn through procrastination, and in order to inflame even more the desire of him whom she wished to deceive to obtain knowledge of the things asked, she did not give the solution, but proposed another evangelical saying, ^C namely, about whom she thought the Lord had said: "*Many shall come from the East and West, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven: but the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness*." Whom do you suppose to be the children of the kingdom, and how, being rejected from this, are they cast into outer darkness? These and similar things, an instrument of deceit, she offered under a feminine guise, and as she little by little allured him with her jugglery, when she saw that he was entirely prone and listening to her as if she were a teacher, taking up the former things: "The children of the kingdom," she said, "who are cast out by him and condemned to outer darkness, are those whom you, and those who are of your sect, call and deem holy, who also cast out demons and heal diseases, to ^D whom you are accustomed to offer worship, having abandoned the one living and immortal God. These, these, I say, are they who hear from that just judge: *Depart from me, for I never knew you*." Therefore, from this most wicked and pernicious seed, already readied for...

its own cultivation the field of tares, she easily had the rest of her impieties springing up of their own accord; and thus she transformed his soul, that fruit-bearing field, into every kind of ruin and corruption, ^B so that all those who were previously notorious for impiety were, in comparison with his craftiness, deceitful ways, and the other machinations and fictions composed for the purpose of delusion, thought of as mere children. For those who preceded him, even if they held the first place in the mire of licentiousness, in nefarious deeds, and in immense blasphemies against God—and they were held by almost everyone to be abominable and execrable—since the conspicuousness of their detestable crimes brought upon them the hatred of all, you would have seen few people circumvented by their deceits, because they offered up infamous and disgraceful things openly and without any artifice, and the very impudence of their apostasy was sufficient caution that no one should easily incline toward it, nor should men be captured by the Evil One.

XXII. But this man, cutting away those things which were more shameful and covering up the rest, either suppressing those things which because of their impiety were intolerable to hear, or mixing them with more tolerable things, and, to speak summarily, hiding the wolf beneath a sheep's skin, ^C seemed to many to be a teacher of piety and a guide to salvation; and he suddenly attacked many and cast them down into the abyss of extreme destruction. For he practiced with greater diligence that which his predecessors had not neglected: namely, that he should not from the very beginning entrust the more sublime impieties to those who were arriving for initiation, nor propose more horrible mysteries; the head of which is the total abnegation of God and the glorification of the devil.

He did not, therefore, entrust anything of this sort to those who were newly initiated. But first, he endeavored to adapt their character and habits to the evangelical precepts, and to other things that had nothing to do with his doctrine. By these things, for the time being, he tried to charm and bewitch them, and to render the initiates tractable and obedient to him. ^B When he perceived that they were well-disposed towards him, and that they looked upon him as a guide to salvation and a teacher, then he would pour out the whole venom of his apostasy for them to swallow with open mouths, and he would declare and proclaim the initiates to be as impious as himself. This thrice-accursed man also called himself Tychicus, not only stealing the name of the blessed Paul's disciple, but also transforming and misrepresenting his very existence and personhood to himself, and pretending to be him. For—O foolish tongue, and O ears of those who heard him that were even more foolish!—he monsterously bragged that he was no other than that very Tychicus who is mentioned in the Epistles of the Apostle and is often deemed worthy of honorable mention. This foul, impudent, insane, and impious fabrication—to which there is nothing similar in any of the heresies that have ever existed—this, I say, he used as a foundation, and upon it he built the rest in the souls of the deceived; for he repeatedly claimed that he had been sent to them by the Apostle as a herald, and he lied, saying that the things he announced and spoke were not his own wisdom, but the precepts of Paul, who taught and sent him. And he who often boasted to those who were more fully initiated in his impiety that he was the Spirit and the Paraclete, numbered himself among the choir of the disciples of the divine Paul to the rest of the multitude, though he was born nearly seven hundred years after Paul and Tychicus. For this cursed man and monster was known in our own times, an announcer of impiety more ardent than any other. For that deceiver traveled through many cities and regions, hunting, deceiving, and ensnaring—O the tragedy!—the souls of the more simple folk, and he himself, truly the son of the lie, says in one of his own letters: "From the East and the West, from the North and the South, I have run, preaching the Gospel of Christ with the labor of my knees." Even if he uses his habitual boasting here as elsewhere, it is nevertheless true that he completed a not insignificant course for his own destruction and that of his followers. For thirty-four years he presided over his impiety and finished his race of error. ^D At that time, that god-loving and God-accepted woman, Irene, was governing the empire, during which time this enemy of God and impious man’s doctrine of apostasy was flourishing, from which time, even up to the present day, the impiety which now spreads in our regions has proceeded from his doctrine. His reputation, moreover, surpasses the impieties of his other rivals, although both these and those—being subservient to him—lead to the same destruction. Such, indeed...

^A His miserable disciples show him such honor, that they not only recount other absurdities regarding him that cannot be endured even to hear, but they also seal their prayers—or rather, their barkings—in his name. "The prayer," they say, "of the Holy Spirit shall have mercy on us." That tortuous serpent also called himself a doorkeeper, a shepherd, and a guide. For he writes to those in Colonia: "Knowing beforehand the approval of your faith, we remind you that just as the Churches which were before received pastors and teachers"—he says this of Constantine and the others who were enumerated above—"so you also have received a shining lamp and a bright lantern and a guide of salvation, according to what is written: If thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light." And after a few words: "Let no man deceive you by any means. But having these promises from God, take heart. For we, being persuaded in our hearts, have written to you that I am the doorkeeper and the good shepherd, and the guide of the body of Christ, and the lamp of the house of God, and I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." ^B Here, then—O, what could one say that would be worthy of him! And yet, he was the most wicked and impious of mortals, who boasted and exalted himself beyond measure, until he was brought down to a deserved ruin, as shall be related. This man, I say, writing to a certain Leo a Montanist, says: "But you, watch yourself, lest you divide the unswerving faith; for what accusation have you against us? Have I defrauded anyone, or acted proudly? You cannot say; and if you should say it, your testimony is not true. But far be it from me to hate you; I only pray that, just as you have received the apostles and prophets, who are four in number, so you may receive pastors and teachers, lest you become a prey to wild beasts." Thus he transformed himself into six hundred shapes, so that he might adapt himself to the different characters of those he was deceiving, now mimicking the giant, now the ape, now the lion, now the fox, now one manner, now another, and setting it forth. In another place he says again: "The first fornication, by which we are encompassed from Adam, is a benefit; but the second, which is greater, ^C

regarding which the Apostle also speaks: 'He who fornicates, sins against his own body.'" 43 By this "fornication," the most abominable one meant a departure from his own detestable dogmas, and he called himself the body of Christ. For this reason, he used to rail against those who departed from both him and his God-hating commandments, saying they were caught by the passion of fornication. Many other things also, pertaining to the same godlessness and monstrosity, are to be seen in many of his foul writings 44, which it would be a secondary task, and one requiring a separate discussion, to go through in order and expose, as well as anything else that is linked and intertwined with them. For even the things that have been mentioned were stated merely as an indication of this complex and multifaceted war against God.

XXII. But let no one think that this most impure offshoot proceeds from any other root than that of Manes, for it is one and the same root that brings forth the same soul-destroying fruit. When Sergius mounted the doctrinal throne of apostasy, wishing to lead many astray from the catholic Church of Christ, he openly separated ^B from the foul Baanes, with whom he had until then been fellowshipping; and in the presence of his disciples he initiated a conflict and confrontation against him, and his contention was staged in a public theatre—through which maneuver he strove to ensnare many and drag away to his own error as many as he could of those who were companions of Baanes. Yet there was set before him a facade and stage of virtues, a great lure for those who approached: a humble 46 character, a manner of greeting that was feigned, and a gentleness that not only won over his own followers but also smoothed and captivated those who were more ruggedly disposed. But indeed, he made it his particular study, 47 in the open, to expose and cast aside the foulness of the vile actions of his rival Baanes; yet with regard to the impious dogmas, he was seen neither to oppose nor to differ in any respect. 48 Baanes, therefore, having the exhibition of his lawless deeds openly accused, took refuge only in those before him, and through the status of these persons, as he supposed, he would defend and embellish his own indecency and that which was hateful in his persuasion, boasting that he was a disciple of Epaphroditus and honoring his tradition, ^D and saying that he had no doubt or shame regarding those abominable deeds, as if they were not to be done. Sergius, however, as a newcomer...

was reviled, and as one who had neither seen nor been a listener to any of the notable teachers, and who therefore, having drawn no light from that source, walked in error and deception. Accordingly, the most wicked Baanes assailed his rival and antagonist with these charges and boasted of himself. But Sergius, that versatile beast, who did not wallow openly in the mire of evil deeds, nor emit the foul odor of impurity as Baanes did, but rather cloaked it with many wrappings of words and fabrications, gained the power to split the apostasy into two factions. He himself, spurning those who were seen to be of the party of Baanes, called them Baanites. The latter, in return for the insult, recoiled from those who stood on Sergius’s side and similarly dubbed them Sergiotes. Daily, the contention and dissension between them grew and strengthened, and from this, an irreconcilable hatred developed between those detestable factions. ^A Thus, strife and factionalism among them increased and grew stronger day by day, and the impious parties were settled into an implacable enmity.

XXIII. In subsequent time, when Sergius had departed this life, his disciples erupted into such a conflict against the Baanites that the quarrel was no longer settled with words and insults, but with hands and swords, and a great slaughter of the Baanites occurred. For the faction of Sergius was prevailing, both by its multitude and because the commander of the soldiers among them inclined toward the opinion of Sergius; and the Baanites would have been destroyed to the end, as was indeed deserved, at the hands of their fellow-believers and fellow-tribesmen, had not a certain man named Theodotus—a man impious, if ever there was one in that religion, and a fellow traveler of Sergius—checked and calmed the raging slaughter. He used words full of blandishments, saying that it was for the common good, and proving by many deeds and words that both factions were of the same origin and had grown up in the same customs, had shared a common life, and had secured their safety through concord, since in doctrinal matters there was nothing of great moment in dispute; and that they had persevered in this for many years, up to the inauguration of their master Sergius. It was not fitting, he argued, that the consensus and partnership of so many years should end in blood and slaughter, nor was it right that those who were even now joined in the principal matters and held the same opinion, because of certain recent controversies that had arisen on both sides, should be handed over to the sword and destruction as if they were entirely heterodox and impious. By such words as these, he checked their mutual slaughter—which I wish had never happened, for that plague would not have prepared the destruction of so many souls. ^{B C D}

^A XXIV. Michael, however, who exchanged the imperial purple for the monastic habit, and Leo, who reigned after him, did not permit the investigation and search into this apostasy to be conducted negligently; rather, with the diligence that was proper, they sent men of high standing throughout the entire Roman Empire. Since those impious men, having been frequently warned by bishops and priests, had neither obeyed nor repented, those officials were instructed that if they discovered any who were given over to such impiety and were unwilling to return to a better state, they should be punished by the sword, as a common plague and destruction of the human race. These commands therefore reached the region called that of the Armeniacs. At that time, Thomas was the bishop of Neocaesarea, and there was also another man, named Paracondaces, who at that time stood out among those who were endowed with honorable character and made a profession of maintaining a more sublime way of life. Both of these men, therefore, having received an imperial decree along with other learned individuals to consult together, would examine the apostates who had been apprehended and brought before them by the civil authority deputed for this purpose. They interrogated them minutely, separating the guilty ^B from the innocent; some they would acquit, others they subjected to ecclesiastical penalties, while those who were entirely incurable they handed over to the civil laws and the tribunal of the magistrates.

While the examination, judgment, interrogation, and proceedings were going on in this manner, those who were called Cynochoritae and those who were called Astati—who were a select part of the disciples of Sergius—divided among themselves the responsibility of slaughtering the aforementioned judges. The Astati, therefore, without seeking any other help, pierced the aforementioned exarch with treachery and deceit. The Cynochoritae, however, since they lacked the primary leader for the defilement, took one of the Astati and, by this means, slaughtered Thomas, the bishop of God. After these bold crimes, the Astati—who, as I said above, were the architects of both murders—fled in haste, along with their followers, from every land that followed the Christian law. They betook themselves to Melitene, a city of the Second Armenia, which at that time was held by the Christ-hating Saracens. It was ruled by an ^C Emir, whom they called Monocheranes; and this Christ-hater, having kindly received these Christ-hating fugitives, and having freed them from all fear, gave them the town called Argaum to inhabit. ^D As a multitude of impious ones flocked thither, so that they were now equal to making predatory raids, many of the neighboring Christians were frequently led away into captivity by them; and as the evil grew worse day by day, not only were the old practitioners of the impiety able to persevere in it freely, but they also [index: entries preserved]

^A permitted some of those who had been taken captive to be forced into falling into the same godlessness themselves. It happened that Sergius, whom we have often mentioned, also arrived there, and after spending some time among the fugitives and deepening their heretical dogmas, he—though he did not escape the judgment from above—eventually paid the penalty.

It was the season for woodcutting; Sergius was not unskilled in carpentry and was accustomed to practicing that trade, cutting up tree trunks into planks. One day he went, as was his custom, to the nearby mountain of Argaeus to attend to his work, and there went about cutting the wood into planks. A certain Tzanios, a native of Nicopolis, a man pious in his religion and courageous of spirit and hand, happened to be there. Watching this enemy of God as he worked alone, confident in his own magical deceptions and trusting his life to his sorcery, the man—though unarmed—cried out in a great and piercing voice against the deceiver. Filled with fear and astonishment at the sound, Sergius was struck dumb, and Tzanios seized the axe from his hands and dealt the deceiver a mortal blow; and by that very stroke, the bitter death of the wicked one followed. Thus, indeed, the true spirit of delusion, the destroyer of human souls, that bitter and deep root of apostasy, the final and worst of all the evils that had preceded it, was cut down by the very weapon of his own trade; and—along with his god-fighting and arrogant words, his abominable and unholy deeds, his impossible promises and hopes, and his very life—was cut off and consigned to the eternal, unquenchable fire, together with his own god-fighting disposition. ^B

XXV. The three hundred and forty-third year after the six-thousandth from the creation of the world was being completed when this impious man paid for his crimes with a violent death. He left behind as disciples of his own wickedness and apostasy three men who held the primacy in his mystical sorcery and witchcraft: one was named Michael, another Kanakares, and the third John; and with these was associated the aforementioned Theodotus. After them came Basil and Zosimus, and many others. But these disciples—the thrice-accursed pupils of that most wicked man, whom the deceived populace ^C call "fellow-travelers" — gathered the people at the place of Argaeus, even though they expected a bitter and divine...

^A had seen the death of the master brought upon him, and nothing of those things which he had monstrously fabricated had happened, they continued, I say, to corrupt and ruin that people: nor did they refer the mastership of impiety any longer to one or two. But they were placed over the multitude with equal honor among themselves: nevertheless, they appointed some of a lower grade, whom they called notaries, to whom they assigned a certain care and office in their abominable orgies and initiations.

XXVI. About this time, the most wicked Carbeas was prominent, a man sharp at suborning the plebs, cunning at hiding those things which it was not right to bring forth, and at persuading others than those which lay hidden in his heart, holding no faith in reality, since he pretended to admire the religion of the Arabs: otherwise, he considered it an honor and glory to be called and thought a lover of apostasy, nor was he unskilled in military matters. Wherefore, when that apostate multitude had already reached such a growth that it could supply a military force, he was raised to command by it, as one who was believed to be able to increase and confirm the most impious assembly. But when he saw his subjects pressed by the narrowness of the small town, he built another larger city, which he named Tephrica, and gave it to his followers to inhabit, so that he might avoid the impending tyranny of the Melitenians. For even if they had been received very humanely by them at the beginning, and then when they saw that they were rich and growing in the abundance of things by daily depredations, they could not look upon them without envy and greed. Wherefore they did not cease to lay snares for them, so that they might seize their spoils. Which was the only reason for him why he decided to place the seat of his subjects far from their first habitation. To these things, moreover, he took care that, separated from other men, they might be placed apart and occupy themselves more freely and with confidence in demonic and absurd things. For since they previously had ^C Saracens as neighbors, they observed their rites and their own at the same time; but their rites in a theatrical manner, their own, however, with mystical worship.

XXVII. Furthermore, that city built by him seemed to be opportune for invading the Roman empire, as it was nearer to its borders. Moreover, if anyone wished to defect from there from among those who assented to the same impiety, it was more ready for flight and

^A they had a place of retreat because of its proximity. He did not, however, wage his subsequent wars by means of raids, but through just battles and set engagements, whether he fought alone with his own men or with the Saracens; but when he was victorious and when he was defeated is a matter for another work and another time. That he afflicted the regions of the Roman Empire neighboring him with countless calamities, our descendants will learn from the very magnitude of the evil, more than from words.

XXVII. After that bloodthirsty and execrable man had perpetrated intolerable things for a long time, he finally and with difficulty perished, consumed by sickness. Declared as the successor to his tyranny and impiety is his son-in-law, by his daughter, and his cousin by birth, whose name is Chrysocheres ^B; at the time we are writing this history, because we neither possess nor promise knowledge of the future, we cannot proceed further. But if anyone should offer that hope which depends upon kindness, and which never deceives those who love the human race nor leads them into error, perhaps it might be written not too audaciously that it will come to pass in no long time that the audacity, dogmas, and strength of this apostate and impious assembly will be dissolved and destroyed. Furthermore, this book has represented whence the error took its beginning, and also how, with the seed cast a second time, this very root of bitterness sent forth shoots of impiety, and also how the tares have sprouted again up to the third time: likewise, what and how many were the defections of the Church, ^C as they called them, who were the teachers, and how they adulterated the sacred voices, by what words they themselves shroud their own opinion, and many other things which, after the history has narrated them cursorily, it remits to the second book both the refutation of the impious dogmas, especially those which have not yet been repelled, and if it has omitted any other things which ought to have been said: if, however, divine grace grants rest and leisure to the writer, who is overwhelmed with business. ^D

Book II. Doubts and solutions of the Manichaeans.

I. ^A If the Good (God) creates the soul, but the Evil one the body, how did the Good one suffer his own creature to be joined with the creature of the Evil one? And how, again, did the Evil one permit such a union? For this union will either make the body good—which is not appropriate, for the Good one ought not to cause the work of the Evil one to be good—or it will make the soul evil, which is far more absurd, since the handiwork of God would be overcome by the creature of the Evil one. Furthermore, what was the reason why the good God suffered his own work to be united with the work of the Evil one, and to be harmed by him? And how, on the other hand, did the Evil one endure to have his own work made good? And apart from what has been said, who began this union? If it were the Good one, how did he not become evil by adopting this evil work? But if it were the Evil one, it is evident that he in turn became good at that point, having conceived a love for the Good one’s creature, and so the Good one became at once both Evil and Good. For that union, by confounding and mixing the nature of each, injured what was peculiar to each and claimed what was ^B alien as its own; so that the Good one fashioned his work as both evil and good at once, and the Evil one made his own as both evil and good. Could there be anything more foolish or absurd? And so it is, if the union proceeded together with the creation of the works; but if these were at some time separated from one another, and each creature was deemed worthy of the proper providence and care of its own maker, remaining unmixed from the opposite, what was the calculation that led to separation at that time, and whence did they later change into the necessity of union? For either each previously preserved his own work and himself unmixed for his own advantage, or, having found it disadvantageous, they later became wiser and agreed to the union. I pass over other impious and absurd things, with which the first foundation of this error abounds. To such a degree is it opposed to God, and filled with fury and insanity, to invent one creator for the soul and another for the body.

II. ^C But as to what those who are held in error say, that the Evil one provokes us toward wickedness, this entirely supports the truth, and not the error. For the very fact that we are incited—so that we should divide the indivisible and inseparable power and dominion of God into two—springs from the deceitful and vehement impulse of the Evil one. Yet while he is indeed able to tempt and assail us, it is permitted to us entirely to repel his incitements. And we repel them through both our body and our soul. But if our body is able to repel his impulse, and not only to repel it, ^D but even to shatter all his arts, how can he be its creator? For indeed [the next page continues]

commandment of its Master and be deceived by the opposing enemy is an argument for free will in both directions, the abundance of which was given to us in our creation. For the soul is free. And behold, I have set before your face death and life. But now, as for that which is altogether and entirely evil, how can it resist its own principle? How, being destitute of judgment, did it turn away from evil? Or how did it deflect toward the good, and conquer its original dominion? Therefore it cannot be that the creation of body and soul should be referred to two opposite principles.

III. Moreover, they warn—and rightly so—that the enemy did not so dominate the soul of those who surrendered themselves to him of their own accord, that being shrouded in darkness they could in no way admit any ray of truth. They say, therefore, that the good God was from eternity, and is, and will be, and that He is invisible and incomprehensible. And this, indeed, is the splendor of the ray of truth; but as time went on, the darkness, having obtained great accessions and being cast over their intellect, so blinds their reason that in their madness they say that evil proceeded from darkness and fire—a thing worthy of much laughter, or rather of endless tears, and to be regarded as an incredible monster of the soul. For if their discourse is about ^B darkness and sensible fire, then that which is born from them must also be considered sensible; so that the Evil One is sensible. But if that darkness and fire are intelligible, then the Evil One and that which came forth from them are even more so. And is this darkness and fire co-eternal with God, or did it come into being later? And where was the Evil One then, when these things existed? If it came into being later, who brought them forth? For darkness, which is understood only by reason, was such from the beginning, and does not allow us to believe that their creator is free from blame. Similarly, neither could the fire, which can be seen only by the soul, have been the author of the principle of evil. And how can that be a principle which owes its origin to others? And how many other things could he bring forward who wishes to call this foolish conjunction to the examination of reason?

IV. Why, indeed, did darkness alone suffice for producing it? Why did the fire not suffice? Who joined both of those together for the production of the principle of evil? How are they not rather recognized as the principle? And what has become of them? And what are they doing now, after ^D the Evil One—as they say—has come to be from the darkness and the fire,

^A claiming as his own the principality of that which they themselves have produced? Moreover, if Evil proceeded from darkness and fire, how do they in turn identify the Evil One as the author of the darkness and the fire? But if Evil is not the principle of fire, and yet fire is perceptible to the senses, how do they claim that the good God has created nothing that pertains to the senses? For if these most shameless men could feel shame at their error, by which they attribute the origin of fire to Evil, and if they took care not to attack the Creator now and then His work with the same accusations, they would realize that they are committing a deed no less shameful. For their faction, even if unwilling and silent, will confess that it is the work of the good God, which before they were with all zeal and effort trying to steal away. For they will surely say that fire, which is perceptible to the senses, however darkened they may themselves be, is neither without a beginning nor eternal.

^B V. Then again, if not all of them, certain of them at least who have emerged from the darkness say that the good God indeed holds the heavenly realms, and is the creator of heaven, and exists as the author of good actions for men; but the same people, having not yet cast off their mist to any great extent, fall back into nonsense when they attribute neither the creation of the earth nor of the things that are in it to Him, but rather introduce another creator. Indeed, some of them (for error runs into many parts) even dare to pronounce that heaven itself, and all that is in it, are the offspring of the Enemy. But if, according to their stunned stupidity, heaven is the work of the Evil One, how does the good God dwell in the heavenly places? And if heaven contains the air, the land, and the water (for even the subterranean things are contained within it), how does heaven, being the dwelling-place of the heavenly God, contain the works of the Evil One—that is to say, earth, fire, and air—and not only contain them, but also govern them? ^C For from the rising and the setting of the sun and the stars, which are of the heavens, both the earth, and the water, and the air, and the fire, by the providence of God, both enjoy their own proper temperature and, through the mutual exchange among themselves, profit the common good, and are suited to the present needs of the human race and of other living creatures. But if heaven is the work of the evil principle, how does our Savior, while teaching and delivering that wonderful and awesome formula of prayer, say: *Our Father, who art in the heavens*? And: *Hallowed be Thy name, as in heaven and on earth*? How then does the Creator of every creature dwell in an alien creature, one that is both evil and the work of the evil principle? In another place, too, the Savior, desiring that men should be forgiving toward one another, says: *If you forgive men their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you*. ^D Again, in another place, exhorting them to follow the will of God, since He Himself first supremely fulfilled His will, He says: *Whosoever shall do the will of My Father who is in the heavens, the same is My brother, and sister, and mother*. Out of His most loving mercy, He grants to others that which

^A He Himself possessed by nature. For He, being the Son of the Father not by grace, but by nature, yet fulfilling the will of His Father in accordance with His humanity, leads those who fulfill it in imitation of Him into the adoption of sons, and bestows upon them the name of brethren. And what more could one recount, by which the Saviour extols the Father who is heavenly and in the heavens? And why should I speak of the rest? How is it that the shamelessness of those who are guilty of murder—those who possess the voice ^A of the Master—is not utterly confounded: *I confess to Thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth*? For He not only pronounces Him here to be Lord of heaven, but also of the earth; and what can be clearer than this testimony? What could be more powerful for establishing that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the Maker and Lord of the universe, and for triumphing over the God-opposing apostasy ^B?

VI. And when elsewhere Peter, the chief of the apostles, had confessed our common Master and God, as though about to render to him a reward for this profession, He pronounces him blessed, teaching that the Father in heaven had provided him with this very revelation: *Blessed art thou, he says, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed it to thee, but My Father who is in the heavens. And I say to thee: Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it; and I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens; ^C and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in the heavens; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in the heavens*. Thousands of such testimonies from the Holy Scriptures could be brought forth for the confutation of this impious opinion. But consider also this: *Jesus, being baptized, went up immediately from the water*. Behold the tongue declaiming impiety! The excellent Son of the good Father went up baptized in a creature of God; and: *Behold, the heavens were opened unto Him*. ^D Here is another creature of the evil hand for you! But why were they opened, and for what cause? *He saw, he says, the Spirit of God descending like a dove*. These few words provide a third argument for triumphing over impiety. For how is the Spirit of God typified by a thing that proceeded in its origin from the evil one? That thing proceeds from the works of the enemy and, having advanced thence, descends upon Christ. A fourth argument of impiety approaches. For a voice sounds from heaven: *This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased*. Consider, I beseech you, the individual words, so that with them an irresistible confutation of impiety

^B "This is," he says, "My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." Who is this who is baptized in the water, for whom the heavens were opened, upon whom My Spirit, descending from the heavens in the form of a dove, bears witness to the sonship of him who is being baptized? "All things are Mine because I created all things; and My Son, in fulfilling My will, is procuring the salvation of the world." Yet it is the power of the Spirit alone, present with the One of the same nature and proclaiming in the deed the genuine character of the sonship.

Elsewhere, He again reproves those who do all things to please men: "You have," He says, "no reward from your Father who is in heaven (Matt. vi, 19). How much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him (Matt. vii, 11)? And there is one Father of yours who is in heaven (Matt. xxiii, 9)." Why, then, did the good Son of the good Father look upon heaven—an alien creation—and by putting His fingers into the ears of the deaf man, touch his tongue, and by spitting, deliver the deaf man from his own infirmity? ^C This is a "new" evil creation, as those who fight against God say. And what of the fact that when He said, "Father, glorify Your Son," a voice came from heaven saying, "I have both glorified it, and will glorify it again" (John xii, 28)? He Himself indeed knew that He had glorified and would glorify. And He did not implore the Father for this reason; for He, having all things that are the Father’s, and alone knowing the Father, was not ignorant of this either. But He did it so that the crowd of listeners who were present might clearly perceive and learn that He both declines the passion as a man and seeks it, teaching everyone that He undergoes it of His own will. Hence He also says: "This voice did not come for My sake, but for your sake (John xii, 30). For I knew all the things of the Father, and was ignorant of nothing; nor did I send the voice to Him for My sake, nor did He confirm it for My sake, but for yours: so that you might know that My will concurs with the will of the Father, and that I call the passion ‘glory.’ For I accept this for the sake of you all." With this end, both this prayer and the voice sought from the Father from heaven confirmed what had been asked. And let these things be sufficient for now regarding these matters.

^D VII. But if fire is the work of the Evil One, how does the good God, the Son of the good One, baptize those who are led to Him in the Holy Spirit and in fire (Luke iii, 16), joining the creature of the Evil One with the Holy Spirit and thereby sanctifying the one being baptized through contraries? What mind would accept this? What understanding could bear such a blasphemy? And who would not detest the magnitude of such impiety? How, then, does the good God again "make His angels spirits and His ministers a flame of fire" (Heb. i, 7), proclaiming Himself the creator of the works of others? For that prophetic voice, as representing the divine and the herald of truth...

^A Paul also affixes his seal. And since the chaff denotes the levity of sinners, why does He again deliver it to the creature of the Evil One for punishment, since He announces that it is to be burned with unquenchable fire? And how did the subduer of the Evil One come to cast fire upon the earth, thereby extending and augmenting the work of the Evil One? And further, how is the fire made ready for the devil if He Himself is its creator? For He would not prepare punishment for Himself. But conversely, if the Evil One did not—as it seems—prepare the fire, then He has prepared nothing by which he can punish those sinning without amendment, nor him who sowed the tares, through whom he might exact just retribution. And who could enumerate all such things?

VIII. But since a blasphemous and impious tongue ^B dares to refer earthly things to the principle of evil, how does our common Lord and Savior call them "His own"? For He says, "He came unto His own, and His own received Him not." But if the apostates should say that the prophetic words are meant here, and that Christ came unto them, and that they did not receive Him, behold, I pray you, their notable madness and shamelessness. First, how do they say that the prophetic words are Christ's "own," when they refer the prophets themselves and their inspiration to the power of evil? And secondly, how did Christ come *into* the prophetic words? For firstly, as they themselves say, He came to what was alien, for the prophetic words are something alien, as though inspired by an alien [power] and not pertaining to the good God. ^C And then, how can they be Christ's "own" at all—the prophetic words—if they did not receive Him? For it is said: "He came unto His own, and His own received Him not." Furthermore, to whom did Christ give the power to become children of God? Is it to the prophetic words? Is this not nonsense? For if the words are from God, for that very reason they are "own" and domestic to God; but if they are evil, how could they be fashioned by God? Moreover, what prophetic word was born of blood, and of the will of man, and of the will of the flesh? For He adds: "Who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the man, nor of the will of the flesh, but of God." Who, then, are the words born of blood? And who are those that are not? For no word, whether it be good or evil, true or false, whether it proceeds from the good God or from the evil [god], ^D will ever be called "born of blood," however much those who suggest such things may rave. Thus, the prophetic words find no place in these words of the Lord. But He calls the world "His own" there, just as He says elsewhere to His disciples: "Behold, the hour cometh, and is now come, that every man shall be scattered to his own." What, therefore, are these "His own" there?

^A Does He call them the prophetic utterances? Or, clearly, the possessions and the dwelling-place of each? Just as here, therefore, He does not—according to the raving nonsense of some—call "His own" the prophetic utterances, but rather each man’s possessions and his own house; so too, when He says, "He came unto His own, and His own received Him not," by "His own" He refers to the sensible world. For this world is His possession and His handiwork; and likewise also those who are in it, of whom some received His instruction, while others did not. And elsewhere, Jesus our Savior Himself, going about His own country and rendering the reason for that journey, bore witness, saying, "A prophet hath no honor in his own country." Since the utterance from the very evangelical words signifying "His own" has shown clearly that it indicates the world and the country—or possession—within the world, how is it that those who twist such manifest matters toward myths and nonsense are not raving? ^B Since, therefore, the Lord’s own sayings call the world the "own" of the Lord, and those who are in it His "own"—whether they have received Him or not (for those who received Him, besides being "His own" as His handiwork and created by Him, welcomed Him who came for the sake of their own salvation and became His children; whereas those who did not receive Him, although they are "His own" as His creation, nevertheless, by not receiving Him, deprived themselves of the dignity of spiritual adoption)—since, I say, they interpret the evangelical words "His own" and "own" in this way, how is their error not to be detested, as they ascribe another meaning to the words? That He calls the world "His own" can be clearly perceived from these things as well. ^C For He says, "There was the true light, which lighteth every man coming into the world." Which world? Clearly the sensible one. And when did He illuminate? When He came into it. And when did He come? The Gospel cries out, saying, "For He was in the world." Clearly, being in the sensible world, He illuminated the man coming into the sensible world. Furthermore, whose handiwork was the world, in which He Himself was, and in which He illuminated the one coming into it, one cannot learn more correctly than from the very evangelical words: "For the world," He says, "was made through Him, and the world knew Him not." This is the same as that other passage: "He came unto His own, and His own received Him not." Do you see how the truth bears witness to itself from every side, ^D and how it shines forth all the more for those who seek it? Since, therefore, the most holy oracular writings call this visible world the "own" of the Savior, and proclaim it to have been made through Him, and those who are in the world

not another, but He Himself—to be the one who illuminates: how do they not tremble, those true offspring of apostasy and sons of the Evil One, in bringing in one creator of the visible world, but another who illuminates those coming into the world—a world which they leave as the creator of the intelligible substance ^A alone?

IX. And from elsewhere one might show the absurdity being revealed. For if earthly things are of the Evil One, how did He endure to satisfy many myriads with the fruits that the creation of the Evil One produced—now from five loaves, now from seven? For/how much better and more God-befitting it was not to feed those who were being initiated by Him from the fruits of others, but from His own handiwork! Or rather, how did He Himself use food or drink at all, which were the fruit of the works of the Evil One? And again, how, in fashioning eyes for the blind man, did He restore sight not from other material but from earth and water—which were of the Evil One—thereby working his craft in concert ^B with the Enemy, and indeed yielding the greater part to him, while He Himself, as if destitute of His own material, completed the part of the alien creature by an alien addition? Indeed, if nothing else, these most wicked men ought to have been ashamed and to have understood at least this much: that He who truly fashioned the eye from clay is the same One who from the beginning fashioned man from clay. For of whatever material the part is, of that same material is the whole; and whoever they had as the creator of the whole, they had the same one as the creator of the part. Add to these: if the body is from the Evil One, how did He weep when it was perishing in Lazarus, and how did He endure to restore ^C and recall to life the work of the Evil One that had been destroyed, and to raise Lazarus, at that time calling upon His own Father, so that He might Himself again preserve and restore to life the creation of the Evil One that was being well-destroyed? And if the body is of the Evil One, how did He raise the widow’s son who was dead? How did He perform the other ten thousand divine signs with which He benefited the bodies of men? The servant of the centurion, the mother-in-law of Peter, the woman bowed over by the infirmity, the woman dragged down by the long-standing flow of blood and deprived of every hope of salvation, the lepers, the paralytics, the ^D deaf, the ten thousand kinds of sufferings and diseases, from all of which He released the body clean. Are all these things not sufficient to put to shame those who say that the bodies of men are creatures of the Evil One? For how did the good God renew the perishing work of the Enemy, and not only avert the evils of those who were retreating toward Him, but He Himself approach them and visit them? For Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and healing every disease and every infirmity. And He did not merely heal these, while keeping the healing silent, but he even commanded them to tell others, saying, Go, report to John: The blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, and the dead are raised. For as they go, He says, report to John: The blind see, the lame walk...

the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, and the dead are raised. And ^A to His disciples He gives the sign of His own power, strength, and grace, namely, to lay hands upon the sick and heal them. Thus, as if it were His own creature, He provided for its care, He who came to save both the soul and the body; and He did not limit this benevolence to Himself alone, but gave the power to His disciples to do the same things. But if, as the mouths of the Wicked One strive against God, the body is the work of the Wicked One, how is it that through it we perform the greatest of virtuous deeds—temperance, self-restraint, watchfulness, standing in prayer, endurance in the face of terrors, and the toils of martyrdom—all of which pertain more to the body than to the soul and are referred to the glory of the Maker and Creator? Indeed, the soul by itself could neither reach the struggles required to perform these, nor could it be called to account for wrongdoing if it did not act. How, then, does the creation of the Wicked One perform good works and assist the soul in achieving those feats which, were it not present, would not even be judged as deeds? But you should also consider this: if the body were of the Wicked One, why was Paul grieved when Epaphroditus fell ill, and why did he say, "God had mercy on him, and not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow"? For what necessity was there for Paul to be grieved, seeing that a creation of the Wicked One was perishing? And if it were a creation of the Wicked One, how did the same heavenly man write to Timothy: "Use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent infirmities"? For that divine teacher, if he was truly concerned for Timothy, according to you, because the body was a creation of the Wicked One, ought to have written to him: "Do not use wine at all, so that this, which belongs to the Wicked One, may the sooner be broken, and you be relieved of its burden." And if bodies trace their origin to the Wicked One, how does our Lord Jesus Christ say: "Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin, and not one of them falls to the ground without your Father who is in heaven"? For what concern is it to the good God regarding the creatures of the Wicked One, to whom neither prizes, nor eternal life, nor the kingdom of heaven are proposed? But because He is their Lord and Creator and Sovereign, for this reason not even these are deprived of life without Him. How also shall Christ be magnified in the body of Paul, if the body is the product of the Wicked One? And again, the same herald of the mysteries of God—if the body were not a creation of the God who is over all—how does he pray that the whole body, spirit, and soul be preserved for the coming of the Lord? For he says: "May the God of peace sanctify you entire ^D

and may your spirit, soul, and body be kept blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." ^A Apart from this, if the soul were the work of one principle and the body that of another, how could our true Creator and God, wishing his servants to be free from distraction, give precepts for both, saying: "Do not be anxious about your soul, what you shall eat or what you shall drink, nor about your body, what you shall put on"? Furthermore, to lead us even more effectively to accept his admonitions by an example, he says: "Look at the birds of the air, for they do not sow, nor do they reap, nor do they gather into barns; and whence do they have their life? Your heavenly Father feeds them." If, therefore, the fount of truth recognizes and calls him our heavenly Father who feeds the birds of the air—nay, even the grass of the field, which is accustomed to be cast into the oven, he says is clothed by the same God with a beauty such that not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed like one of these—how can the unbridled mouths of impiety proclaim one creator for the grass, the birds, the body, and all sensible things, and grant half the sovereignty to another as if out of grace?

^B X. That of the fact that it is the same one who grants both these temporal things and the kingdom of heaven, the Savior demonstrates in a few words, saying: "For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you." Whose, O most wretched man, is the kingdom of God, and whose is his righteousness? And who is it that supplies things sufficient for the needs of the body? Is it not the same God who is one and alone? Is he not the common fashioner? Is he not the Lord of all? If, indeed, he who makes his sun rise over the wicked and the good, and sends rain upon the just and the unjust, is the same one who has adopted us as sons for the perfection of virtues, and this is our Father who is in heaven, is not the impiety of the apostates ^C vehemently to be abhorred? For the Savior says to you: "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you." He then proceeds, if it be asked what is the reward of obedience? "That you may become sons of your Father who is in heaven." But who is the Father in heaven? He who makes his sun rise over the wicked and the good, and sends rain upon the just and the unjust. "You shall therefore be perfect, as your Father who is in heaven is perfect." The perfect Father, therefore, whom the Son by nature exhorts us to imitate, is this very one, and no other: the one who makes the visible sun to rise and grants the visible light to us who are subject to the senses, and who rains upon the just and the unjust for the fruitfulness and cultivation of the earth; and, if anything should incline toward excessive heat due to dryness, the air, which we use for breathing, is tempered by the moisture of the rain. Where, then, are those abominable dividers of God's ^D empire, who attribute to the earth, the air, and the moisture from the rains, the moderation necessary for the tempering of the elements? Where are they who...

assign to the earth, the air, the rains, the sun, and those things of the same substance, one creator, and yet another to those things which occupy the rank of the intelligible? ^A

XI. But do you also ponder this for me: If He who knows the Father—and the things of the Father—better than others, calls the heaven the throne of God, and the earth His footstool, and Jerusalem His city, is it not the greatest proof of impiety for some to cut away those things of which the Son is a witness, and to advertise another as the author of the very things that have been cut away? For Christ, who is God, and who both does and counsels all things for our salvation, shutting the door of perjury among men in civil society, says of oaths: "But I say to you, do not swear at all, neither by heaven, for it is God’s throne; nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet; nor by Jerusalem, ^B for it is the city of the great King. And neither by your head," He adds, "for you cannot make one hair white or black." Here He mentions the head, Jerusalem, the earth, and the heaven—things perceived by the senses and visible to the sight—by which it was the custom of the Jews to swear. Let the insane cohort beware, lest it turn the head, and Jerusalem, and the earth, and the heaven back into fables and nonsense. For the heaven that is seen, and the earth that is felt, and Jerusalem—the city built in ancient times and rebuilt by David generations later—these, I say, He calls the throne, the footstool, and the city of the great King. And of what King? He himself teaches more clearly elsewhere, saying: "Do not make my Father’s house a house of trade," ^C referring to the Jerusalem temple as the house of the Father, for which reason He also calls Jerusalem the city of the king. For whom He proclaimed as the great king in His prohibition of oaths, Him He here calls His own Father and God. Therefore, He also drives from the paternal house those who were selling oxen, sheep, and doves, punishing their insolence in trading and threatening them with righteous anger, seeing them as contemptuous both of the paternal house and the paternal commandment. Furthermore, what will they say if first David, moved by the Holy Spirit, and afterwards divine Paul cried out with a clear voice that the God preached by Moses speaks to our Lord Jesus Christ? For Paul, writing to the Hebrews about our Savior, applies the paternal voice foretold through David: "You are my Son; today I have begotten you," and again in another place: "I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son." ^D Likewise: "And let all..."

the angels of God worship him." And: "Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of your kingdom." Attend then, you deaf, and look, you blind! For he adds: "And you, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands. They will perish, but you remain; and they will all grow old like a garment; and like a mantle you will roll them up, and they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will not fail." If ^A the God-inspired David announced these things in the Spirit, and Paul—an initiate into, and initiator of others into, ineffable mysteries—sealed them, that indeed the God of the Old Testament is the same as the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and that He himself established the throne of His Son by nature forever and ever, and constituted all the orders of the angels as worshipers and servants of His Offspring, and that He himself—and no other—laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of His hands; do not those, therefore, who feign that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is one, and the Creator of heaven and earth another, conceal every impiety in their bosom, stripping the Creator of His creatures and assigning them to the sower of tares, for which He will repay them with the destruction He has prepared, and with the punishment that awaits ^B them, when they are led away with him? The divine Luke, offering similar things to those spoken in Acts (although the greatest part of these apostates does not receive his words), uses the voice of Isaiah, or rather the tongue of Stephen, and brilliantly shuts their mouths before the Jews. For he, since he was the first to carry off the victorious crown, in his refutation of the Jews, among other arguments by which he confounds their impudence, introduces the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ crying out and saying: "Heaven is my throne, and earth is the footstool of my feet; what house will you build for me, says the Lord?" And the things which the Savior said in the Gospels concerning the Father, calling heaven His throne and the earth His footstool, and Jerusalem His city, these the first martyr, bearing witness to the Master through the voice of Isaiah, brings forward as the Father saying ^C the same. Elsewhere, too, the Savior, restraining and checking the foolish talk of those who swear, again builds up the same doctrine. "For you fools," he says, "and blind, which is greater? The gold, or the temple that sanctifies the gold?" Therefore, the temple of the Old Testament was not only holy, but it possessed the power to sanctify. Again: "Which is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifies the gift?" Where he clearly shows that both the altar was holy, and that it rendered holy the things which were offered upon it. And after a few words: "And he who swears," he says, "by heaven (open, O man, the ear which God formed for hearing, but he who is truly evil transformed it so that you would be deaf; listen, I say): He who swears," he says, "by heaven, swears by the throne of God and by him who sits ^D upon it."

^A Thus the temple is holy, and the altar is holy, and it possesses the divine grace to sanctify; and the heaven is the throne of the true God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole creation is also a work and handiwork. But if they speak against the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who proclaimed these things, and do not believe Christ, our true God, who says the same things with the Father; if they supinely neglect Paul, by whom they are falsely named, and David who prophesies; if they do not heed Luke, the disciple and evangelist of the saving word; and if, finally, they mock Stephen, the first among martyrs and a prophet, when he is brought forward—then it follows for them, as indeed they do, that they obey only the Evil One, to whom they have delivered both their souls and their bodies, indulging the former in impious thoughts and the latter in sordid actions. ^B The rebuke cast by the Lord upon the ungrateful Jews—that they called the master of the house Beelzebul—truly fits them well. For those apostates call the Master of the whole universe Beelzebul, or rather, they heap injury upon injury; to such an extent does this faction, which fights against God, make every other impiety and every other act of insolence appear lighter than its own.

XII.

defiles the man." ^A Again, in other brief words, establishing and ordaining peace and justice among men, he said: "Whatever you desire that men should do to you, do you also do to them." As he was about to commend this admonition and legislation of his as blameless and useful, he sealed it with an eulogy of the Law and the Prophets: "For so," he says, "are the Law and the Prophets." Assuredly, the parable also, in which our Savior likens the kingdom of heaven to a man sowing good seed in his own field, no less puts impious men to shame. For is not the present world, and those who are in it, to be referred to the kingdom of God, seeing that he calls it his own field not once, but twice, ^B saying that the field is the world, and that the world, like his field, is thus also his kingdom? For unfolding the parable, he says: "He who sows the good seed is the Son of man, and the field is the world. The good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; but the tares are the sons of the Evil one; and the enemy who sows them is the devil." Do you hear how he calls the world his own, and those who are in it his own seed, whom he also calls sons of the kingdom, attributing only the sowing of the tares to the Enemy? But inquire by reasoning whether you carry with you any trace of the hand of the Creator. For in the following ^C he most clearly declares the world to be his kingdom. How? "At the consummation," he says, "of this age," and not of the future one, "the Son of man will send his angels, and they will collect from his kingdom"—namely, the present world—"the stumbling blocks." For neither do tares grow in the future and eternal kingdom, nor does the Evil one sow them there, nor do stumbling blocks exist there, so that the angels of the Son of man could collect them from it—just as, after this collection has been made, the tares are cast into the furnace of fire. "Then, indeed, the just will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father." What could be more brilliant or more powerful than these words of the Lord, both to cast down the impiety of the apostates and to exalt and strengthen piety? For they proclaim the world and those in it to be of Christ and our Savior, and they announce the Lord himself as the Master and King of the universe, both in the future kingdom and in the present one. But what are men more desirous of being ^D than devoid of sense, more so than the very soulless things? Since the sun, and the earth, and the rocks, in that they suffer with the Lord, publicly proclaim his sovereignty, while these men are not ashamed, even when they see their own imprudence rebuked by them. For "from the sixth hour," it says, "until the ninth, there was darkness, and the earth was shaken, and the rocks were split." For what communion or sympathy exists between a wicked creature and the Lord's passion? For according to the tenets of those impious men, it would have behooved the earth to be proud and to be clad in splendid attire, seeing as it did him who was to bring destruction upon his Creator being exposed to such torments. But how, after the resurrection, when he had not yet returned to the bosom of the Father, which he had never left, did he receive from the Father the pow

power over heaven and earth, of which the one giving was not Lord? For thus does the God-fighting tongue blaspheme. But since, if fields and houses are the handiwork of the Evil One, how does the good God, our Savior, promise to provide to those who zealously followed him, along with eternal blessings, fields and houses—which are evil and of an evil creator, and over which he himself has no power either to possess them or to bestow them upon others? And why, as a reward, was it necessary to bring the things of the Enemy to those who had left everything and followed him, and to include them in the gift, and to couple faulty things with good things in eternal life, and by the addition of the inferior to insult that which, without that addition, was the most excellent of gifts? ^B And again, when the Savior was asked about the legal commandments, why did he say the first to be: "Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord. And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind"? And the second, which the question did not even require: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself." And he did not stop there, but finding the one who questioned him to be of the same mind, he said that the kingdom of God was not far from him. How, indeed, could the Mosaic laws, if they were of the Enemy, first command one to know and acknowledge one God and Lord, and then to love him alone with all one's heart, and one's neighbor as oneself? If, therefore, Moses proclaims one God and Lord, and desires that neither any other should be worshipped nor served besides him, and after this first commandment—as it is truly—urges also brotherly love and love for mankind in a manner similar to the Savior’s own precept, where, I ask you, does the evil principle of the apostates find a place? But that Scribe understood the Lord affirming the Mosaic law, that God is one and there is no other besides him. However, they who are commanded to be better than the Scribes and Pharisees do not preserve for themselves even the smallest portion of piety. ^C But Luke, the writer of the words of the Lord, how does he testify that Zacharias and Elizabeth, living under the old law, were righteous, and that they were so before God, not only before men, and were walking blamelessly in all the commandments and ordinances of God? How does he say that Zacharias performed the priesthood before God? How does he call the legal temple, into which he entered, the temple of God? And how does he affirm in the Gospels that the angel of God—even Gabriel, the captain of the hosts, who announced the birth of the Lord from the Virgin both to that undefiled Virgin herself and with her to the world—was seen in it, and that the prayers of the priest were heard, and that the child mentioned therein would be great before the Lord, ^D full of the Holy Spirit, and the herald of great joy to many, the author of the conversion of not a few of the Israelites to God, and that he would go in the spirit and power of Elijah? Therefore the evangelist, or rather God, who speaks these things through the archangel—not only John, who saw the grace budding forth, but also

Elijah, who long preceded grace—provides unassailable testimony that he turned souls that were straying from the true God and playing the harlot after demons back ^B toward the true God. Again, Zechariah is filled with the Holy Spirit and proclaims the prophets of old to be a choir of saints. "He has raised up," he says, prophesying and speaking through the Holy Spirit, "a horn of salvation for us in the house of David his servant." And whence the proof? "As he spoke," he says, "through the mouth of his holy prophets who have been from old," not, however, through the mouth of the Enemy. And what did they prophesy? That God would remember his holy covenant, not, O most wretched one, the Enemy. And to further bridle the mouths of the impious, he adds the oath which he swore to Abraham our father: "That he would grant to us, that we, being delivered out of the hand of our enemies, might serve him without fear, in holiness and righteousness." Consider what has been said. The Holy Spirit fills Zechariah, and, filled with Him, he declares the prophets of old to be saints and priests of God; he proclaims the Mosaic covenant to be holy; he announces our freedom to us; he declares that the One who swore to Abraham is the Giver of this freedom; and he asserts that those who offer Him worship serve Him in holiness and righteousness. If Zechariah, filled with the Holy Spirit, sets forth all these things, must not those who contend for the opposite surely be judged to be filled with an evil spirit? What then will the bitter accusers of the Mosaic law—or rather, the dividers of the kingdom of God—say when they see Jesus being led into Jerusalem in the Gospels, ^C observing the Mosaic institutions, offering sacrifice according to the command in the law of the Lord, and being received as a gift in the arms of the righteous Simeon? This man, among other proofs of piety and justice, having received an oracle through the Holy Spirit and having embraced the common Savior in his arms, blessed Him and prophesied that salvation had come before the face of all peoples, and a light for the revelation of the Gentiles who would thereafter believe in Him. But the divine evangelist was not content merely to recount what occurred then against these impious men; rather, as it seems, foreseeing their shamelessness, he also introduces in the sacred history Anna, whose tribe had Asher as its progenitor, present with that old man, glorifying the Lord and proclaiming the same and similar things about the common Lord. Indeed, what happened later has great weight in suppressing and casting down those who raise their eyebrows against the divine glory. For when Jesus had gone up to Jerusalem according to the flesh with His Virgin Mother and His putative father, and when the sacred rites which the holy Code prescribes had been performed there, and they were returning home—and both the Mother according to the flesh and the putative father were anxious about the absent boy and were seeking the One whom they longed for—He who is indeed the Creator of all, but who, out of love for mankind, was the Son of the Virgin, said: "Why did you Seek me,"

inquisitive old man, and acknowledging Him to the Lord, she delivers via the sacred history that she is prophesying things equal and similar concerning the common Master. And that which came to pass later also possesses great strength to cut off and humble those who lift their crest against the divine glory. For when He went up to Jerusalem with the Virgin Mother according to the flesh, and the reputed father of Jesus, and those things were performed which the holy Scriptures relate; then, even upon returning home, the child being present, and on account of this the mother according to the flesh and the reputed father being distressed and seeking the One whom they longed for, the Maker of all, but through philanthropy the Son of the Virgin, says: "Why is it that you were seeking me? Did you not know that I must be in the things of My Father?" ^B rightfully calling that temple the Father’s, which the mouth of destruction of the evil principle blasphemously calls an altar. But how does the heretical drunkenness, while carousing, call another the creator of heaven and earth, when our Savior Himself, rejoicing in spirit and with an ineffable and inconceivable confession, cries out: "I confess to Thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that Thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding, and hast revealed them unto babes"? "Father, Lord of heaven and earth," the genuine Son cries out; and the wicked crowd of humanity, which hides all impiety, speaks against the Savior and calls Beelzebul the lord of heaven and earth. But if the Law were of the Evil One, how again does the Lawgiver of grace, when the lawyer who was tempting Him—and pretending to seek eternal life—sends him to the Law as to a great medicine, urge him to find there what he was seeking? And when the lawyer had recited the first two commandments in these very words, Truth Himself said that he had answered well, and ordered that if he were to live according to these, he would inherit eternal life. ^C XIII. But you, from other things as well, gauge the equal dignity of the Law and of grace, so that you may know that He is the same Lawgiver of the Old and of the New Testament. "Amen, amen, I say to you, heaven and earth shall pass away, but My words shall not pass away." This pertains to the doctrine concerning grace; see also the similar one concerning the Law: "It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than for one jot of the Law to fall to the ground." Do you see how our Savior, foreseeing the insolence of the defectors, bestows equal dignity and glory upon the Old and the New Testament? Although in many things grace far surpasses them; for that [the Law] was a pedagogue to those things which are of grace. But in order to show that He Himself ordained those things and the present things according to a diverse and ineffable manner of dispensation, He used the same and similar phrases concerning each legislation. But indeed, also against those who do not believe in the saving doctrine, not...

^A another accuser or conqueror does He bring forward, but Moses. For do not think, he says, that I will accuse you before the Father; no, but there is one who accuses you, Moses, clearly, before the Father; he who, having been entrusted with the laws and the prophecy concerning Christ, would be a wholly trustworthy accuser and an irrefutable witness against those who indeed boast much of honoring and loving his laws, yet accept nothing of what was foretold by him concerning our common Lord and Savior—which was the head, the foundation, and the preface of his whole legislation—and who do not even perceive the restraints of their own insolence and opposition to God against Him who was foretold. ^B By many, then, of the Lord's words, and not of words alone, but also of deeds and, indeed, through the apostolic works and words, the error has been refuted which divides the power of the kingdom of God into opposing beginnings. What pardon, then, can they have who, after so many refutations of wickedness, still serve the will of the Evil One in what they think and how they live, calling the Master of the house of all "Beelzebul," while proclaiming Beelzebul to be the hidden and ineffable God, and Good, and Father—not to speak of more impious things? And do they not marvel at or revere the victory of the Lord over the slandering Jews, which He carried off not less, if not more gloriously, through the side of those people, than from the present apostasy? For the impiety which they both hold in common—even if that new apostate boasts more boldly in this regard—is what he was putting forward when he said: ^C "Every kingdom divided against itself shall not stand." For since the wicked and foolish Jews, seeing the Creator freeing both souls and bodies from diseases, attributed these miracles to Beelzebul, likewise the champions of this apostasy also attribute the works of His hands to the same. Therefore, with the same Lordly voice, the combat against God in both parties is justly condemned. For if the one rule of the Almighty is divided, it cannot stand if it is split. But that first division paves the way so that it may be distracted into a thousand parts and can never again attain a fixed seat and foundation. Just as, therefore, each is caught fighting against God, both the Jew and the apostate—the one by attributing the miracles, and the other the works of God’s creation, to the Enemy—so against both holds the common and invincible sentence of the Lord. ^D XIV. But whither are you being carried away, O men! Why, having abandoned the Lord, do you set up for yourselves as Creator your fellow servant, or rather a slave and an apostate, and the plotter against our whole nature from the beginning? Why, renouncing the Creator, do you surrender yourselves to him who seeks our destruction, and who endeavors to bring ruin not only to the soul, but also to the body? Why are you blinded to the light? Why have you exchanged the darkness for the light? Wake up from your drunkenness; rise from the lethal sleep,

soul-destroying bane; rescue yourselves from destruction. But how could this come to pass? If you would labor to turn yourselves away from those actions in which the Enemy holds power: first, from fornication, through which the body is destroyed, but the soul is destroyed in an even harsher destruction, yielding its self-mastery to serve the passions; from injustice, while which prevails, neither house, nor city, nor human life at all is preserved; from perjury, which plunges the soul into a contempt of God; from hatred of the brother, through which the common Creator is insulted—for he who hates the creature without cause transfers his outrage onto the Creator himself. Hold falsehood in hatred, considering that the devil is the father of lies; turn away from deceit, which has brought about many evils, even those not hoped for; flee from murder, for from the beginning the Enemy was a murderer; from avarice, ^B calling to mind, if nothing else, Judas; abhor theft and guile against your neighbor, and the corruption of others' marriages, and luxury, and licentiousness, and drunkenness, and purge them from your way of life; for with these the Enemy enters in, with these he takes delight. In these he procures the strength to subjugate your mind and to separate it from the God who created it, and to persuade creatures that they both are and are called his own. If you abstain from his works, both those mentioned and those similar to them, he too will stand off from you, having nothing upon which to set foot and rest within you. And then the divine grace, shining upon you, will enlighten you to recognize the Maker and Creator, not as the treacherous enemy, but as the good and ^C philanthropic God, in whom were created visible and invisible things, principalities, and thrones, and powers, and virtues, and the present whole and visible world. For through him all things were made, even if that apostasy, having bewitched the eyes of the soul, does not permit it to see the Creator. For as long as you minister to the will of the Evil One, and are mired in the filth of shameful pleasures, and instead of saving labors pursue the soul-destroying ease, the divine and heavenly radiance will never shine upon you, nor will the Enemy let go of his power over your souls and thoughts, which he holds enslaved through these actions. Nevertheless, we shall by no means lose our zeal to guide you, by the testimonies of the Holy Spirit, to the light of piety and to refute this apostasy. ^D

BOOK III

I. Open to me, my own, your chaste ears, which bear no dogma of the Evil One, and consider with me the injuries against God held by the opinions of those who [corrupt] the Old Testament.

For if it is from the Evil One, how did He who came to destroy the Evil One endure to take its book, and read it to the ears of many, by which the things concerning Himself were proclaimed beforehand? And not only to read, but also to testify that "These things are now fulfilled in your ears," and to proclaim that year—which is a period of times (13), and time itself is the measure of sensible motion—to be acceptable to the Lord? And how, again, in the parable of Lazarus and the rich man, does the benevolent and good Master of ours call Moses and the prophets teachers of saving conversion and repentance? ^B For they have, He says, Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. For would He who assumed our nature for the salvation of the common race of men send those who were initiated by Him, and liberated from error, back to the servants and ministers of the Enemy, in order for them then to obtain salvation? And who, truly being a creature of God, could endure the excess of such madness?

Again, if the author of the Old Testament is the Evil One, how does the Fountain of goodness say: "Search the Scriptures, because in them you will find eternal life?" For where is eternal life, in those places where the sting of sin holds sway? Where is eternal life, where the murderer establishes laws and gives commands? For this is what the God-opposing tongue dares to utter. ^C Furthermore, if the Old Testament is from the Evil One, how does Truth Itself say: "If you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote of me?" He did not say: "If you believed Moses in some things," but simply declared him worthy of faith.

And how, again, does He, in defending the Lawgiver brilliantly against those who hung about the dissolution of marriages and who brought forward Moses in support of their own passion, say that "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to put away your wives. But from the beginning it was not so?" And from where does He bring his proof? "For He who made them," He says, "made them male and female." ^D Thus, the things which the Saviour decreed in the Gospels concerning marriage, He declares to proceed from Him who fixed the laws in His own creatures and works, and He testifies that Moses did not despise the laws given in creation, but because of certain circumstances, granted some relaxation regarding them. For my law, He says, accords with the law of creation made from the beginning, while the dissolution of marriage depends upon the dispensation and arrangement of Moses. Because of the hardness

of your hearts, he says, Moses wrote these things. ^A For the indissoluble nature of the union, which I enjoin, and which the one who created man from the beginning—through the diverse formation according to the body—foretold and predestined as the same for me as for his works. Therefore he adds: For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his own wife, and the two shall be into one flesh. But that you may learn more clearly who it is that formed the bodies in this way, he himself, by introducing the one who joined them, also introduces the Creator. For he says: What therefore God has joined, let not man separate. The Savior bears witness that even the difference in form of the creature ^B of man and woman is the handiwork of God who is over all, and that it is right to preserve the indissoluble bond in union. And that the Mosaic introduction had a situation involving the hardness of heart of those receiving the law, which dragged down the dignity of the law that had been silenced concerning creation.

II. But let us pass on to another argument: if the Old Testament was of an evil principle, how does Christ our Savior, who joins grace with the law, say: Many just men desired to see what you see, and did not see? For how could they have desired to see, ^C those who belong to the Wicked One, the things that belong to the Good? For the longing for the Good is a sprout of a good impulse. And again, how does he say: Abraham saw my day, and rejoiced? For where is it consequent, and where is it possible, for a man of the Old Testament to have been raised to such a height of contemplation and power, as to see the day of the arrival of the good God, and to rejoice? Especially since the divine Paul bears witness and says ^D that the mystery according to Christ, and the coming of the Savior, had escaped the principalities and powers of the world, and the ruler of this world. If, therefore, even the ruler of the world was unaware of that mystery, whence did his servants foresee and anticipate it? But you, hear also another and more brilliant refutation of their impiety. For when the incredulous and maliciously diligent Sadducees

^A fashioned seven brothers, and assigned to them each in turn one and the same wife, and by this fiction endeavored to destroy the resurrection of the body, the Savior, to those proposing to him the problem which they thought to be insoluble by their fiction, and asking whose wife she would be of these seven, first of all rebuked them for their error as being ignorant of the Scriptures. Yet what rebuke is sufficient for those who are ignorant of the things of the Evil One? ^B But He adds, from their ignorance of the Scriptures, another and more severe reproach against them, that they did not even know the power of God. Then, explaining more clearly the mystery of the resurrection: For in the resurrection, He says, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. And furthermore, still more strongly and effectively chastising their folly, and at once declaring the harmonious agreement [(21)] of grace and the law, and at the same time inflicting a blow [(22)] upon them through the Mosaic legislation, and through them upon those who are now apostates, He says: Have you not read what was said by God: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? clearly showing through these things that Abraham and Isaac and Jacob are heirs of eternal life, and that God is eternal, and the author of the resurrection, and the provider of the enjoyment derived therefrom, and that their God is this. And He adds ^C continuously: God is not therefore the God of the dead, but of the living. And He said these things so that He might cut off every pretext of the impious. Nor did He omit to mention where these things were written, but cries out through the holy Mark, that in the Book of Moses, God said these things to him. If, therefore, God is not the God of the dead, but rather Abraham lives with Him, Isaac lives, and Jacob lives, and all who have emulated their way of life, and they are as the angels of God in heaven, how can those who lived according to the old dispensation be said to have sprung from an evil principle, as that wickedness utters?

III. But the opinion of the apostates can be still further refuted, since the Savior, when urging those who desire to enter heaven to strive to enter through the narrow gate, in turn consigns those who are negligent of this command, as workers of sloth [(23)], to the place where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth. ^D And He brings in, gathering from all sides those who have been zealous concerning the command, into His kingdom, and causing them to recline in it (pay attention, O man, to the thought!), He vindicates the first place for Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob. For He says: If you do not wish to hear...

when you shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves cast out? And who are those cast out, if not clearly those who did not live their lives according to the imitation of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets? But if those who did not emulate their life and piety are cast out of the kingdom of God, and are thrown into the weeping and gnashing of teeth, what retribution could be found sufficient for those who have raged with such madness? O unbridled mouths of men, so readily serving the father of lies, that they dare even to call them robbers, thieves, and the offspring and servants of the Evil One! And do not those who do not stop their madness even at this point, but even blaspheme the One who grants us eternal life and ^B the kingdom of heaven—who is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of the living and not of the dead—as a wicked principle and creator of evil works; do not those, who are truly the offspring of the Evil One, who perpetually provoke the punishment prepared by fire and darkness for the devil, deserve a punishment equal to their most audacious deed? And do they not even dread the chasm that exists between the rich man and Lazarus, which wall s off those who feast with Abraham from those who are tormented in the pains? Alas! Even if they do not now have a sense of the punishment and are not terrified by the warnings of the Savior, then indeed, then, having learned by experience the bitterness of the torment—though they will find no gain—they will render against themselves a harsh, long, and irrevocable judgment! For especially when, according to the parable of the rich man, they call upon Abraham for aid, they shall find him, whom they formerly mocked, moved by no pity for them. For if the man who acted insolently toward Lazarus is excluded from the bosom of Abraham by a fearful chasm, and pays the penalty for his inhumanity in unquenchable fire, and is seized with the desire for that blessed happiness and rest, but is not granted it; and if his tongue is scorched, and he suffers bitter pains, merely for that insolence, in that he did not show sympathy to a man like himself, and not because he heaped mockery or appeared as a blasphemer; how much more grievously will the mouth, and the tongue, and all the bowels be burnt of those who showed such insolence toward Abraham, and through him transmitted their war against God to the common Lord and Creator? But examine and weigh the rest with me.

IV.

^A attacking them even more vehemently, he adds: You are not children of Abraham, but you are of the devil. For the judgment is indeed ^B powerful to denote the calling and lineage of that one whose genuine character one expresses in the imitation of his life. For if the Old Testament were, according to the godless voices of the Evil One, of that source, and Abraham belonged to it, it would have been equal to saying: You are children of Abraham, and children of the devil; for by either, the Jews who honor equally what God hates ^C and the Enemy loves, could be reproved. But how is it that elsewhere again the Savior adjudges to those who are of Abraham the kingdom of heaven as an inheritance, and unites with them those who, with wholehearted purpose, have proved themselves keepers of the commandments without excuse and have offered to him pure worship, and promises them, as if bestowing some great and admirable reward, the dwelling together with those men in the kingdom of heaven? For I say to you, that many shall come from the east and west, and shall recline with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. Is this, then, a reward for those who have acknowledged him? Is this a gift for those who have suffered slaughter for his sake? Is this a prerogative? Is this a wage? That they should be able to be, and to be numbered, and to abide with the ministers of Evil? And how could ears accustomed to divine discourses tolerate these things and others of this kind?

V. On the Old Testament and the Genealogy of the Savior

V. If the Old Testament was from the devil, how do Matthew and Luke, in recounting the Savior's genealogy, record as his ancestors and fathers those whom the Old Testament held as its own glory? For how can the good God fall into outward appearance and hypocrisy? For there is, there is a not insignificant part ^D of this apostasy, which also brings forth this madness against the advent of the incarnate Word. But how could the Good One, either by appearance and hypocrisy, or in truth and reality, have deigned to have those as his own ancestors and fathers who excelled in the wicked [dispensation], and to take up such a seed, whose framer he did not ignore to be the Enemy? And how did he not come forth from another nation, he who had not experienced the power and might of the devil in a second turn, but came forth from that very one which the laws of the Old Testament had fashioned and disposed, and after the initial evil creation had led them on and incited them to actions and customs far worse? If the Old Testament does not have God as its author, how does it punish with fire those who have transgressed the natural laws of the Creator, and have slipped into wantonness, and have become completely enslaved to the will of the Enemy, and requires them to pay the penalty for their daring deeds? For to demand of the Evil One the penalty for the evil work that delights him and proceeds from him, how would it not be entirely, if one were even to think [or say] it, an act of madness? But the apostate says that the enemy is the one who, with an evil [blank space for likely continued text]

^A nature, calls the other fire—that is, the fire—a punishment, and punishes with a flood those who have been dragged off by the passions of the flesh. But it is the mark of one who hates evil, and is good and just, both to restrain evil and to exact the same punishment upon those who have become shameless in sin; it is not the mark of someone who is evil by origin, or who loves and legislates for sin.

VI. ^B That you may learn more accurately that the same God is good and a lover of mankind, who is the avenger of what is just both in the Old and in the New Covenant: He causes the fig tree to wither that did not offer fruit to him who sought it, and subjects those who do not obey him to myriad threats, and He condemns those who transgress his laws to the more severe and inimitable punishment, namely the outer fire which is prepared for the devil and his angels. And so, He punishes first with temporal fire and water, but in the end with that which is eternal and unending. Do you see how the hatred of evil and the love of mankind are everywhere a hallmark and testimony of the goodness of God? And does He not himself do these things, while holding back his disciples from such actions? But Peter, who is brilliant in grace, delivered Ananias and Sapphira to death as the punishment for their lying. And Paul, the fervent herald of grace and teacher of the world, immediately makes Elymas blind, having himself learned, from what he had suffered, how much benefit punishment brings. He delivers the fornicating Corinthian to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, and sends Alexander away to the torment and judgment thereof. And if, as Paul strongly testifies, there is wrath, affliction, and anguish upon every soul of man who does evil, ^C just as there is glory, honor, and peace for everyone who does good, and how God is no respecter of persons; how is it that those condemned in the Old Testament were not condemned by the same good God who also legislates grace, and who confirmed his lack of respect for persons by the things He brought about? Indeed, who would suffice to recount the laws of grace or of the New Testament, which prove that justice, inimical to the wicked, ever prevails there?

VII. Furthermore, if the Old Testament is of an evil principle, how does the heavenly and celestial man, Paul, ^D immediately from the beginning of his Epistles, profess that God, through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, declares [the Gospel] concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh? For if the prophets and holy Scriptures are of God, through whom God previously promised concerning his Son, where will the Evil one find his principle? And if his invisible things, that is, those of the God and Father of our Lord,

are known from the foundation of the world by his works, as it is perceived, in what might the Creator, the Enemy, be seen? The invisible and intelligible things of God are; but these are discerned ^A from the sensible and visible. For if the invisible things of God were not discerned through the visible creation, he would not have distinguished the invisible from it; nor would he have taught that those things are to be discerned through this. How then are the invisible things of God discerned in sensible works, and then his eternal power and divinity also in the works of the Evil one? For on the contrary, if ^B there were any works of the Enemy at all, his wickedness and baseness would be discerned in them. That the law is from the good God, one could demonstrate even from this. For Paul, the mouth of Christ, says that not the hearers of the law are righteous before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. And how is the law not from the good God, he who, instead of punishing, declares those who perform it to be righteous? And if the transgressor of the law, even if he be circumcised in the flesh, is considered as uncircumcised, and is judged unworthy of God; but the uncircumcised who keeps the righteousness of the law bears the circumcision of the all-holy Spirit in his soul, how is the law not from the good God? And if, as Paul loudly proclaims, Christ Jesus became a minister of circumcision, for what purpose? For the truth of God, in order to confirm the promises of the fathers, and did not Christ confirm these? And he who arranged the promises to the fathers is the same God who also created the sensible heaven and the earth, whom Moses also proclaims as God in his history of the creation; and it is shown by what Paul says ^C here and in many other places, that this is the Father of our Savior; whose promises, as the genuine Son, he himself, not using the works of another, proved to be fixed and stable. How can it be that the most impudent faction of the apostates is not confounded? But why do I appeal to Paul, a man otherwise so illustrious in the knowledge of the Old Testament and the wisdom of the New, when one may dare to hear the common Lord himself commanding and saying: Do not think that I have come to dissolve the law or the prophets: I have not come to dissolve the law, but to fulfill? And elsewhere: Amen, amen, I say to you, The heaven and the earth shall not pass away, not one iota or one serif, until all these things shall have come to pass. I have come, says Christ, as one about to fulfill the law; but it is the part of evil mouths to say that I have come to dissolve the laws of the Father. I, however, shall leave nothing of it unfulfilled; there is nothing in it inspired by the Evil one ^D; nothing false shall be detected: all things are full of truth. I am the confirmation of the prophetic sayings. For the prophets, who were servants and ministers of me and my Father, both clearly foresaw and foretold my coming and all the things that pertain to it. Therefore, neither any small thing nor great of those things which they foretold, or which the law contains, shall pass away, which is not at last sealed by the seal of truth. For if I am a minister of circumcision to confirm the promises which the Father made to the fathers, how could even one iota, that is, the smallest of those things spoken by the law or the prophets,

ever pass away or not come to pass?

^A VIII. But now turn your mind to other matters with me, that it may appear that the oracles of the law are divine. For Paul says: "What is the prerogative of the circumcised?" And then: "Much in every way. Primarily, because the oracles of God were entrusted to them. For what if some did not believe? Shall their unbelief render the faithfulness of God of no effect? God forbid! Let God be true, but every man a liar." And He does not suffer the faithfulness of God to be abolished; rather, He chooses that every man should be convicted of falsehood, so that God, who gave the circumcision, might be acknowledged as truthful. If, therefore, they are the oracles of God which were entrusted to Israel, and their unbelief does not abolish the faithfulness of God, and it is right to consider those ^B who do not believe God as liars, but to hold Him who gave the laws to Israel as most truthful, how is the Old Law not the legislation of the good God? For surely Paul does not call the Wicked One, who has been a liar from the beginning and has not stood in the truth, the fountain of truth. Rather, he prefers that all men be convicted of falsehood, so that the architect of falsehood might be exposed, and the Creator of truth might be proclaimed. And if the righteousness of God has been manifested, receiving testimony from the Law and the prophets, how are the Law and the prophets not to be considered as having been filled with the inspiration and truth of the good God?

But see the shocking and detestable impiety of the enemies of God even further. If God redeemed the world from the slavery of the Enemy through His own blood, and the blood and the flesh—but in my horror at their logic and their words, I refrain from repeating what the enemies of God say—how did He rescue our race from the slavery of the Enemy by means of such a creation? For our enemy would be worthy of much gratitude, glory, and honor if he himself had provided the material by which we could be delivered ^C from his tyranny. But he would be guilty of great folly and much derision if he had set himself to fashion that by which he would be deprived of his power over our bodies and our souls.

What else follows from this error? None other than that the Savior did not accomplish the whole work of our salvation of His own, but gave the Enemy the greater part to possess. O minds subject to Satan! To suppose that, having borrowed from him what He Himself was not the Creator of, He nonetheless redeems it by His own suffering—a thing which certainly ought not to be [for the apostasy of the Wicked One makes it a work of evil], and He transforms it into immortality and brings it about that the evil remains perpetual.

^D IX. And how could he be considered the enemy of our race who has contributed so much to our common salvation through his own creation? How, therefore, in

creating the body, have done any evil, when he not only preserves it and later makes it incorruptible, but also uses it to benefit the souls that follow it, rendering the bodies united to them capable of the same immortality? Thus, it is darkness and chaos and blindness of the mind, and madness and deep intoxication, that characterize the zeal of those who split the single principle into two principles, and divide the one Lord, Jesus Christ, the creator of all things, into two principles, assigning the one to the intelligible realm and the other to the visible. But how, by [their talk of] Bythus and Sige ^A, do those who claim that our body is of the Evil One not sink into the pains of their own Maker? For Paul cries out clearly from the opposite side: "The body is not for fornication," which is the work of the Evil One, "but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body." For how can the creature of the Enemy be entirely the Lord's? And what is the point of admonishing that it should not be given over to fornication, if it is evil in itself, an opus of an evil principle, and entirely alien to the will and creation of God? For if, as those apostates would have it, the body is evil in its formation, its nature, and its laws, it will never be the Lord's at all, nor will it make any difference whether it gives itself to fornication or not. For whether it indulges in it or not, on both sides it will never cease to be wicked, and the opus of an evil principle. But consider this also: If the body is a creature of the Evil One, how does he who vigorously opposes evil and fights for the truth call it holy? "The unmarried woman," he says, "cares for the things of the Lord, that she may be holy both in body and in spirit." ^B If, then, the body is holy, whence comes the evil? And whence comes the opus of an evil creator? For evil actions, which adulterate the creature of the good God, claim it for themselves and subject it to the Evil One. But when it remains within the laws of its Maker, it has more power to drive away the Evil One than the Evil [One] has to subject it to himself.

X. That it is therefore unlawful either to say or to believe that there are two mutually opposed principles in those whose will remains free and not subject to the allurements of the Enemy, I think has been sufficiently argued. Let us now examine the other head of the apostate doctrine, which, although it was not lightly or perfunctorily examined and condemned in the foregoing chapters, yet let it be subjected once more to the same sacred Scripture. Paul, who consecrated himself entirely to God, cries out with a clear voice: "Am I— ^{C D}

^A speaking these things according to man? Or does the law not also say these things?" It is the same. Do we confirm what is said by human reasoning, or is the proposition not both divine and of a legislation surpassing man? And he himself clarifies who established these things: "For in the law of Moses," he says, "it is written: 'You shall not muzzle an ox that is treading out the grain.'" And having said this, he adds: "Is it for oxen that God is concerned?" And intending to show for whose concern he acts, he adds: "On our account, indeed, he says it, and for our sake it was written." Thus, the doctrine is common, which both held good in the Old and prevailed in the New Testament.

Afterwards, indicating the natural similarity and immutability that is between the Father and the Son, by the similarity of the laws enacted on both sides, he says: "Just as it was commanded," he says, "that those who serve the altar should share from the altar; so also the Lord commanded that those who preach the Gospel live from the Gospel," exalting the law, as having proceeded from the Father, to such a degree that he suggests the Son established His own precepts in imitation of that. ^B Being about to explain still further the connection and kinship of the law and of grace, he says: "I do not want you to be ignorant, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and all ate the same spiritual food, and all drank the same spiritual drink." Show me then, in this place, a single moment that is not immune from the raging power of the Enemy. "For they drank," he says, "from the spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ." Do you hear how Christ was giving drink to the paternal people, and how the Father was leading Israel toward the worship and conversion of the Son? By whom else, if not by Moses and the prophets? Where then here is the Evil One? Where is the work of the evil principle? Where are the laws of the opposing faction, when the Mosaic people were nourished with spiritual food and drank spiritual drink from the accompanying and following rock, which was Christ?

Then again, this man learned in the law, and reckoning all the gains in which he formerly prided himself as refuse for the sake of Christ, says: "Neither let us tempt Christ, even as some of them tempted him." Who are they, if not the Israelitic people? And what were their rewards? They perished by the serpents. Thus, those who tempted God present in the law, through the Father also tempted His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. For the Israelitic people tempted their own lawgiver; but the initiate and mystagogue of the mysteries, knowing the kingdom of the Father and the Son to be indivisible and inviolable, ^C and knowing that in the tempting of the Father of the good Son, God, Christ also is tempted, maintains this. Consider it also in the manner of a corollary, that Christ straightway sent a blow against those who had tempted Him, the destruction by means of the serpents. And inflicting this, He did not abandon His love for men. Elsewhere, the same Apostle testifies that the prophets spoke by the command of the eternal God, and truthfully foretold the mystery established before the ages,

which remained hidden from the powers of the world and from the Prince of this world himself. ^A And how could the prophets or the Law be of evil inspiration, when they proclaimed the mystery, while the contrivance of all wickedness remained hidden from them? Again, in other places, he testifies that the same God, and not one and then another, spoke of old through the prophets, and later through the Son. For he says: "God, having spoken of old in many ways and by various means to the fathers by the prophets, in these last days has spoken to us by his Son." The same one, I say, and not one and then another. He, therefore, who bestowed the New Testament upon the world through the Son is the same—if anyone possessed knowledge of divine things—who established the Old through the prophets, as Paul also testifies. How, then, does the faction of those who wander invent one Legislator and God for the former, and another for the New? ^B But if God did indeed found the earth from the beginning, as this same mystic and teacher of hidden things confirms in this sacred Scripture, and the heavens are the works of his hands—for, by taking the song of the Ancestor of God and weaving it into his own thoughts, he confirms that it is inspired by God—how are the collection of apostates not ashamed to call those who preach these things their teacher, even though they do so falsely and while hypocritically pretending? For they are even inscribed with his name, doing this very thing contrary to his law. For was Paul crucified for us, or were we baptized into the name of Paul? And, "I, indeed, am of Paul, and I of Apollo, and I of Cephas; is Christ divided?" But yet, even while they boast, through their transgression insulting the boast itself, they take refuge in that calling, so that they might avoid the shame into which even the mere mention of the teacher of apostasy casts them. ^C But how are they not overwhelmed with shame? When Paul, through the voice of David, teaches that the true and good God is the Creator of heaven and earth, they themselves say that the maker of heaven is one, and the creator of the earth is another; nor do they hear him crying out: "It was fitting for Him," that is, for the Father, "for whom all things exist and through whom all things exist," that he might declare him to be the Creator, not of some things, but of all things equally. And how is it evident that he says this regarding the Father? The sequence of the words makes it clear: "having brought many sons to glory, to perfect the captain of their salvation through sufferings." ^D For who, other than the true God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, either brought many sons in, or perfected their captain through sufferings? The same divine and holy man, since he knew that our Lord Jesus Christ possessed authority and power undivided from the Father, says elsewhere of him: "For from him and through him,"

and to Him are all things; to Him be glory forever. Amen." ^A All things, he says—not the intelligible things only, as those madmen think, but also all the invisible things—are the work of His creative palm. And the sovereignty over all these, and the authority, and the power, and the providential care belong to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit.

But do you turn your contemplation also to other Apostolic sayings, in which he calls those who believe "brothers," and "holy," and "partakers of the heavenly calling," in order to set Christ our true God alongside your servant ^B Moses. For he introduces both of them as faithful to God and the Father. For Paul says to them in these words: "Consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Jesus Christ, who was faithful to Him who made Him," that is, High Priest. Then, explaining how He was faithful, he demonstrates it through Moses, as he says, "as Moses was in all His house." Whose house, if not His who made our Lord Jesus Christ High Priest?

Then, intent on teaching the incomparable difference between the Master and the servant, he calls the one a servant and faithful in all God’s house, but says that the Other built the house; for God, who makes all things, He it is who also ordained the structure of His own earthly house. For "He who made all things," he says, "is God," ^C whose genuine Son Jesus Christ is; and for this reason He is Lord of the house, and not a servant, as Moses is.

And after a little: "The pride of hope and the confidence until the end, if we hold firm, we who have believed," declaring that we are to be called the house of God. He brings forward the Davidic words in support of those things already said, in which, first, he proclaims that the Holy Spirit spoke through him, and then he confirms that the same punishment is required of those who now turn disobedient ears to the Lord’s commandments, as was required of those who, in the time of provocation, hardened their hearts of old. ^D For if the punishment is equal, neither does the sin differ; and those whose sin is similar are convicted of having sinned against the same God, each party alike. Yet that strenuous and fervent lover of the truth does not rest even in these points, in order to join the law of grace and demonstrate that these are common to the Father and the Son, but he warns that those who provoked Moses of old, and through him God Himself, tempted no other than Him whom the Holy Spirit announces: For in the day, he says, of temptation, in the desert...

where your fathers tempted me—me, and no other—and tested me, and saw my works. Therefore, having gone astray, because they chose not to know my ways, they did not enter into my rest. Take heed, then, lest, just as those provoked God, and disbelieved, and turned away from Him, you too turn away from the living God, and do not harden your hearts as they did, nor covet the things against which God was wroth for forty years in the desert, whose limbs also fell therein. For indeed, because of unbelief, they were unable to enter into the rest of God. Let us fear, therefore, lest we fail in any of the things commanded, or fall into sickness of unbelief. For those of us who have believed will enter into His rest. And who is it who decreed this, thereby sharpening the things said, and showing that it is the same God in the Old and in the New Covenant, who both creates and saves, and punishes and fulfills promises, and who adds with singular confidence: As I swore in my wrath, they shall not enter into my rest? The same [God], therefore, who at that time did not bring in those who were unbelieving, even now similarly excludes those who do not believe from the rest. And he who examines the sacred oracles placed before our eyes will find infinite other things of this kind: ^B that it is the same God who governs the Israelite people through Moses and men in the New Covenant through Jesus Christ. The very same One introduces some, both of old and now, into the place of rest, while He repels others. For a man most studious in contemplation sees that both that ancient rest, which was the promised land, and that other new one, which is the heavenly kingdom, belong to the same [God]; he sees Him both inflicting punishment as it is merited, and distributing salvation as a reward, and many other things. But if, as the mind of the apostates desires, those ancient things were from the Evil One, it would have been necessary for those who approached him to be graced with rewards and crowns, and to enter into rest, and not to leave their limbs in the desert, nor to pay such penalties as are prepared for those who sin against the true God.

XII. But how does that same teacher of the world say elsewhere that Aaron was called by God to be high priest, just as Christ was? ^D For no one, he says, takes this honor upon himself, but he who is called by God, just as Aaron was. So also Christ did not glorify Himself to become high priest, but He who spoke to Him: You are my Son, today I have begotten you. But if He who called Christ high priest is the same One who anointed Aaron through Moses, and neither

^A of them glorified himself as high priest, but He who called them; how is it that the things of the New and the things of the Old are not also works and laws of the same Good God? But does the mass of the defection, becoming more shameless, dare to accuse the Truth, Christ Himself, of falsehood? For He says: The ruler of the world will come, and in Me he will find nothing. But the [heresy] that says the body which He wore is a creation of the Evil One, pours the lie of falsehood upon the Truth bitterly. And He, indeed, as Lord of all and Master and Creator, when He arrived for the voluntary and saving passion for the world, declared Himself Lord of both the ass and the colt to the disciples. For He claims them as creatures of His own lordship and mastery, just as the world and the things in it, and thus these too. Therefore He says: If anyone should say anything to you, you shall say that the Lord has need of them. And immediately he will send them. And Christ indeed speaks of Himself as Lord, as Maker of both the ass and the colt; but the faction of the defection does not tolerate this, but snatching them from His power, it subordinates them to the power of the Enemy. ^B Yet the shameless ones ought to have been shamed, if by nothing else, then by the other utterances of the divine Paul. For these say that there is no other God greater than He who swore to Abraham, and that He is immutable in His promises, and that it is impossible for Him to lie (in this way is the dignity of truth inherent in His essence) and that He is the provider of our hope as Christians. For he says: For God having promised to Abraham, since He had nothing greater to swear by, swore by Himself, saying, etc.; and how Abraham, having endured, obtained the promise; and that, the same God, wishing to show more abundantly to the heirs of the promise, who we are, the unchangeableness of His counsel, confirmed it with an oath: so that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation. Who are these? We who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us. Did you note ^C how he says no God is greater than the One who provided the oath to Abraham? And how he proclaims Him the source of all truth? And how we who have believed in Christ have from thence consolation and strength to lay hold of the hope set before us? Where, therefore, is the Good One and the Evil One, and the splitting of the Old Testament? And who, again, is He who has perfected the new testament, and upon the house of Judah? If you do not wish to say it yourself, listen to the teacher Paul responding; for he responds by applying prophetic ^D oracles: Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, and I will perfect upon the house of Judah a new testament. Apply your mind, O man! Not according to the testament which I made to their fathers, in that day when I took their hands to lead them out of the land of Egypt: which

I made, he says, but not—as you claim, O wicked one—that which I made to their fathers. ^A Then: *They continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not.* Who is the speaker? The Lord, he says, not the Wicked One. For he adds: *This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will make it, I myself,* not another; *I will make the new, as I made the old.* Do you see how, up and down, Paul praises the same Lawgiver of both the Old and New Testaments? And how could the "Holy place" and the "Holy of Holies" of the former testament be such, if it were of a wicked legislation? For he says: *The first tabernacle had ordinances of divine service and the worldly holy place, and the first tabernacle was prepared.* In which were the candlestick, and the table, and the showing of the loaves, which is called holy. And after the first tabernacle, the holy place, and the ^B *Holy of Holies*, in which the golden pot had the manna, and the rod of Aaron that was laid up, and the tables of the covenant; and how did the Cherubim of glory overshadow them, if these were indeed the commands of a treacherous and evil principle? And how, again, does the same herald of grace cry out that the ages were framed by the word of God, and that by the same God the visible things were made from those that do not appear? For if God made the visible things by a word, just as he did the ages, does the apostasy then fashion a different creator for the visible things, and another for the intelligible? How many things could one say, and by how many arguments could one confute the God-opposing and baseless doctrine of the apostasy! For how does the good God attest that Abel was righteous, if he were of an evil creator, and how did he receive his sacrifice, and [how] does Paul proclaim his gift to have been offered by faith? For *by faith,* he says, *Abel offered a more excellent sacrifice than Cain unto God, by which he was testified to be righteous, God testifying upon his gifts.* And how [is there] the translation of Enoch by faith, and how did he please God? And how must he who wishes to approach God believe that He is the author of these benefits—that, first of all, He himself truly exists, and is the rewarder—if [the] Evil One were the actor of evil works? But why is it necessary to recount one by one those who stood out in the Old Testament, and whose faith in God He celebrates—Noach, for instance, and Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob—testifying that they were not only faithful throughout their whole life, but ^D that according to faith they...

...[regarding] the one approaching God, [and] the one working these things, first that He truly exists, and that He becomes a rewarder, if he were evil and an author of evil works? And what need is there to speak one by one of those who shone forth in the Old Testament, for all of whom [Scripture] testifies to their faith in God—I speak of Noah, and Abraham, and Isaac, and [that they were] not only faithful in their whole life, but also in accordance with their faith, they abandoned the present life, and considered themselves strangers and sojourners of this ephemeral polity, and were not ashamed of God, and considered themselves His own ^A domestics, and [wished] God Himself to be called [their] own—which [God]? The One who had prepared for them the heavenly city. For how did He prepare the heavenly kingdom for them, if they were not recognized throughout their life as His servants and observers of His commandments, and [if they] had not preserved their faith for Him, to whom the reward is the heavenly city, a pure and unmixed confession ^B?

XIII. But do not pass over that un-sacrificed and wondrous sacrifice of Abraham, which God sought and whose purpose He approved; and just as in turn he (Abraham) obeyed not unwillingly, and not only obeyed, but also believed that God is able even to raise the dead. For this reason, it is reckoned to him for righteousness, and he receives the paternal honor not for that generation only, but also thereafter, as it is written, "I have placed you as a father of many nations," before the God in whom he believed. And observe accurately, of which God he speaks. For Paul ^C adds, teaching, "[of the One] who gives life to the dead and calls those things which do not exist as though they did." And again: "He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened by faith, giving glory to God." Do you see who He was that spoke in the Law and the prophets? Clearly, not someone different from the One who bestowed grace upon us, but the same. For he adds: "But it was not written for his sake alone, but also for us, to whom it shall be reckoned, to those who believe on the One who raised our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead." Therefore, the One who placed Abraham as the father of many nations, who swore an oath to him, who is unfailing in His promises, who calls the things that do not exist as though they did, who gives life to the dead, He is the same One who raised our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead; and this is so, even if this pernicious ^D opinion of the apostates divides them into two lordships and gods. But do you, for my sake, consider the others who have clearly been shown to have lived in the Old Testament: Abraham, Jacob, Joseph, even Moses himself—whom Paul, while bestowing worthy praises and celebrating their faith, adds regarding Moses: that he even endured the reproach of Christ. For he says, in these very words, that he considered the reproach of Christ greater than the treasures of Egypt, and the reason: for he looked toward the reward, which clearly God was able to provide. But it is of no use, [for] men...

^A to enumerate them one by one. For the divine man says: "Time will fail me telling of Gideon, of Barak, of Samson and Jephthah, of David, and also Samuel and the prophets, who through faith subdued kingdoms, ^B wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions (56), quenched the power of fire, escaped the edges of the sword, were made strong out of weakness." Afterward, [he recounts] their sacred and wonderful deeds and sufferings, and their dwelling and endurance in the wilderness, adding: "Of whom the world was not worthy." Moreover, he excites us to their imitation, and proposing their manner of life to us for the pursuit of virtue, he adds: "Having so great a cloud of witnesses surrounding us, laying aside every weight, and the sin which clingeth so closely, let us run with patience the race set before us, looking unto the author and finisher of our faith, Jesus Christ," who is our Lord ^C. Therefore, if he was the author of that faith in which our fathers remained pure and steadfast, He is equally the finisher of our salvation. And that this could lead them back from no other error and constrain them to piety, it was certainly fitting that they should recognize the truth even from the things which they immediately bring forward. The apostle Paul says: "What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid" (Rom. vii, 3). And elsewhere: "For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal" (Rom. vii, 14). And again: "Delight in the law after the inward man" (Rom. vii, 22). He continues: "So then I myself with the mind serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin" (Rom. vii, 25). "For the flesh lusteth against ^D the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh" (Gal. v, 17), that is, the soul, fashioned according to the image of God, and joined to the body fashioned by the same hand, desires to be restored to its origin. The flesh, that is, carnal desires (for it is right to call these affects by this name, since it was given to us before and after grace, and by grace), these, I say, carnal desires do not easily yield to the will of the soul, and very often struggle grievously, having evil for their fellow-soldier, unless one keeps watch zealously, and through prayers receives the impetus from above to triumph over them (57). These (such things are named passions). These [desires] of the soul ^A struggle vehemently, having the evil one as their fellow-soldier, unless one keeps watch carefully, and drawing down through prayer the assistance from above, raises a trophy against them (58).

XIV. But whatever the discourse has turned aside from, let it return [to it]. For it adds to the aforementioned things, saying: "So the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good." And it is evident that it is not other than holy, ^B and just, and good; but rather that it is the commandment of the Law itself and of its own... [alt-version omitted]

God, and just, and holy, and good. For He from whom the holy and just and good flow is Himself the author and giver of these. Inasmuch as He is the cause ^A of all things before all else, He is these things Himself, which He has granted to others to share, not by sharing, but by that superabundant goodness of which He shares—and what He shared, he shared by a participation of a good-like nature. And again, elsewhere, the same herald of the truth cries out, "The righteousness of the law" is fulfilled "in those who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the spirit," that is to say, in those in whom evil actions and the seeds of the Enemy and sins have no power, but instead the life according to the spirit—that is, the life perfected by virtue and divine cooperation—is established. If, then, the righteousness of the law is completed not in those who are subject to passions and sinners, but in the spiritual and those who are assisted by God, how do they not shudder to call it an evil legislation?

Again, in other places, the fervor of his faith and his zeal for the salvation of all—which he was unable to contain or repress, namely the zeal that impelled his vehement love to bring all to Christ—he expresses, crying out with a loud voice: "I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh, whose are the covenants and the legislations and the promises and the worship." And he shows most clearly whence these things are and upon whose providence they depend, saying: "Who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen." So that the legislations and the worship and the promises, in which the fathers pleased God and from which, according to his humanity, Christ sprang, are of the God who is over all.

And in other places, he praises the Mosaic law as the unerring word of God: "For the word of God," he says, "has not fallen." The same man, taking up something regarding Jacob and Esau—how the elder shall serve the younger—refutes the ministers of error, both the ancient ones and those newly arisen. For he says: "Is there injustice with God? God forbid!" For to Moses he says: "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." And lest anyone think that he executes the sum of these accomplishments by his own labors and sweat without assistance from above, he adds: "So then, He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens." He celebrates the same God as being the fountain ^D of mercy to those who look to Him, while He depresses and coerces the pride and haughtiness of the puffed-up and arrogant; the same God, I say, who is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, celebrating Him as a lover of mankind and good, and exhorting all to obey Him and none to resist Him—using domestic arguments drawn from the hidden governance of things—he adds: "Nay, O man, who are you that answers back to God?" And having subsequently clearly pronounced the same to be the Creator, and not the Creator alone but also the absolute Judge, and one who to each...

(61) what his judgment has meted out, he teaches that He inflicts wrath upon the vessels prepared for destruction, while he pours forth the riches of His glory upon those worthy of His mercy. He proclaims that we also are participants in this, inasmuch as we were foreordained and called beforehand to the enjoyment of good things, those of us who have believed in our Lord Jesus Christ. In other places, again, when writing that the true God cannot repent of His grace, and that the Israelite people and the law and the commandments belonged to Him, and that He did not cast off all people on account of the transgression of some from the right of sonship, he says: "Has God rejected His people, whom He foreknew?" And making clear which God he means, and whence the assurance arises that He has not rejected His people, he adds: "For I myself am an Israelite, from the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin." Thus, He who did not reject Paul, but called him into election, is the same one who also appointed Israel as His people, and who did not reject them, but perfected them through faith in Christ.

^B XV. In another passage, proclaiming that both the Old and the New Testament belong to the same God, and that the latter blossomed as it were from the root of the former, and that both are partakers of holiness, he says: "If the first fruits are holy, so also is the whole lump; and if the root is holy, so also are the branches." And: "You do not support the root, but the root supports you"; likewise: "If God did not spare the natural branches" (for the members of those who tempted God in the desert fell, and many other sufferings befell the guilty), "take heed that He might not spare you either," showing Himself not as one God for them and another for you, but as one and the same. And again: "Behold, then, the kindness and the severity! Of whom? Of Christ; severity toward those who have fallen, but kindness toward you." What, then, do the first fruits and the lump, and the root and the branches, and those that grew spontaneously and those that grew by grafting mean, if not that they inculcate with the clearest voice their ^C correspondence, kinship, and origin derived from the same Lawgiver? And again, he says of those Israelites who had not yet come to the faith of Christ: "Concerning the Gospel, they are enemies for your sake, but according to the election, they are beloved for the sake of the fathers." Here, indeed, intending to declare them beloved, he mentions the calling of God, of whom it cannot be that He repents of His gifts. "For God cannot repent of His own gifts and calling." And: "Whatever was written before was written for our instruction"; why? "So that through the endurance and the consolation of the Scriptures," by which the Old Testament is understood, "we might have hope." Then, wishing to confirm that the true God is the God of endurance and consolation (for let it not be that the servants of the Evil One should be so insane as to call the enemy the God of consolation and endurance), he adds: "May the God of endurance and consolation grant you to think the same thing among yourselves, according to Christ Jesus, so that with one mind and one mouth you may glorify ^D

^A the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." Not another and another, but He who previously announced the coming of the Son, who provided the Scriptures, and who called [men] to faith in His Son; the God of consolation and patience, the giver of concord, into whose glory Christ received us, having become a minister of the circumcision. In other places he says again: "Was anyone called while circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Was anyone called while in uncircumcision? Let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing"—but attend now!—"but the keeping of the commandments of God." Not of gods. Now of the commandments, the one ordered circumcision, and the other did not; both of which He proclaimed as being of the same God, and not of gods. Therefore, one is the true God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who both ordained circumcision through Abraham for the consummation of the mystery at the appointed time, and received those who were in uncircumcision through His Son.

XV. Elsewhere, he says: "This corruptible" (what else could this be but our body?) "must put on incorruption," he says, "and this mortal must put on immortality." But how is it fitting for a good God, if the body were a creature of the Evil One, to change it from corruptible into incorruptible, and from mortal into immortal? For when the wicked body and creature of the Adversary is transformed by the good God from mortal into immortality, and from corruptible into incorruption, not only will the written word not be true, that "Death is swallowed up in victory," and that at the end of all ages He shall fall, ^B both he who in whatever way the Enemy ruled, as if [these bodies] were subservient to the works of the Evil One; but also, on the contrary, at that time [the Adversary] shall have a secure and successionless victory, when his mortal and corruptible creature has been brought into immortality and incorruption. Behold also for me, from this, the wealth of Paul’s wisdom, which, as it seems, being caught up into the third heaven, he learned, in how he introduces the difference between the New and the Old. For foreseeing this apostasy, and overthrowing all its empty talk, he immediately adds these things: "For he says, 'If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.'" But see the energetic and wise and skillful [nature] of the man. "And all things," he says, both the New, clearly, and the Old, "are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself, through our Lord Jesus Christ." Therefore, ^C the good Father of our Savior Jesus Christ was the same, both the giver and the provider and the author of things past and things present. But how could the body be the creature of the enemy, when the same [body] by the Spirit

of that same inspired orator, takes to itself the prophecy of Isaiah and says: *For you are the temple of the living God; as God has said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.* If, therefore, we are the temple of Christ, as Paul cries out, bringing forward Isaiah as a witness, and there was no other God who spoke through Isaiah than the Son of God Himself, whose temple the divine Paul knows and calls us, where then is the creature of the Evil One? Where is the dual and mutually opposing principle? ^B

XVI. Furthermore, the same herald, uncovering the light of truth and exhorting us to be pure and separated from the unclean, so that we may be reckoned as sons and daughters of God, says: *For you shall be to me for sons and daughters.* He mentions, indeed, also Him who has made these promises, namely that the Lord is almighty. At the same time, he also indicates to whom these promises pertain, namely to us through the fathers. For he adds: *Having therefore these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all pollution of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.* Therefore, these promises were made to us, beginning from the fathers. And whose people He is, of that same we are: and just as pure and chaste men of the old testament are the temple of God, so too are the pure in the new testament the temple of the same God. ^C

But while the same herald of truth very often calls Him the Creator of all, he no less proclaims the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ than His true Son, even in those places where he celebrates the grace given to him and the power of the mystery entrusted to him. For having said, as [it is written]: *To me, the least of all, was this grace given, to preach to the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ, and to enlighten all, as to what is the dispensation of the mystery hidden from the ages in God,* he immediately adds: *by Him who created all things through Jesus Christ.* So that the Father is the Creator of all, and the Son is the Creator of all. For common and undifferentiated, just as is the nature, so also are the authority, the kingdom, the creation of all things visible and invisible, and the bringing forth and subsistence of things from nothing into being. And after a few words: *For this cause I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named.* ^D

"All fatherhood," he says; not: some [is], but other is not. Nor does he speak only of all that is heavenly, but of all, whether you say heavenly or earthly, or every, or a part: the Creator of all these is God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ; for it is from Him that *all fatherhood in heaven and on earth* is named, as he who is a spectator and teacher of the hidden things clearly proclaims. And elsewhere, discoursing in the same manner about God, he says: *One faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in us all.* [It is] indivisible and undistinguished, just as...

he knew regarding the nature and the will, so too regarding the creation and the power, that they are inseparable and undivided, and thus he speaks with a confident voice also ^A regarding the Savior. *For in him,* he says, *all things were created.* Attend: *All things, those in the heavens and those upon the earth.* And so that madness might not suggest other nonsense to these holy words, he further explains in sequence what those things in the heavens and upon the earth are, because they are the visible and the invisible; and he says that all these were created in him, and through him, and into him. How, then, does the apostate madness make one creator of visible things and another of invisible things? For if all things were created through Christ and into Christ, and he is before all things, and all things consist in him, where then is the creation of the Enemy? Surely he himself, the good God, brings them forth; and bringing them forth, he holds them together; and holding them together, he provides for their persistence. By what other argument will they attribute power over God's creatures to the Enemy, if not from the fact that they themselves fulfill the will of the Enemy, and in which they do not fear to fight against God? For these, having opened their mouth in shame against the common Lord and Maker, and rising up against his creative dominion, and having subjected themselves to perverse passions, both by the things with which they fight against God and by the things in which they see what is unlawful, they have shown themselves to truly be creatures and slaves of the Enemy. For by whom anyone has been defeated, to him has he also been enslaved. ^B But just as we, being dragged away willingly toward the passions, fall away from the creative Providence and from the intimacy toward the true Maker, and we introduce the evil master to ourselves, and we persuaded by the Enemy to sharpen our tongue against the Benefactor and Maker; so, if we should flee the darkness of the passions, and should wish to recognize both the soul and the body as creatures of God, we immediately drive the Enemy from the tyranny he holds over us, and with purified eyes we see that he has no strength or authority against us, but is trampled and mocked by us, both he and all his power. *For you will tread upon the asp and the basilisk,* he says, *and you will trample the lion and the serpent.* ^C But as long as we wallow in soul-corrupting pleasures, and walk after the desires toward which the Enemy pushes us, and we cut with our tongue and with our life, and divide the nature and kingdom of our good and only God, and the dignity of creation, into warring factions—by no means would it be possible for any one of us to be delivered from the subjection and tyranny of the Enemy, and to be illuminated into the light of piety toward our true God and Maker, and to be acceptable to him. For by dividing the one principle and the nature ^D and the will, and being led away from him, we do away with the true Creator and Lord, and we give the Enemy great power over us.

^A Having taken hold of us with great efficacy, the Enemy—for he has already rendered us so subject to himself—persuades those whom he has taken, once they have succumbed to his impulses, to acknowledge him as creator and Lord. And what could be more miserable than this? To have abandoned the Creator and to go over to the Enemy, and to have fled from the Savior to run to the destroyer; to have despised him who brings us the kingdom of heaven, and to follow with eagerness him who drags us to the punishment prepared for himself; and for the deceived to be condemned along with the deceiver into the gehenna of unquenchable fire.

^B XVII. But, O you who are partakers of our nature and creation, though you have fallen away from the gift, yet at last, having become sober, turn your hearts back to the common Lord and Creator, to the benefactor and provider, to him who formed the body and breathed in the soul, to him who for our sake became flesh, and became man, and was crucified, and who renewed the resurrection through his own body. Recognize his good Father, who through the Son and through his Holy Spirit brought all things into existence out of non-existence, the visible and the invisible, the powers, the principalities, and even that very enemy himself—to whom he did not impart any wickedness, far from it! For how could evil proceed from the Good? But he granted him a share of goodness, which he himself turned into malice, just as those do who now obey him. For they too, having received a great good, the self-mastery of the mind, through which the Creator is also represented, have perverted this, corrupting its use toward the utmost evil; for that which they received to praise the Creator, they used to praise the Enemy. And that which they could have used to become heirs of the kingdom of heaven, by misusing it, they labor to enter the gehenna of fire, which has been prepared for the devil. ^C But wake up, arise, keep watch, so that the power of the Enemy may be repelled from you; and do not bring upon yourselves the fulfillment of the apostolic—or rather, the Spirit’s—prophecies. For the Spirit says explicitly: *In later times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error and doctrines of demons, through the hypocrisy of liars whose own conscience is cauterized, who forbid marriage, who command to abstain from foods which God created for participation.* ^D “Which,” he says, “God, and not the Enemy, created.” And for whom? For the faithful, and those who have acknowledged the truth, so that no pretext for error may be left to you. He immediately adds…

Therefore, every faithful person who has acknowledged the truth knows all things, and with all things, knows that food, too, is a creation of the good God. But he who refers some of these to another, he is the one concerning whom ^A the Holy Spirit has spoken: *There is the one who has given heed to spirits of error and to doctrines of demons, and is a defector from our true Christian faith.* Concerning such people, the prophet of the Spirit also prophesies elsewhere, saying: *In the last days,* he says, *difficult times will arise. For men shall be lovers of self, covetous, arrogant, blasphemers, disobedient to parents.* And after listing the other corresponding sins, he makes an end of the prophecy: *Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof.* And in just the way ^B that Jannes and Jambres stood against Moses, so too do these men stand against the truth. For he aligns truth with Moses, and those who stand against the truth with Jannes and Jambres. If Moses and the truth are in the same rank, and Jannes and Jambres are aligned with those who stand against the truth, how is this prophecy not to be understood as being about them? For while those who rave against Moses stand against the truth, they are also associated with and share in the blasphemies of Jannes and Jambres. And by whichever lie those ancient apostates were stirred up to raise a revolt against Moses, by that same lie have these new ones also become arrogant, not only against the Mosaic writings, but also acting with tyranny against the One who established them as law. Still, the difference in their case tends toward the worse. For in the former, evil remained in meditation; ^C because punishment, if it did not prevent the very attempt before the act, at least utterly destroyed those who were about to perpetrate some evil. But these men have meditated wickedly, and while divine kindness awaited their repentance instead of inflicting punishment, they, as if they were contemptuous ones and by doubling the evil act, perform their planned crime, and do not cease to arm their tongue against the Creator of all, while in the reproaches they pour out upon the divine servant, they are also simultaneously insulting the laws of the Lord which they have received; and through their insolent behavior toward those laws, they assail the very Lawgiver and Lord of all with petulant and impious voices. And such is the new and recent tyranny ^D of these apostates against the Creator of all, or rather, it is a variegated and monstrous viper, offspring of a serpent, which destroys the womb of the one who bore it, and pours out a more abundant venom of blasphemy against the Creator. But of these things, more later.

^A XVIII. Since my discourse has passed in summary fashion through the sacred oracles, which clearly proclaim and celebrate the good Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and his beloved Son, the maker of this universe and creator of all things that are numbered among the sensible and the intelligible, it seems good to me to show even more manifestly who is the first author, both in mind and word, of this insolence against God, among those who shall surely pay the penalty for not wishing the King of this universe to reign over them, but who, together with other sensible things, withdraw their very bodies from the Creator and deliver them to the Enemy. Nor is this discussion drawn from elsewhere than from those very sacred and God-inspired Oracles. Hear, therefore, the evangelist Luke, for nothing prevents us from hearing him. For in narrating the temptation by which our supplanter from the beginning of things attacked the common Creator of all in the habit he assumed, and in setting forth the second temptation after having recounted the first, he says: *And the devil led him up into a high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world. And the devil said to him* 17. ^B Pay close attention, O man, so that you may know from where this voice antagonistic to God first went forth, and what is the abominable beginning of apostasy. Who was the first to dare to call the earthly sphere the work and kingdom of the Enemy? Surely, the sower of tares, who was a murderer from the beginning, who first raised his neck against God, who through pride and arrogance fell from heaven like lightning. For the devil said to him: *To you I will give this authority* 18. See what a doctor of evils this man establishes, what a leader, what a preceptor! O my miserable nature, how much power I have allowed against myself to the Enemy! Although the Gospels so clearly reveal whence such a great evil of apostasy has arisen, and who its author is, yet erring men, as if their ears were stopped up, or as if they were entirely deprived of their use, refuse to see whose disciples they make themselves, and whose voices they adopt and receive. *And the devil said to him: To you I will give all this authority, and their glory, for it has been delivered to me, and to whom I will, I give it* 19. It strikes you with horror, O you who are most beloved of God, the audacity of the lie, and the magnitude of the insolence casts you into unlooked-for terror: but it strikes me much more, the zeal of these worst of disciples to surpass their worst of masters, their preceptor. For he, ^C although in all things bold and impudent and mendacious and rash, yet proclaims that he obtained his kingdom on earth from another who gave it. For he says: "Those things have been given to me"; he does not say: "I created these things out of nothing." But these genuine ones, and worse than their own preceptor, ^D and of the lie, O God-loving audience, and it leads [the soul] into extraordinary terror at the magnitude of the arrogance; but [it strikes] me even more, the zeal of the followers of the worst teacher of evils, in that they have rivaled in surpassing their teacher. For he, although he is bold in all things and shameless and a liar and rash, nevertheless feigns that he received the kingdom on earth from another who gave it. ^A Since the discourse has passed in summary fashion through the sacred words, which clearly proclaimed and heralded the good Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and his beloved Son as the creator and maker of the whole, of both all things that are examined among the sensible and all things among the intelligible, it seems to me still necessary to traverse further, and to show more clearly, who the first is—in daring purpose and in those very same words—the teacher of this war against God, and that those who have not wished the King of all to reign over them, but have—together with other sensible things—torn their own bodies from the Creator and joined them to the Enemy, shall expressly pay the penalty for this. And the proof for these things proceeds from nowhere else but from those same God-inspired and holy Oracles. Hear, therefore, the evangelist Luke, for there is nothing like hearing him. He hands down, through the sacred history (73), the trial by which our supplanter from the beginning dared, having seen us in our own form, to tempt our common Creator, and, after the first, moves on to the second: *And the devil, he says, led him up into a high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the inhabited world. And the devil said to him.* Pay attention, O man, to where this voice of the war against God first went forth, what is the filthy beginning of apostasy. Who first dared to proclaim the earthly sphere as the work and kingdom of the Enemy? Since he who has been a man-slayer from the beginning—the sower of tares—was the first to rise up against God, he who fell from heaven like a bolt of lightning because of his haughty and arrogant mind; and the devil said to him: *To you I will give this authority*. See what a teacher the council of wickedness installs, what a mystagogue and guide! O my miserable nature, ^C to which I have allowed power against myself to the Enemy! In this way, when the Gospels so brightly proclaim whence such a great evil of apostasy sprouted and went forth, and who was its beginner, as if those who are led astray have stopped their ears, or are entirely deprived of their use, they do not wish to perceive whose disciples they make themselves, and whose voices they adopt and submit to. *And the devil said to him: To you I will give all this authority, and their glory, for it has been delivered to me, and to whom I will, I give it.* The audacity strikes you, ^D and [it leads] to extraordinary terror—the magnitude of the arrogance.

^A For mine, he says, it has been delivered, but I have not established these things from nothing. But the noble and more impious disciples of the teacher, who puffed themselves up to say that they possess the kingdom of earthly things by receiving it from the teacher, as it seems, commit impiety all the more, [thus] requiting the Creator and Fashioner of earthly things by proclaiming [the devil instead]. And daring both to think and to say these things, they neither shudder, nor have they wished to discern into what a pit of destruction they are plunging. But you, do not pass over what follows. For he says: *If you, therefore, will worship before me, it shall all be yours.* Consequently, he who believes that earthly things belong to the devil, and supposes that he receives the things that are in them from him, this man is he who worships the devil. For one who acknowledges that he receives from him the things that were the reward of the [devil's] worship could not [possibly] renounce the worship. And who could these be, if not those who acknowledge that they have [their] body from him, and say that this belongs to his creation and kingdom? And not the body only, but also bread and wine, and water, and all other things through which human composition is held together and sustained, and [through which] they pass through this sensible life. For indeed the sensible creation of these [things] also—some it pours forth, others it brings up from the earth. So then, those who make it a doctrine that visible things are the creations of the devil and his kingdom, from the things they learned from him, and show by their very deeds that they possess these things from him and live by them—these, clearly and undoubtedly, even if they attempt to deceive the eyes and ears of those who see ^B them, have offered worship to him.

But one will find another instance of their insanity, one that surpasses even that of the teacher. For he, having attacked the Lord in a short time with three temptations, and having been rebuked three times, finally desisted from that temptation and from that arrogant and impious insolence. But they, being rebuked not only three times by the same Lordly words (for by the same words with which the devil was rebuked and silenced, the disciples were also condemned to silence)—but thousands, or rather, countless times, and for as many years since the arrogant and god-fighting machine of their teacher fell upon them—being rebuked by divine oracles, they are still impudent and arrogant, setting themselves against the Creator, and, dividing His kingdom by their life and words, they hand it over to the Enemy, not wishing in truth for the common Master to reign over them.

^D XIX. But let us see, if you please, what is their recompense for this support and worship and for proclaiming the Enemy as king; and what is the prize for those who did not wish the King of all to reign over them. The sacred parables therefore compare our Lord Jesus Christ—or rather, He compares Himself—to a nobleman; for what is nobler than divinity? And the host of men, to omit other things, [He compares] to His citizens, as though they were His own creation, and to whom He gave His earth to inhabit—indeed, whose flesh He assumed, desiring to become and be called their household member and fellow citizen. But He, carrying the nobility of divinity in Himself, and having received the kingdom equal and inseparable from the Father, since He knew all things, also did not ignore the rebellion that some of the citizens were plotting against Him.

And they denied His kingdom, nor did they wish for Him to reign over them. This lover of mankind, the good Son of the Father, the fount of sympathy, the God of mercy, He whose bowels of compassion are never empty, could not endure such great insolence from His ungrateful citizens. For it was not just any human sin that was dared, but this madness rose up against the Creator, against the Author, against the Benefactor, against the Provider; indeed, they showed their zeal for the enemy who was evil from the beginning, for the primeval murderer, for the adversary, to this end: that they might strip the kingdom from the one, and bestow it upon the other. What then does He do? And what penalty does the just Judge demand from those apostates? It is better to hear that very sentence: “My enemies,” He says, “who did not want me to reign over them, bring them ^B here and slay them before me.” For since they despised the Creator with their eyes, while looking toward the supplanter, for this reason they are required to pay the penalty worthy of their deed before the eye of justice that sees and contemplates all things. “And slay them before me,” so that the one whom they did not wish to acknowledge as King, they might acknowledge even against their will, through the penalties by which they are punished, as both King and just Judge. And since they sold the body formed by Me and given to them as the work of another’s hand, “slay them,” so that through that by which they were injurious to Me, and which they stole from My rule and delivered to the enemy, being separated from it, they may pay the penalty owed for their apostasy. “Slay them before me!” Consider the inevitability ^C and bitterness of this punishment. Who is it that gives the sentence? Whose is the judgment? To be slain by the enemy, although it may be a mournful thing, yet provides a great source of consolation. For it leaves the Lord as the future avenger, and the hope of resurrection, and the joy joined with it, makes one think on the impending slaughter of the enemies as a beginning of gladness. But when the Lord Himself commands them to be slain—He from whom comes vengeance, from whom comes mercy, from whom comes the exultation and gladness after the resurrection, from whom life and salvation proceed—what speech could represent the bitter and unbearable nature of the blow? The sharp and comfortless nature of these pains? To whom shall one flee? What refreshment will there be under a torment that lacks an end, and under an interminable penalty? Think on these things, and thinking on them, fear for yourselves the punishment which you see in others, and the horrible and tremendous torments, before you learn of them by experiencing them. ^D Depart from similar madness, before you suffer a similar punishment. For the fear and repentance born under affliction bring no profit. While there is time for repentance, let us embrace it; while the door of pardon is open, let us not be sluggish to enter through it. While the threats loom, let us testify to our conversion. For once the sign is given, and life is dissolved, no further way of salvation remains, nor

is any hope left of escaping what has been threatened as suffering. ^A For since the teacher of apostasy has been clearly and plainly denounced by the evangelical voices, and since the just Judge has shown in a manifest and most evident way the punishment he exacts from his disciples who do not wish him to reign over them, what defense will those who come after, and who still cherish this apostasy, find? What remnant of forgiveness have they left for themselves? What eye of mercy will shed a tear over them? That their teacher is the devil, those who were his disciples before them learned from the Gospels, seeing that they were slaughtered before the Master because they did not wish him to reign over them. And this the venerable Gospels of our Savior teach loudly: that those who divide the kingdom of God ^B are worshippers of the devil and abusers of the Creator, and the same holy Scriptures cry out this fact. If, therefore, none of these things turns them away from their apostasy, there remains the interminable fire and the outer darkness, which has been prepared for their teacher. That will forcibly and without any gain turn them away from their fighting against God. But let these things suffice for the present discourse and sermon.

SERMON IV

1. ^C Since, O most lovable of holy men, those who have recently sprung up like offshoots from Manes have requested to have discussions, they have brought shame upon their own intellect. Long ago they conversed with Nicephorus, though he was not yet known by that name. For he had not even embraced the faith which conquered the world; rather, he was still wallowing in the remnants of apostasy, and from that he acquired his name, for he was called Berzelis. Since, therefore, [they have requested] that discourse...

^A you desired those discourses which had been committed to writing, but the plundering of the books also brought about an irreparable loss of those works, so that this commentary is not now at hand; and yet you have the greatest need of those things which it contains; you may know that all those things which pull up by the roots the shoots of that new Manichaean graft by means of the evangelical and apostolic oracles (for these, indeed, more than all others, introduce the inescapable sickle by which they are cut down)—these things, to speak in summary, demonstrate how grace sounds in harmony with the Mosaic account of the creation of the world, and how it is in harmony with all other things by which a commonwealth is now established, taught, and directed to know God. Indeed, it also demonstrates that He is the one who, by His Word, brought the corporeal and visible creation into being from non-existence, just as He also produced the intelligible and invisible creation through an equal, abundant wisdom. Furthermore, it demonstrates ^B that the human body, just as much as the soul, proceeded from the same beneficent and philanthropic providence, and that those who were distinguished under the old economy worshipped the true and good God and set themselves against wickedness. These things, then—as far as our strength allowed and the burden of the times permitted—assigning them to our commentary (for in these, I think, your request is encompassed), we now send to your holiness. And if you find what you hoped for, this should be attributed to your prayers and to the efficacy of your request made in faith. But if you find something you did not expect, you must attribute that to the perpetual ill health with which my poor body struggles and to the difficulty of the times. If at any time, perhaps, divine providence should overlook our sins ^C and dispose our affairs more kindly, causing the unmerited wrath of men to change into gentleness, and thus that which you requested at the beginning reaches your hands, you will not be surprised, upon reading these things, if you find that most of the things that were there are included here—but, on the contrary, if some are missing. For forgetfulness often takes hold of things that were better to know and necessary to know, especially when it brings on conflict with present circumstances. But at the same time, I would not have you overlook this: that it was never my intention to bring forward another new commentary, but only, in this scarcity of materials, to suggest something—however modest it may be—as a solace for the previous loss and a remedy for forgetfulness for us and for our friends.

II.

^A how, upon that very encounter, the King of all, our Savior and Leader of the war, uproots and destroys the enemy’s rampart from its very foundations, confuses their machinations, and dissipates the boldness of the apostates. What He intends and what art He employs requires no long skill, nor does it proceed from struggle or labor; but He emits only a voice, and all the affairs of the enemies have vanished. For, He says, every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. Do you see how the sound of the Lord’s trumpet, having merely echoed, destroyed and laid waste the rampart of the enemies? And why do I say rampart? Indeed, the city itself, and the very royal palace which the apostates, through their most impious and misguided reasonings, fashioned and fortified for their apostasy. ^B For if a kingdom divided against itself does not stand, but rather quickly collapses and vanishes of its own accord, while the creative Principle and Kingdom of all remains forever—a fact which not even the apostates themselves would dare to deny—then truly no time, however innovating, has yet shown anyone who has drifted into such madness. If, therefore, the Principle of the Good is, as is evident to all, superior to every dissolution, how is it not much more evident that the very things by which they, tearing apart its integrity with their audacity, fabricate and construct an evil principle, are the same things by which they have conceived the insane plan of turning away the kingdom of the common, good Master, while at the same time they build up and tear down that which they pose against it? ^C For since the kingdom of the Good is preserved undivided (for division is a path to dissolution), it rejects division as the indissoluble, and the Master foretold, even before this incursion, that what is divided will be dissolved. And creation itself, through so many ages from its very production, has been granted, by virtue of its integrity, to be superior to such dissolution. It is also manifest that earthly things are most closely joined with heavenly things and are held together in the same structure; and that those things which are investigated by mind and thought are not separated from corporeal things subject to the senses through the uninterrupted providence, but exhibit a most brilliant connection. ^D Furthermore, man himself, the rational animal, is constituted as a being fitted together from visible and invisible parts. If, therefore, the creation and kingdom of the good God admits of no division, while that which they themselves fabricate—having torn away, with their tongue, a certain portion of the whole creation, and producing it with the words of apostasy, and establishing an Enemy to reign within it—how could it possibly subsist by itself? Or how could it stand, having received its very genesis from division and dissolution, and from the cutting and separation which destroys even the whole into corruption, having proceeded and flowed off—even if it were not merely a fiction of a blasphemous tongue? How, then, just as the kingdom of the Good...

^A principle consists as something indissoluble, and as it progresses further it is both constant and improves for the better: how, I ask, does that principle which, by human madness, is leveled against God not in the same way, since it does not exist merely on the naked lips of those who slander, dissipate more quickly than it arose, and perish by exposing its paramours to laughter and mockery? For it thus, as it were, exacts punishment from them for the feigned inauguration by which those very people, by a vain or rather impious and most wicked endeavor, laid claim to the name of queen, which did not even hold the place of a maidservant. To such a degree does the omnipotent and military power, lord over all others, have the ability to overthrow the forces of the enemy, and to such a degree ^B is it able to spoil the foes. To such a degree does it show that, by that very tyranny, it possesses insurmountable power to defeat and expose to the mockery of all its warriors and satellites and whoever else acts as its champion, even with a single word. Therefore, it was not fitting for those defectors, once their bulwarks were immediately demolished and seeing that they could not even sustain the sound of the royal trumpet, nor any longer serve the rule which, because they were desirous of novelty, they had fashioned for themselves—with everything now looking toward destruction—nor, once the tyranny had been lifted, to turn toward the tyrant; but rather, having recognized the common Lord of all, to submit themselves to His rule, and through a genuine conversion and fervent repentance to confess that they were the work and creature of His hands, and were being ruled and governed by His providence and kindness: conversely, it was right to hate and turn away from the greatest enemy, and to permit him no power, or even access, to them in any of the actions of their life.

III. But if indeed the darkness of deep defection has so dulled their senses that, not even when this rule has been destroyed and defeated, are they able to wake from their stupor and refuse it, but rather prefer to be held under it than under the kingdom of the best God, come, let us show how the King of all, ^C for those who deny His kingdom, does not stop at overturning and destroying and despoiling their leader and punishing them, but, after testing their great long-suffering and patience, when they know not how to be corrected, sends destruction upon them. Perhaps, seeing this looming over them, they will be gripped by some awareness of their wickedness, and will no longer think or say that they do not want Him to rule over them, or that they do not want the Creator and King of the universe to rule over their bodies and the rest of visible creation. For see with what harshness and severity He who is by nature a lover of mankind passes sentence against them: "Those enemies of mine," He says, "who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me." What do you say? Are you stunned by this sentence? Do you flee from that slaughter? ^D

And do you desist from dividing the empire of the good God? Do you look toward repentance, so that you might confess the sovereign rule to be whole and entire, and refer the lordship of both body and soul back to Him? Or do you contend even to the point of suffering what is most wretched to suffer, and what cannot be expressed even in words—things more cruel than that? For He does not simply kill, nor does He merely remove one from the present life, but after killing, He sends them away to be punished, both soul and body, in the unending and never-ceasing Gehenna of fire. ^A But I will bring forward for you other things in greater abundance—whether you prefer to call them arrows that pierce and strike down your impious judgment in many ways and many parts, or medicinal remedies for the disease and healing taken from the same benevolent and omnipotent Word; I will apply my zeal to purging your disease, if by chance you desire to be restored to health rather than to lie forever upon your wounds, ^{B C}

IV. John preached Christ, not yet a partaker of the grace, but still being led by the Law. And he did preach Him, for he declared Him to be God in all those passages in which he testified that He takes away the sin of the world, and in which he openly taught with a free voice that He—the Son of God—baptizes in fire and the Holy Spirit, that is, that He is the One who, by the fiery and lightning-like power of the Spirit, refines and renews our fallen nature. He preached the Father, too, and by proclaiming Him as God, he testified that He had the unimpeded power to raise up children to Abraham from stones. And he preached the Spirit, also, in those instances where he saw Him coming down from heaven, and where he observed Him coming upon the only-begotten Son of God and resting upon Him as one of the same essence—and, what asserts His divinity even more, where he honors Him as a participant in the work by which the salvation of the world was made manifest. ^D For he ascribes the salvation of men as a common work to them: since if the one takes away the sin of the world, the world is cleansed and washed clean by the all-holy Spirit. For he clearly cried out that the world, having received freedom from sin and having been judged worthy of salvation, and having then been baptized by the all-holy Spirit and by fire—through which it is possible to learn of the fiery, active, and cleansing power of the Spirit—enjoys such a great benefit. But if the work is common and undivided, and consists in the renovation and restoration of the world, how could they not possess the same nature, the same power, and finally the same benevolence and providence? He, therefore, who at the very threshold preached the Triune God, and the terrible and

^A venerable dogma in the introduction of his discourse, which the Savior explained more clearly to his disciples after the resurrection—does it seem to you that he drew these things from elsewhere, or that he spoke and preached them, so that he would be said to have called the law contrary to grace, or that he denied that God, who can raise up offspring to Abraham from stones, had demonstrated to all that his own beloved Son is the Savior of the world? But if those who were the heralds of grace under the law, and the legislator God himself, who established the whole Old Testament, proclaimed his own Son to be the good God and the Savior of the world, and then [accepted] baptism in water, how then must not all things which are in the law and in grace be considered works and precepts of the same providence, care, and goodness?

V. Consider, moreover, at the same time with what praises the Savior crowns John, when he declares him superior to all riches, ^B set above all the pride of the world, firm in faith, and immovable in defending good and right opinions. Celebrating him by these very things, see how far beyond he raises the man, not placing anyone among those born of women to be compared with him, but having him carry off the palm from all. Afterward, having thus exalted him for his virtue, he also calls him a prophet, and more than a prophet; a prophet indeed, in order to show that the name and the use of prophets are adapted to such works and prerogatives, which are gifts of goodness. And he calls him more than a prophet because, having obtained the grace equal to them to foresee future events, he yet had this further advantage: that he might behold the very one who was the subject of their prophecies, and be deemed worthy to baptize with water him who was to baptize the world with fire and the Holy Spirit, and to cleanse it of sins. Does grace, therefore, fight against the law? Or is there not rather a great agreement and affinity between them both? How indeed, if John were from another principle, would the author of grace have testified such things concerning him, which it is certain were accomplished in only a few and those select persons in the time of the New Testament? ^C And how would he have endured, being the good Son of a good Father and the fountain of goodness, to bow his immaculate head to that legal hand and voice—which those apostates of the opposing principle dare to call the work and precept of an enemy—and to accept the baptism by water (O tongue that pours forth the poison of the asp!), if the water were not from the creation of the Good?

VI. But I do not speak of that which is of greater value. It is, however, the very thing which is most difficult for him who speaks to utter without horror, and to those in whom this error exults, it is most fitted for their destruction, and thus it must be set forth by us with the greatest fruit and zeal. For the good Son of the good Father was born from a virgin's womb for the salvation of the world, so that he might fashion our flesh for himself from ^D her immaculate blood, and be called man. And this, indeed, those of the ancient impiety

^A were trying to obscure, but those who have sprung from them, I know not how, though they prefer in their deeds to deny it, they do not refrain from commemorating it in their discourse. For one may see them speaking specious words, when they assert that they cherish the evangelical Scriptures, and when they falsely claim the Apostle and God-bearer Paul as the author and teacher of their own way of thinking. Since, therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ took on flesh—for indeed that son of thunder cried out: *And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us* (John I, 14). And another of the evangelists records ^B again that the birth of Jesus Christ came to pass of the Holy Spirit, and that the Virgin brought forth her firstborn Son, and called his name Jesus (Matt. I, 25). And he who is their colleague and companion in their conventicle does not merely announce the incomprehensible birth, but even the hidden manner, which had preceded it in part, in which he was conceived, and how the Virgin wrapped in swaddling clothes her firstborn Son and laid him in the manger (Luc. II, 7); and how the multitude of angels sang of the Savior, Christ the Lord, having been born to the world in the city of David. Moreover, besides these things—which puts to silence and puts to shame even more those who reduce the ^C phantasmagoria of the mystery and grace to nonsense, along with their offshoot against whom the discourse is directed—he scourges and confounds them thoroughly, and teaches that our Savior, who was born to us, underwent the circumcision of the flesh prescribed by the Law, and furthermore, that the same one, fulfilling the Mosaic precepts in this part as well, received the name of Jesus. Now, since the incarnation, or the taking on of flesh and becoming man, of the Word is so manifest—up to this point, indeed, the discourse has carried us along with a swift current and with pleasure and grace, but from here on, dizziness and fear stand before me. Yet it is necessary to speak, though filled with dread, for the refutation of the error does not ^D permit me to pass by: whether, O you who dare the undareable, you would attribute this very Body of the Lord to an evil principle, or whether you will recognize the gravity of this impiety? For if tremor possesses you and fear has seized you, you will surely withdraw it from the evil creator and principle, or rather, to speak more correctly, you will exert all your zeal to remove this crime, this offspring of your blasphemy. But if, having no regard for divine wrath and disregarding the judgment of right reason, or indeed even the shame felt toward men, you have obstinately resolved to hold fast to your opinion, tell me, how has Evil been joined to the Good, and how did the good God endure to accomplish the salvation of the world through Evil, and, what is more worthy of wonder and dread, seat it upon the paternal throne? For he who is knowing and a teacher of hidden things hands this down. Therefore, you must either deny all these things, that is, that the Word took on flesh, in the wor-

world through birth in the delivery, 92 has not saved the race, and has not enthroned the assumed body upon the Father's throne; or, if you do not deny these, it remains that you deny 93 the goodness of God, insulting it by its association with wickedness. Moreover, when you do not even have your own [arguments] left, [you have no choice but to] turn Him into goodness. And if you had utterly determined to fight against God, it would have been easier to choose the earlier head of impiety than the latter. For there was a time when those who did not know the earlier things, and as though they did not yet exist, were not called to pay the penalty for this disgrace, and did not fear them. But as for those who have transferred the goodness of God to evil, or have rendered it illustrious as though it were a participant of the Good, no age exists that does not exact the inevitable penalty from those who have chosen such things. ^B

VII. But although this audacity and impiety surrounds its lovers with so many evils on every side, they do not turn back from their error; rather, as though fearful that they might be sated by a certain satiety in fighting against God, they expose the nature of the Good to a new kind of profanation. ^C For when they attribute His Old Testament, and those who excelled in it above others, to the power and worship of the evil principle—yet seeing that David and Abraham, from whom Christ came according to the flesh, were of that same order—it is manifest that they affect the Lord of the universe with a double injury: first, because they claim the body which He assumed is from the Evil one; and secondly, because they trace it from no other people than that which lived according to the Law, which they themselves despise. For if the work of Evil is inherent in the Good, how, I ask, can it be avoided by others? Can there ever be an approach to the insolence of a man who binds himself with a double crime? For to save one's own creature, which had turned away toward sin, through assuming it, is a proof of the greatest care and goodness: conversely, if something foreign steals in secretly, which by nature is hostile to the other and fights against it with its contrariety, must it not be judged that this turns that eminence of care and goodness into the opposite? Therefore, there is no opinion more insane, or impure, or impious than that of those who derive either the body or the Mosaic Law from the Evil one. ^D Besides these things, if bodies are from an evil Creator, and not from the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, one Godhead and power, how does the good God drive away diseases from foreign and evil bodies—which are surely the works of the Evil one—and bring them a marvelous remedy? For this would be nothing other than to adorn the work toward whose power He had come to destroy, and thus to increase the strength of him who had procured the apostasy from the beginning. Furthermore, if the fruits of the earth are not from the source of goodness,

^A how was it that he himself (O deep stupor!) offered the bread, which was leavened from foreign seeds, when he was especially able to provide food for himself out of nothing? And he who multiplied these things fed thousands, making use of the creation of the Evil One for the performance of the miracle, and making the Adversary a companion of his supernatural beneficence, just as if it were not permitted for him to nourish himself and those who heeded and were instructed by his words from other matter. And as for those who lived under the Law, if their guardians and princes were not servants of the most benign God, how did he hold the disciples, who were falsely accused by the Pharisees—those who strained out gnats but swallowed camels—because, being hungry, they plucked and ate ears of corn on the Sabbath, solace for the deficiency of the body, innocent of this charge, ^B and declare them better than the cause of the accusation? He acquitted them of the crime, bringing forward David for support and assistance, and the priests who butchered meat and cut wood on the Sabbath—and that too at the time when his sacred office, which was directed toward the salvation of the world, was being pressed most urgently.

VIII. What clearer or more powerful argument could be brought forth to prove that the Evil One has dominion over nothing earthly than his own words, whereby, subjecting creation to himself as he approached to tempt the Creator of all things, who was hidden and unseen, he showed him all the kingdoms of the earth and their glory, and said: "All these things will I give you if you fall down and worship me" (Matt. IV, 9)? For if he is a liar, and never stood in the truth (for this is what the Truth himself ^C taught us, and there is no one among those who confess Christ who would dare to reject this statement), is it not most manifest to all that the creator of lies has dominion over none of the earthly creatures, nor is he their maker, except for those wills and actions of which he is the sower, and whose reasonings he transformed to inscribe him as creator and maker, not because he produced their soul or body from nothing, but because they themselves were led to inscribe him as their master? Consequently, that which some of those in error put forward in defense of their own impiety—namely, that the Evil One rules over earthly things—this very thing is turned against them to show that he possesses no authority over any of them. For being a liar and the author of lies, he himself falsely claimed for himself the rule over earthly things. But if ^D bodies are from the Evil One, how shall the disciples be the salt of the earth? How the light of the world? For they will salt and illumine only from a half-portion, or rather, not even from a half-portion. For in turn they will afford this only to a half-part of the human substance, and not to the whole man. For the creature of the Evil One does not admit of being salted, lest...

^A it incline toward putridness, since it is, in its entirety, a putrid thing. And indeed, it is also unfit to receive the rays of light, especially since their error suggests—and those who are ordained to perform these things do not have the power, being involved in the same accusations. But when the Savior himself clearly cries out, "I have not come to abolish the law or the prophets, but to fulfill them" [Matth. v, 17], how does the most shameless mind of the impious not fear to say that the law and the prophets proceeded from an evil principle and have offered worship to it in this life? For if our Savior is the fulfiller ^B of the law and the prophets, and there should follow from this for them a blasphemous conclusion falling back upon their own heads, it is one of two things: either they transform the Evil into the nature of the Good, or conversely, by claiming that it remains in the particular definition of its own wickedness, they condemn Him who, because of His great goodness, came to destroy the tyranny of the passions that had taken hold among men. And as for the words, "Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one iota or one mark will pass from the Law, until all things come to pass" [Matth. v, 18], what greater assurance could be left to anyone? How do these words not trumpet the destruction of their error, or shut the ungovernable mouths of the impious, even if they still struggle with ^C gritted teeth to maintain that the law and the prophets are of the Evil One?

IX. But when you hear the evangelist referring the unspeakable coming of Jesus Christ the Son of God, and His actions which surpass all speech, from the very beginning to the prophets (as to heralds), are you not then led by shame and repentance for having dared to insult those whom the sacred Oracles establish as the heralds and revealers of such a philanthropic mystery, and whose prophecies are the foundation of the Gospel? "The beginning," it says, "of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God, as it is written in the prophets: Behold, I send my angel before your face, who will prepare your way before you" [Marc. 1, 1, 2]. But who sent him to prepare the way of the good Son and God, if not the good Father, ^D who, through his ministers in the Law, had for many ages before announced that His Son would be emptied even unto the taking on of flesh and blood? And in the end of those times, He sent His own angel, John, saying, "Prepare the way of the Lord; make straight his paths" [Marc. 1, 3]. As for the water, in which the most philanthropic Jesus was immersed and fulfilled all righteousness, how could He even have touched it, not to mention have been altogether baptized therein, and have endowed it with the power of cleansing and purifying, unless—rather than by His own nature—

it happened to be the handiwork of the opposing power? And He did not merely grant this grace to fountain forth for the body while He was present, but He also bestowed upon the saved for all the ages to come that they should find through Him, by the operation of the Holy Spirit, the restoration and regeneration, so that the gift of grace might follow him like something immortal. ^A Since John had become worthy of the manifestation of the good God, having been proclaimed by the Truth itself to be more than a prophet and greater than those born of women, how could he have stood up to fight for the legal commandment, being sent then as the forerunner of grace? He not only knew this to be a gift of God for the sake of that which was already ceasing, and contended for it zealously, but he went so far as to lead his own life a second one, for the sake of its preservation. For when he rebuked Herod, saying, "It is not lawful for you to have your brother's wife," ^B whence had he received the mandate for such a rebuke, or for what law was he contending when he brought the censure before the king? Do you not see how far the forerunner of grace was from insulting the legal commands, he who was deemed worthy to baptize the Lawgiver of grace? If the Mosaic precepts had not proceeded from the same divine and beneficent inspiration, how could the same minister of grace not only have failed to hold them in contempt, but instead have pursued them with all zeal and fervently urged them? Especially with our Savior crying out: "No one can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and Mammon." ^C And indeed, if the law and grace were from two opposing masters, and not from one and the same goodness and sovereignty, how is it that no man greater than he was ever seen serving two masters, according to the impious wagging of tongues? And likewise also the assembly of the prophets before him. For as to the fact that the Savior Himself fulfilled the Father’s will after becoming man, and came not to abolish the law or the prophets but to fulfill them—on account of the enormity of such impiety, I would not wish to unravel it more clearly.

X. Yet that unspeakable thing, as far as it is possible and insofar as it is allowed not to gratify the enemies in every respect, I will narrate as I did the former. John, namely, performing his ministry on the border of the Law and grace—and indeed the whole assembly of the prophets before him—convict with irrefutable arguments those impious men who persecute substantial truth as if it were a lie; and while they tear apart the precepts by pitting the lawgivers against one another, by the very same action with which they slander the earlier ones (although they do not dare to do it openly), they nonetheless also betray and simultaneously explode those things which belong to grace (for what evil could fail to proceed from a lie?). For if the good Lord is the author of grace, and among His doctrines is that "no one can serve two masters,"—^D

^A and the aforesaid served both parties, but now that rabble of apostates has set up a different Lord *in opposition* to the Mosaical precepts; do they not, in the midst of their pretexts, attack grace itself with insults while disparaging the Law? For in such a way—even if it is unbearable to mention it even for the purpose of refuting such impiety, though it would be more thorough to do so—they were judged to be accusing the very Testament itself of falsehood.

But if someone should object: "If the Law is good, why do we who are under grace not live according to it?"—as regards you, there is no need to call upon anyone else for assistance. For what doubt could remain for you, O impious one, the solution to which I would not undertake? Would you perhaps sin more lightly? And while you harm—to no injury—that which is subject to no injury, will you escape unpunished, or will you let it go more easily? Indeed, that very objection itself refutes this defection no less strongly; so much does the strength of the truth shine forth from every side, even from matters contrary to it. For if, because the Law is not observed by those who are under the Good One, it is brought into suspicion as if it does not harmonize with goodness, of how great a goodness is it ^B not proclaimed a participant, since the good God came, not to abolish the Law or the prophets, but to fulfill them?

And as for the apostates, there is no need to add more. But for the sake of the pious, who are worthy to be initiated further into the mysteries of grace, it can be easily explained that we do not live according to the ancient laws for this reason: because Christ, upon His arrival, fulfilled everything, providing grace in place of the grace given through Moses, and in place of those holy things which were in the holy place—the typical "Holy of Holies"—exhibiting the very things themselves which were prefigured by them, of which the one is proclaimed by Paul 95 and the other by John the Theologian 96. So that now, if anyone were to live according to those *ancient laws*, he would be convicted of being one who dares to deny Christ, the Fulfiller of the Law, as if He had not fulfilled all things.

But I must return to the point from which the momentum of my discourse, turning to related matters, has digressed. The Author of grace commands us to revere heaven, and earth, and Jerusalem, and indeed even the ^C hairs on our heads, to such a degree that He does not even allow them to be used in swearing an oath; He proclaims heaven to be the throne of God, and the earth His footstool. Again, He calls Jerusalem the city of the same God and great King 97.

If, therefore, these things belong to the creation of the good Father, as the Son, who knows all that belongs to the Father, has confirmed, how are those apostates—who, in their madness, attribute His creation to an evil principle—not to be held accountable for raging, even before they commit their outrage against the creatures, against our Lord Jesus Christ Himself and against His Father?

^A XI. But you, observe even more deeply the audacity and madness of these impious men. The Savior, by presenting and delivering to us our daily bread, the mystical [(98)] prayer, commanded us to ask for it from His Father. But they refer this bread, as they do all terrestrial things, to a pernicious principle, and they babble that the bodies produced by the same principle are nourished by it. Thus, they shamelessly rise up against the Dominical command, calling bodies evil and food evil, even though the Lord explicitly decrees that we ask for this food from the good Father. And how could it be possible for them, I will not say to confess this as a true commandment, but even to propose it under the guise of a myth? For it is the same thing to pray to be delivered from the Evil One, and to seek to receive him [as a guest or] inhabitant from the Good One. Since the nourishment is the work of the Evil One ^B—and indeed, at the end of the prayer, as if he were thereby removing this very impiety, He who came for the salvation of the race, to whom He ordered us to bring our petition for food, commanded also that our supplication be brought to the same [Father], through which we might be delivered from the Evil One—He reveals that He who delivers us from the Evil One is Himself He who provides us also with bodily nourishment, about which the only-begotten Son of the Father who grants these things taught that the kingdom, and the power, and the glory belong and shall remain forever. Do you see into what a chasm apostasy plunges, and how the word of truth, being effective and sharper than any two-edged sword, strikes at it? If, however, one were to say that the daily bread is not simply that which is provided as food for the body, but that which is changed [(1)] into the body of Christ and sanctifies the soul with the body, by such an interpretation impiety is nonetheless—if not even more—brandmarked, and this discourse inflicts upon it an incurable wound.

XII. But if it is not possible to serve two masters, and if the human composition ^C of our nature, insofar as it is a creature—as impiety wishes—of the Evil One, is subject to him even against its will, and serves him as a creature serves its creator, then no one can ever serve God purely and in its entirety. And the divine proclamations are turned into trifles by them, and—oh, the absurdity of their mind!—the fearful presence and incarnation, and everything that the Lord willingly endured and accepted for our salvation. But you, on the other hand, of human ^D [nature...]

^A bodies the food—wicked and ungrateful to your Benefactor—you claim to be the sprout of wickedness; whereas the Savior of all and Creator announces that His own celestial Father and God, whose kingdom He bids us seek before all bodily things, is the author and provider not only of the food by which humans are nourished, but also of those things by which the birds are fed. And how would any sound reason not deservedly inflict the penalties of the utmost insanity upon those who swap their own barkings for the Lord’s saving oracles? For these teach us to know our Father in heaven, who knows what we need, and to whom we have been ordered to direct our prayers, crying out: *Our Father, who art in heaven* ^B (Matt. vi, 9); and they proclaim that if we seek His kingdom and His righteousness, He not only provides food for us, but all the other things as well whereby the body is cared for; and not only those things which contribute to the necessary use of humans, but even those which occupy a secondary or even a last place, He has furnished and nourished with their natural habit. *Consider*, He says, *the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin* (ibid. 28). And not only these, but also the very grass of the field, which exists today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven. For He says: *If, then, God so clothes the grass of the field, which exists today and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, how much more you, O men of little faith?* (ibid. 30). And as for those natural garments with which the good Lord has clothe the grass, what is their splendor, and how great is it! ^C It certainly leaves behind, as only a secondary thing, the royal robe shining with purple, which human ingenuity places among the highest garments. *For I say to you*, He says, *that not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed like one of these* (ibid. 29). How then can the good God prepare the clothing of the grass, yet you seek a different creator—and not the same one—for that garment with which the human soul is surrounded, I mean the body? And how do you not confess yourself to be liable to a much graver punishment than that grass which is thrown into the oven? For while the Savior promises to those who seek the righteousness of God and His kingdom through their works that He Himself, whose kingdom that is, will supply both food and raiment ^D and other things by which the body is sustained, you refer these gifts of grace and kindness to the very opposites. And how does He proclaim Himself the author of those things of which He is not the author, but which are the works of another? And how—what is still more absurd—does He present Himself to those who struggle for virtue and strive for His kingdom as one who provides, as it were, a reward for their love of God and their countless contests, the creations of the Evil One?

XIII. That the Law is in harmony with grace is so certain that each is established by the other. Grace, as being prefigured and foretold by the Law...

is actually manifested and proclaimed through various adumbrations; while the Law, after those predictions and types have passed over into the reality which has unveiled and brought to light the truth hidden under its veils through grace, remains. But if the things of grace and the things that preceded grace did not preserve this mutual agreement, how could those things which were foretold by the Law and the prophets have appeared to the eyes of all as having been fulfilled? And how could our Savior, when He cleansed the lepers with a word, send them to the priests who were under the Law, bidding them depart and show themselves to them as the Law commanded, and, what is more significant, to offer the gift as Moses ordained? If things old are set in opposition to things new, how does the Savior Himself, gathering from the east and from the west those who have fulfilled the Lord's commandments ^B and have lived in grace, bring them into the kingdom of heaven and unite them with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who pleased God according to the Law, or, if it is right to say so, constitute them co-heirs of His kingdom from both Testaments, so that they may together enjoy the promised and eternal goods?

XIV. Is there, then, any discourse more furious or any opinion more impious than that of those who refer grace and the Law to opposing principles, and say that those who lived under each dispensation did not worship the same good God, but, divided by contrary principles, used even a contrary worship? And when the teacher of grace again puts forward the commandments of Moses, one of which is that which enjoins: "Honor your father and your mother"—nay, even takes up their defense—he declares these to be the commandments of God, and by the same action ^C lays bare and rebukes the guile hidden in the heart and the hypocrisy of the Jews, because, while this originates from divine precepts, they preferred their own commandments to the divine Law. Yet how much easier it was to obey human suggestions than those which the author of evil has brought forth! But further, through it (the Law), He directs a severe rebuke against those who at that time had grumbled unreasonably against the disciples, declaring that nothing of those things which are taken for food and drink defiles or pollutes a man. And see how the divine sentence is pronounced not only against them, but no less against you yourselves: against them, because the stigma is branded upon them, for the reason that foods in themselves bring no harm; but against you, whose calumny it seizes and cuts off, by which you persist in saying and thinking that these things come from the Evil One. For if ^D the seeds and sprouts sprung from the earth, and those things which belong to the class of irrational things, are from a malefic creator, do they not pollute and in-

infuse them ^A with a twofold—or rather a manifold and continuous—wickedness? This, on the one hand, increases and keeps hold of the wickedness latent in human bodies from their birth, while, on the other hand, it makes the evil innate in them sprout up and follow along. But if the Mosaic ordinances did not proceed from a beneficent providence, how could the Lord of the kingdom of heaven have loved the scribe who agreed with them and accepted the first and second commandments, and how could He have welcomed him with praise, because he prudently voted for that which held the preeminence among them, and was seen honoring and embracing them? And what is a greater matter for praise, and illustrates that the commandments given through Moses proceeded from the Good, is that He pronounced the one who had lived in them, and who knew how to honor them, to be not far from the kingdom of heaven. Thus, too, in the case of Zacharias and Elizabeth, who directed their life according to the law, it is possible to see how they are proclaimed as righteous by the Holy ^B Scripture, and not simply so, but in such a way that their righteousness is declared manifest before God. This very thing shows that they did not obtain righteousness from human glory, but clothed themselves in it as if it were an ornament bestowed by divine judgment. And what works did they perform, in truth, to obtain this grace that adorned them? "They walked," it says, "in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless." When, therefore, the sacred oracles pronounce those who are exercised in the Mosaic precepts to be righteous and unblameable, and you dare to slander them as ministers of wickedness, do you not show that you, no less than others, falsely lay claim to the Christian name? Or rather, do you not, if not more so, rise up against grace itself just as you do against the law, and move your impious lips against it, while you simulate with your tongue that you adore it and ^C pay it worship? But the mission of Gabriel from God, and the sanctification of the virginal womb that was unknown to seed, and none the less the declaration of David as father of the good Creator of all things, God; furthermore, the handing over of his royal throne for eternity to the King of all; and simply the taking on of flesh, and the being called man, which the good Son of the good Father took upon Himself (for it is right to mention these things here only as if by way of reticence, since an accurate refutation carries with it blasphemy, and is not to be borne even by the ears themselves)—how, I say, do all these things not cast down every daring and rage of the principle of evil? For what need is there to bring forth that which is even more ^D horrendous, and which is passed over in silence, which it is permitted to attain by thought and has already been indicated? And since they have reached such a pitch of madness and mental stubbornness that they revile and condemn the followers of legal worship, it would suffice in every way if piety opposed to such impiety nothing else than that tremendous mystery, namely, the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ, the assumption of flesh from the seed of David, and no less that which is the virtue of the all-holy Spirit supervening, the virginal blood, compacted into flesh, produced man; nay, if you think that some inheritance, as if it were paternal, should be attributed to the King of this universe, a succession in the Davidic kingdom, and all the rest that [pertains to] so great a mystery.

to be brought forth into flesh, and to become entirely man. But if you wish to also attribute to the King of all, as a paternal inheritance, the succession of the Davidic kingdom, and all else that is comprised within the mystery; these things—even without any other addition or supplement—suffice, for those who have not altogether surrendered the gift of intellect which the Creator bestowed upon it in its very formation, to effect a certain conversion and recovery from a God-opposing opinion, and to beat back the rashness of those who have once and for all abandoned this gift by the very things with which they fight against God, and have surrendered it to the enemy; and even if not willingly, to drive them to silence out of sheer helplessness. For what is more brilliant than this for the refutation of such impiety? Or what is more powerful to seize their jaws as with a muzzle and bit, and to display the multitude of scourges to which, having become far removed from the truth and no longer enduring to draw near to God, they have rendered themselves liable? But even if it is not easy to bring forward everything that brands their madness, it is perhaps neither superfluous nor useless to proceed with what is most pertinent. For if the Church of God prides itself in nothing else, it certainly prides itself in the abundance and wealth of its arguments against this defection, ^A and in the fullness of the ^B Church.

XV.

^A For by the Law he lived, and according to the Law, the Savior is brought into the temple, and according to the Law, he is carried in arms. And it was not one harmed by God or abandoned to the worse, but rather one carried by God on both sides, because both the Holy Spirit was with him, and because with his hands he carried Christ; he proclaims the salvation of all nations, and indeed the glory of Israel, not one person and then another, but our very Lord Jesus Christ, the mediator and creator. For all things that are the Father’s are also His, whether they be of the Old Testament or of grace. These things, even if they occupy a secondary place compared to those mentioned before, do not, however, hold a secondary place in terms of how much they serve to strike down those who fight against God. For where could they ever show that there is any blasphemy against the Law, or against the things that belong to the Law, or against the passage through the legal sanctuary? But why do I say blasphemy? Do they not rather treat with all honor and worship those things which are common and joined together, and which are akin to grace? But the prophetess Anna, whose life was prayer and dwelling in the temple, and to say it briefly, the legal worship—if she herself had not also proceeded from the beneficent hand and providence along with those things in which she took joy during her life, and if she had not also received the inspiration from thence, how would she have confessed to the Lord, and spoken of the good God, as one who would be for a redemption for those in Jerusalem who were awaiting him? ^B Indeed, would those who were waiting for Christ to come for their own salvation, while cultivating an evil principle, have directed their hope toward the Good? Who, being possessed of reason, would not loathe and judge as the gravest error one who reasons in this way?

^C XVI. But proceed with me further. The Savior ascends into the temple together with his Mother, who is truly Mother and virgin; and the father by the glory of the betrothal also went with him. And here again, the Savior, fulfilling the Law, ascends, not once but often, as if by set purpose he wished not once but often to restrain and cast down those who are injurious toward the precepts of the Law. When, therefore, he had gone up there at one time according to custom, and the things which the Law required had been completed, and the time brought on the return home, the most holy Mother, along with others and with Joseph himself, was returning home: but the child, who for our sake had become what he was, tarried for three whole days in the temple, and as he sat in the midst of the doctors, as was fitting, he so captivated those conversing with him, both by his perception of questions and by the exquisite and accurate nature of his responses, that he brought upon them astonishment and marvel filled with God, and not only upon them, but also upon all who were permitted to hear his teaching and his discourses. Meanwhile, as Jesus, devoted to the temple, was engaged in these things, his most holy Mother and Joseph, seeing that Jesus was not with them on the way, but thinking that he was with their kinsfolk, ^D and when they did not find him present, by instituting a search...

^A they return immediately to the temple, and find him doing what it was fitting for him to do—he who was both the salvation of the world and the glory of Israel—and what the Word of God had foretold. Then his Mother says to him, "Son, why have you treated us so? Behold, your father and I have been looking for you in sorrow." ^B And attend now—but there is no need to exert one's mind, so clear and manifest to the eyes is everything. For the fountain of truth and goodness answers them: "Why were you looking for me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house?" What is clearer than this, or more effective for stopping the mouths of the impious? "My true Father," he says, "is He to whom this temple is sacred: and all things that are the Father’s are mine." Therefore, it was not fitting for me to be looked for elsewhere, when it was possible to find me in the things that are the Father’s.

Thus, truth itself testifies with a clear voice that the legal temple and the precepts of the law—the very things that were being taught and discussed—belonged to his Father. But the servants of lying do not fear to contradict him; rather, by the same work, these most abandoned men dare two contrary things: they drive the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ away from these laws and from his own dominion, and they dare to accuse of lying the testimony of the Son, whom they do not shrink from calling—albeit with their lips alone—Savior and Truth. Such is the aversion to the law that it rejects the very Legislator of grace. Or rather, these apostates, ^C who have long since been laboring to bring forth blasphemy against the authors of both testaments from the very beginning, and who then, however daring they are in all things, have been restrained from such a pernicious birth by fear of their audience (for they ought to have allowed the seed of the dragon which they had conceived to perish), restrain the birth for a short time; then, however, through circuitous ways and as if by some device, they bring forth the conceived poison with their tongue. And they pour out their poison against the law, yet they are driven no less—or rather, far more—to act insolently against the authors of the laws themselves. And in as much as they fear to use a grosser insult, they prove themselves to be entirely convicted, because they are not unaware of the magnitude of their crime; yet in as much as they do not desist, even while not being ignorant of it, they ensure that this sin will not be forgiven them.

XVII. ^D You may see the disciples of truth, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself, not on a given occasion, nor once, but everywhere referring to Nazareth and calling it his fatherland, and neither do they shrink from anything, nor do they shy away from mentioning his very earthly birth. Yet how much was required to set forth the origin of his nativity! Now, if that had been the work of a pernicious hand, do you think the good Son of a good Father would have allowed this to be...

set forth, or even permitted the disciples to be bold, so that if someone else had dared to say it, he would have brought a just judgment upon him, and would have severely called him back from such rashness? ^A And thus indeed is the revolt against the common fatherland, or rather against the whole of creation, through the fatherland of the Lord, overturned and brought to nothing. But if one man is good, and another in turn is evil, of whom the one brings forth the good from the good treasury of his heart, while the other brings forth evil from the evil, who would not admit that it is not the original formation of the body, nor the soul that was given to associate with it and govern it, that is to be referred to a hostile principle, but that free will, declining into that from which it ought not to have declined, converted good into evil by this declination? For what other cause could you give why you see some men as good, while others look toward evil—no less, a fact I wish were not so, than you yourselves? For the malice which is in your actions and sentiments, spontaneously born of your own judgment, is what separated you from the flock of the good, just as it had already separated you from a good intention and counsel ^B before you. For this reason, some indeed are heralds of the goodness of the Creator, and both know and celebrate their own Maker; but others, turned to slandering Him both by deeds and by language, withdraw themselves from His goodness and creation and lordship, and—oh, shall I call it folly or madness?—render themselves subject to a hostile and rebellious hand. For if anyone wishes to weigh the matter rightly, how can he who brings forth good things from his soul (for this is what the heart signifies here) be good, unless his entire substance is also called good? Just as, in turn, that whole substance is evil which brings forth from its own soul the evil that has been stored up within it. And I do not see what excuse these men can leave for themselves—or rather, why they do not rather manifest the very transgression for which they insult the prophets and the Law, for which they cannot be immune to punishment. For the Savior Himself cried out: *Many prophets and righteous men*—where it is clear that these are they who were under the Law—*have desired to see and hear those things which you see and hear*. ^C By the same work He showed to the disciples the principle of the dignity and glory to which they have attained, while He subverted their defection in that He testifies that grace and its heralds obtain the superior portion, while the prophets and those who lived under the Law, and those who were zealous for truth and goodness, obtain the secondary portion. But how can the lovers of the Savior and His dogmas be servants of the adverse party? And how could they have obtained their inspiration from an evil principle, when it is impossible by nature for the same persons both to indulge in malice—not to say, to have been fashioned by it—and yet at the same time to be carried by desire toward the good? For this is nothing other than to turn the word of the Lord into all contrary things. For that Good ^D brings forth from an evil heart

what is good, he contends to demonstrate. ^A And since the Saviour in another place joins the new with the ancient, He concurrently warns that both lead into the same way of salvation, since some things indeed initiate, while others truly bestow perfection: "Every Scribe," He says, "instructed for the kingdom of heaven, is like to a man that is a householder, who bringeth forth out of his treasure new things and old." For by the very fact that he teaches that both the new and the old testament come forth from the same treasure and from the same source, he confirms beyond doubt that they consent and agree among themselves, and do not war with one another. And while he hands down that the doctrine of both leads to the kingdom of heaven, he has still more clearly established their profound harmony and indissoluble bond. If, therefore, both testaments are stored up like a treasure in the same place, and come forth again from the same source, and lead those who have kept both into the same kingdom of heaven, how shall opposing factions separate them? Will not the Author of both testaments rather laugh at and mock those who dare to speak such things, nay, even shatter them like a potter’s vessel, as those who have separated themselves from the straight path and perished? ^B Indeed, the prophet Isaiah also foretells those things which, at the time of the Saviour, appeared as actually fulfilled: "He hath borne our infirmities and carried our sorrows; and by His bruises we are all healed." Those things, too, which were hidden from the lord of darkness and his powers — that the prophet foreknew these things was granted to the prophet by the prophetic gift and by a life led according to the law. But how did the prophecy that eluded the robber come forth from his inspiration? And how did he who thus preached our Lord Jesus Christ, and thus foretold that our salvation was to be restored, prophesy this unless from the good God and Father, from whom the fountain of truth, our Saviour Himself, has flowed, but rather have obtained that inspiration from another evil principle?

XVIII.

^A Observe then the good that was in that young man, and what kind of thing it is, the practice of which procures eternal life. Being interrogated, the Savior taught him nothing else but, setting Himself against the apostasy, He proposed the commandments of the Law, testifying with much assurance that these are good and lead to eternal life. And yet, if they were not from the good Father, and in harmony with His own proclamation, but had sprouted from tyranny, how would the Truth Himself have brought them forth as if they were full of truth? How, indeed, would He have persuaded one seeking eternal life to seek it through them? And how, O deep intoxication! if anyone should wish to consider these things in themselves, could the Law—"You shall not kill, you shall not commit adultery," and the rest, to which wickedness and its sower are diametrically opposed—have been that of him who was a murderer from the beginning? Is it not clear that it is not fostered, but rather brought about, that those who obey are removed far from the punishments of those who are to be chastised? For he who keeps himself immune from murders, and theft, and adultery, and false witness, and loves his neighbor as himself, he it is who tramples underfoot the statutes that are opposed to goodness, and puts to shame the enemy who is evil from the beginning, and, having received grace through the practice of the Mosaic commandments, he drives far away the works of that enemy. Thus, also, the actions of the commandments of the Law in themselves carry goodness within them, and by themselves ^B prove the power of the Evil One to be fragile. But if the Savior also declared the young man would be perfect if he should receive His own commandments—those which produce grace—this does not bring in anything contrary to what has been said. For, in the first place, not one of the commandments which are under grace confers perfection by itself, since in that case one would suffice, and the observance of the rest would be superfluous. For this is not all that is required of a good law, that it should exhibit perfection within itself, but rather that it should leave nothing, as far as lies in it, that might prevent the one who occupies himself with it from being joined to the Good, and from being turned away from the actions of the evil one. In the second place, it is no less possible to perceive from this very assertion than from what was said before, that the commandments of the Law were held in honor. For when the Savior did not cast those aside, but rather added His own to them, and then declared that the perfect man is brought about through both, it is manifest that, by this connection and conjunction with the things that are under grace, He proclaims those also to be sharers in perfection. For no one who has the full use of his reason would affirm that those laws which the Truth Itself asserts to be good, and to be guides to the kingdom of heaven itself, ^C confer nothing toward perfection, even if those things which are of grace are also present. ^D

^A XIX. To me, however, as I reason on these things, and as I set forth how much the enemy has prevailed against the race, into what a fall man has been brought down, and into what great alienation from the Maker our nature has been carried off, having chosen to inscribe the enemy as master in the place of the Creator, the inward parts are overturned, the bowels are troubled, 14 tears fall, and lamentations surpass the arguments. But what lamentation would suffice for the passion? For I believe that even Jeremiah himself, who, if any other, knew how to compose wailings equal to transgressions, would here be held to be inferior, and would depart having exhausted all his sympathy, so great is the fall that lies before us, and so great is the wound that has seized the human race. For do you see? Alas, how they now present themselves as ministers of the enemy, and not only as ministers, but even as such who, in malice and in deeds, surpass and outdo the author of evil himself and the sower of such things. And as they outstrip the initiator in their absurdities, they do not wish to gain any perception.

For when our Savior was already demonstrating His own divinity and power by miracles, since He was liberating His own creation from other diseases, and did not even allow the band of demons to harass it, but drove it away with great authority, the enemy did not dare to be arrogant, as before, nor to gainsay that it was his, from which he was being driven away. But as soon as the Creator looked upon the creature with a compassionate eye, the legion fled; and not only does it testify, even against its will, by the very fact that it flees, that it is being pursued by one who is not its master, but it clearly declares that not even the nature of the swine is subject to the evil creation ^B and principle. For these agents of malice ask common Creator and Maker for permission to enter even into those creatures. ^C But He who does all things in wisdom, not, as it would seem, indulging them, but rather allowing them to display the hostility and murderous intent they have against men, and, moreover, preparing a kind of medicine against this strange disease, both allowed their request to proceed and their impulse and will to turn into a triumph. Do you see how the legion of demons, not by words but compelled by necessity, confesses that the swine are the works of the true God who is hidden in the flesh?

Then the enemy, who formerly lied and said: “All these things are mine, and if you will fall down and worship me, I will give them to you,”—he, at that time, being ignorant that it was God against whom he was bringing the temptation, but boasting, as though the earthly things were his, when the divine glory already shone forth through ^D the miracles, the shameless one feared, and departed from his arrogance; and he confesses by his deeds that he does not even have authority over the swine, let alone to have created them.

^B But you, O man, wake up! Do you not yet wish to acknowledge your own Master, but still call your body a creature of the Evil One? He who was being championed, seized by fear, put aside his lie; and do you still sustain his defense? He confesses by his deeds that he is not even lord of the swine, and do you make him your lord? He had not yet perfectly acknowledged the ^C Master—for the cross had not yet been fixed, nor had the sun veiled its light in darkness, nor had a wondrous trembling seized the earth, which is otherwise calm by nature, nor had the treasuries of Hades been emptied, nor was the resurrection known. But even so, with none of these things yet present, the thief, fearing the substantial truth, withdraws himself—even against his will—from the power which he had previously feigned to have. For the truth was compelling the liar; and he, who had boasted that all kingdoms were his, cries out by his very deeds that he does not have authority over the swine, let alone anything else. And do you, after the cross has been endured, after Hades has been despoiled, after the resurrection has taken place, after the principalities and powers of darkness have been made a public spectacle, after you have received the power—if indeed you so will—to evade every power of the enemy; do you, I say, still endure it when someone else, not to mention yourself, calls you liable ^D and a creature of the Evil One? For who would not easily perceive from this that the prophets and envoys who were under the Law, whom Jerusalem—which now denotes the system of the most senseless Jews—ceaselessly stoned and killed, were entirely inspired and sent from the good principle, and drew their origin from that same source from which all these things flowed, namely, from our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, the fount of truth? For He calls Jerusalem miserable because of the things to which she had become liable. But Goodness Itself would not call that city miserable which stoned or killed the lovers of wickedness or those sent by it; for "Jerusalem," He says, "Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you." And afterwards: "How often I have wished to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her brood, and you were not willing." That is: How often have I wished, out of compassion, to receive them to Myself and to rescue them from the punishment that awaited you for the slaughter of the prophets and for the mockery of the laws given to you, and furthermore to grant them the grace to be able to enjoy happiness in this present life? But indeed, the tyranny of senselessness which you yourselves established over yourselves not only prevented you from looking in any way toward the conversion which such great and such kindness was offering, and was encouraging you to embrace, but it also urges you to add similar things to the former. And why do I say similar? Nay, indeed, far worse, by which you provoke my providence and humanity to

^A be cast off by yourselves. Therefore, the time has come for you to be called to account for the wages [of your deeds], both in the mutual condemnation of your dispersion, and not only in [that] dispersion, but in the destruction of the city itself to its foundations and delivering it over to desolation. If, then, the audacity against the blood of the prophets and the slaughter of those who were sent brings the Jews to lamentation and becomes the prelude to their final destruction, how is it that they—the zealous imitators of the Jews, striving even to surpass them—do not draw upon themselves the same judgment, not to say a heavier one, and clearly make it inevitable? For those who slander those of whom the Savior shows Himself as the avenger, saying they proceed from an evil principle, dare to do things far worse than those who put them to death. The latter once laid hands upon their bodies, but those who contend that malice is naturally inherent in them inflict upon them perpetual, incurable, and unbearable wounds, since they even honor their killers with the rewards of punishment, and thus, in their mind and intent, prove themselves the leaders of this bodily slaughter. And not only these things, although they are so great, but they do not shudder to assign this insolence to our common Lord and Creator, from the insolence against [these] bodies. For those whom they call the works and ministers of malice, toward those whom He avenges, they—I would not even know how to name them—insult them and also insult their very avenger. ^B

XXI. That the choir of the prophets, and the sacred utterances which Moses served, appeared as both the handiwork and the worshippers of the good God, and that those whose heralds they were privileged to be, were things of divine inspiration and good-working providence, and that nothing was, for the ears of men at that time, either wiser, or truer, or readier for providing salvation, or better for giving guidance—the Lord of the Old and New Testaments Himself provides us the proof. For He gave to the prophets such assurance of the truth in His works, and raised them to such glory and distinction, ^C that He shows they did not only foretell and proclaim His miraculous works, or that He would endure the cross and death, by which He would redeem our race, or that He would be given gall and vinegar to drink, or that the sun, not bearing this passion, would be darkened, or all the other things—each of which, as they were supernatural, obtained an immutable outcome—but also that He would sit upon an ass's colt, and would have the children of those who were indignant become his praisers. None of these, I say, did He leave remaining without having them come to pass according to their words and prophecies, testifying that He Himself is the one performing them. ^D Indeed, what was appropriate for Him who was going to remove evil from the midst, and whose coming was above all for the sake of the abolition of the tyranny

of the enemy — knowing both the things predicted and those who had predicted them — whether to do everything contrary to them, if they originated from a hostile source, or to seek to fulfill everything and to let nothing fall to the ground of what it had occurred to them to say? But He did not appear to be doing so, in no way ignoring what had been prophesied to them, but even frequently in His actions pointing to the fact that He was fulfilling those things just as they had foreseen and predicted them, and that His works in no way departed from what had been prophesied by them. To such an extent did He deem it worthwhile to show them to be truthful, and He placed upon it great care, that He might demonstrate that they were true prophets and ministers of the true God and Father. And how could one reasonably argue that He would establish the prophets as the source of truth, or by the very work confirm and fulfill their wondrous prophecies, and make the whole world eye-witnesses of their faithfulness? The same, surely, would be as if Truth itself were teaching that it is the business of the hostile principle to suggest the truth. Observe, moreover, that by being carried upon the foal, the Savior ^B was hinting at other things as well. Yet it is most evident to take this as a confirmation of the prophecy. For the most holy oracle says: "This whole thing has happened, so that what was spoken by the prophet might be fulfilled, saying: Tell the daughter of Zion: Behold thy King cometh unto thee meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a foal the son of a beast of burden 14." Do you see how the Savior of the world sits upon the foal in order to fulfill and confirm the prophecy? For even apart from such testimony, as far as what is apparent is concerned, what other pressing need was there, when the way was so short, for Jesus to ride upon a foal, since He had often traveled many and longer ways on foot? Or what glory did the foal confer, while it carried Him who by the word of His power upholds all things? And what kingdom, pray, did a beast of burden proclaim while it supported the king of Israel as he was being carried? For He would have rendered His humility and meekness if not more, then certainly no less, attested if He had made the journey on foot. To such an extent did He join the things of the Old Testament with the New; to such an extent did He proceed to teach, both by words and by deeds, that those new things also proceeded from the same goodness, even though, among other dogmas, grace primarily pressed this point.

XXIII. Concerning the Temple

^A He brings them down by their own works, as He tests the impious. For He did not merely leave nothing insulting, but He also casts out and expels with a threat those who had not held it in sufficient reverence, and, as He prepared to show the wrath of which they were worthy for profaning the temple of His Father, He weaves a whip 15 of cords and brandishes it against them. And He does not stop at this alone, but he also overturns the tables of the money-changers—that is, those that carried the silver and coins for exchange—and, furthermore, even the chairs of those selling the doves, or the oxen, or the sheep, if you like. And He did not do these things while remaining silent. Or did He not remain silent, but spoke through a parable? Or did He not do this, but without speaking freely? And what other word could be clearer, or hold such boldness, lest some of those who make a science of doing evil fashion for themselves some other pretext and assign the cause of these deeds to that? But at the same time as He was doing these things, He was cleansing and purifying the paternal sanctuary from the neglect of the Jews. ^B And He accompanied it with an oracle, teaching clearly and with boldness the cause both of the threat and of the destruction of the tables of commerce and the chairs. "For my house," He says, "shall be called a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves" 16. Here He recognizes and calls "house of prayer" and "house of God" the temple which was built under the law, and He vindicates it as profaned, seeing that it was both His good Father’s and His own, since all things that are the Father’s are also His. Yet how minor an act of profanation that was: a silver bench and a board of coins, on which the price for irrational animals was being paid! But He knew then that the temple was worthy of such honor and reverence that He could not endure even the slightest of those things that anyone might dare to offer it that fell short of the honor owed to it. What are you saying? Would the Savior of us all, Jesus Christ, who took such account of the temple, and who declared those who had attempted in some way to profane it worthy of such wrath—would He leave unpunished those men who were emboldened to profane it not merely by some common commercial transaction, but who polluted it entirely, from top to bottom, with unspeakable filth and incomparable abomination? And where could it be possible to accept this with sober reasoning? ^D From this you might see, no less than from the things mentioned before, how great a glory and honor Moses and the blessed company of the prophets were held in then, and that the Law is in harmony with Grace.

XXIV. For when our philanthropic and good God had finished the economy, and was already bearing the victory over death and the very author...

^A of death, having despoiled death, He rose, and the body, which had been separated from the soul, He took back again, and journeyed with the companions of Cleopas, who did not recognize the Master; and He rebukes them for their ignorance, or rather for their foolishness, and for their slowness regarding faith. And He brings a rebuke from no other source than that which leads to knowledge; although it would have been easier to show His hands and feet, which bore the marks and signs of the nails and the spear, and by that very suffering to teach clearly that it was He who had suffered, just as later He dispelled the unbelief of the doubting disciples by these same means. Nor did He even remind them that He had foretold these things while He was still with them before the Passion, nor did He mention by what miracles He had confirmed the truth of His words; although He did recount this to those to whom He appeared later. But He set none of these things before them, nor did He set before them or explain any moment of His saving Passion, but as if to show that both His own discourses and His Passion, and the Mosaic and prophetic oracles were sufficient for demonstrating the truth and illuminating the minds of men, He confirmed His resurrection to some by showing the traces of the wounds of His Passion on His body, as He had predicted He would; but to others, who had conceived the vision of Him in their minds, revealing Himself by none of the things that had been said, nor using them for their rebuke, He weaves the rebuke for them from the prophets and Moses, and at the same time removes their ignorance of mind and of eyes. And what really brings power ^B and dignity to the demonstration of the Law, is that on one hand He used His own words and His Passion for teaching and refutation, having assumed the companionship of the Mosaic and prophetic testimony; on the other hand, revealing His Passion and glory and resurrection through the prophetic and Mosaic utterances, He rested entirely in these, inasmuch as He did not need confirmation sought from elsewhere. So fully did He have the power of the truth of the prophetic and Mosaic words, and their great utility, perceived, not that He preferred these to those, but because He wished, according to His prudence, for the oracles to enjoy the reverence and power of those things which, having been foretold, had now come to pass. For to the former, domestic beauty was sufficient, but to the latter, it was necessary that some decorative element be added to their inherent nobility. But nothing prevents us from hearing the words of the Master Himself. For He says: "O foolish ones and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken" (Luc. XXIV, 25). Do you hear how He brings the rebuke through the prophets? And then: "Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and so enter into His glory?" (Luc. XXIV, 26). The prophets preach the glory of the Savior; and you drive them to the lowest ^D ignominy, or rather, you drive them even further than that. And beginning from Moses and all the prophets, He interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself. Our Redeemer, the interpreters of the works through which He redeemed us, began from Moses and all the prophets.

^A Our Redeemer declares the prophets to be interpreters of the works through which He redeemed us from tyranny; but you, do you not shrink from making them ministers of tyranny? Or perhaps you have filled yourself not only with this, but also in another way with such folly and madness, that you do not even have the perception, nor do you see that you are caught thinking and saying completely contradictory things. For now you exalt that lofty mind, the Assyrian monarch and master of the universe, fighting against God, above all others; yet now, even unwittingly, you do not permit him the power of mastering himself and using reason, but you order him to busy himself with trifles and to behave with incredible stupidity. For what, I ask, would be the degree of madness, to inspire and appoint his own servants and worshippers—may the prophets forgive us, for it is concerning their injuries that we recall this, for them—so that they might propose and proclaim the destruction of his tyranny, and further, to trumpet forth the manner of that destruction so clearly and conspicuously; and not only to trumpet forth things of which the brigand himself was ignorant, but also to bring them about and prepare them with all diligence? What degree of madness would these things not be? And what kind of mind would it be, that preserved its innate impulse even to the final stages? Or, if you prefer to recognize it by another reckoning, to him whom you say foreknows secret and supernatural things, and things which were known and predetermined solely for the true God, you grant, alas the absurdity! an infinite and ineffable wisdom and an unspeakable prudence; yet, while claiming that he brought about his own destruction, you allow him to overlook nothing that madmen and dervishes might undertake, even though you make him God with your lips.

XXV. ^B Such are the fruits of your dogmas, such are the wages of those studies in malice; or rather, they are the rewards of your blasphemy and the first-fruits of the sowing of your tares. And these are small. But how are those men, more unthinking than the Sadducees—for I would not say more impious, as their defection is greater than can be compared with worse—how are they not suffused with shame? Men who are moved by neither the threats of God, nor His wrath, nor His grace, nor the enjoyment of His benefits, and who are not struck by that utterance which the Saviour used against the Sadducees, who held that there is no resurrection of the dead, and who attempted to tempt Him who cannot be tempted. “But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by the Lord, saying: I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob: therefore God is not ^C the God of the dead, but of the living.” For what else could one find in this use of Scripture? ^D

scriptural passage, or more powerful for demolishing the audacity of those who war against God? The God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob, is the God of the living. And it is manifest that those whose God He is, both now and after the resurrection, are alive in Him. For God is the agent of the resurrection, so that those whom the Son raises—and He raises the entire creation (27), among whom are also the ancestors of the patriarchs—over these, therefore, God reigns both now and after the resurrection, when that fashioned creator of your body, having been fashioned himself, will have been delivered to the unending fire and the worm, along with those whose desire it was to obey and serve his will. They will indeed sustain punishments with him, but Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and all who through the Law find favor with God, will enjoy a joy that is unending and unspeakable. What do you say, miserable man? Your so-called creator of fire becomes food for the fire, while those around Abraham inherit the heavenly tabernacles from the true God. And you say that he, whom the outer darkness confines, rules over them? The Savior of the world calls His own Father the God of Abraham and the other patriarchs. You, however, cast Him out from His rule and install in His place one who is consumed by fire and who drags you yourself into those same punishments, unless you ^B quickly recover your senses and flee from this error. The Jews, indeed, were astounded when the Savior said these things; nay, even the shameless faction of the Sadducees was restrained. Yet you do not even thus bridle your tongue, nor cast off your impious thoughts. How then, or whence, or at what time will even a drop of mercy fall upon you?

XXVI. Nor is it right to pass over this. ^C One of the Pharisees, who seemed to excel the others in knowledge of the Law, puts Jesus to the test and asks, saying, “Teacher, which commandment is the greatest in the Law?” See, then, from the things that Jesus answers, how He vindicates both the dignity of the Mosaic commandments and their love for God. “For you shall love,” He says, “the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.” And this is indeed the sense of the Law; but attend also to the judgment of the Lord. For He adds: “This is the first and great commandment.” He calls the worship of God according to the Law a great and first commandment. Yet what necessity was there to pass this judgment and to claim this prerogative for the Mosaic divine worship, if He did not acknowledge it ^D as a paternal institution? But this commandment itself, if anyone were to consider it, is it not full of beneficial and divine inspiration; and it is full of primary philosophy, knowing God...

to be the Creator and Benefactor, and loving Him before all others? For whom else ought one to love before Him who has care for all things and created all things from nothing? How is it not proper to honor Him, who searches hearts and reins, not with all the soul, not with all the heart, not with all the mind, but rather with some hesitation and division of thoughts, and as if perfunctorily, by rendering the debt of love for the things for which He sustained us, for which He feeds and holds us together, for which, though we had sinned, He did not cast us away, but even sent His own Son—who never departed from His bosom—for the salvation and restoration of the wanderer, to live among men in the flesh? ^B And He so eagerly embraced the Father's will, that He did not only, in a way like ours, become a partner of flesh and blood, and was named a man without sin, but also endured the cross and death, through which he who had fallen was raised up and deemed worthy of a glory greater than the former. For all these things and for those like them, is it not necessary to love with all one’s heart and soul and mind Him who has bestowed such things? He who thinks or says that this commandment is not salutary, or that the ordinance of Jesus’ legislation is not well-ordered, shows himself to be entirely unworthy to truly know the true God. But do you consider also the one that follows: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” And what could be more profitable or more virtuous than this? Or more suitable to hold life together? Or to construct the sociable and gentle nature of man, as loving one’s neighbor as oneself? To know that he is the work of the same hand, of the same nature, and brought into the light by the benefit of the same birth, and also that he is to depart from this life by the same path, after which the one and same Arbiter and Judge of the things done in life will ^C await him; and before all things, to resolve to do nothing to one's neighbor that anyone would never be seen doing to himself; but to pray for and to bring to him, to whom you are a neighbor, all the best and most salutary things. For this is the reason for love. Do not these duties seem to you to be the most important and critical among humans? And let me add now how many divine and God-loving things can be accomplished by observing this commandment. For the Savior does not stop here; but that He might cut off every excuse of the ungodly, and that they might not look toward any wickedness, as if this pair alone was deemed worthy of the Lord’s honorable judgment while the rest are considered of no account—in order, then, that He might close off the machinery of wickedness against them from every side, see how He adds: “On these two ^D commandments depend all the law and the prophets,” as if saying that inasmuch as these two have attained my just approval, and by their own nature are salutary and God-loving, through them

both the whole law and the prophets are worthy of the same honors. For these are linked and held together with one another, and depend on the same legislation. And the Lawgiver and instructor of them all is himself ^A of equal honor, and is to be pursued with the same honor everywhere. Thus, elsewhere he produces David as a witness, who announced him beforehand as Lord and victor, not simply and for himself, but in the Holy Spirit, and from the Lord [receiving] the seat at the right hand, being himself also Lord, receiving this [honor], and seeing his enemies placed as a footstool under his feet and falling. And how could he have been present to predict and theologize these things, if he were drawn to the opposite party, especially to theologize so clearly and openly concerning Jesus, and to confess him as his own Lord, and to vindicate for him the paternal dignity through [the title of] Lordship, and to testify how brightly and inalienably he shall gird himself with power against his enemies? Whose [work] was it also to predict and bring to completion, if not that of the beneficence-bestowing ^B wisdom of God, through which all things consist, and the things that pertain to our salvation were foreordained from the foundation of the world, and reached an end not unworthy of the one who had foreordained them?

XXVII. Let us consider also from this point, if Moses and Elias, living according to the Law, were not ministers of the good and true God, and were not pleasing to him? For how, upon the mountain on which the Savior was transfigured, and manifested the glory of his divinity, and gave it to be seen by his principal disciples like lightning, were they present there and enjoying the divine splendor, unless they had pertained to his worshippers and ministers? ^C And how were they not only present, like mere spectators, but as those who, more than the rest of the disciples, enjoyed the first fruits of this vision of God, and were adorned by a certain prerogative of grace beyond those in whose company they otherwise were? For, surrounded by splendor, they conversed with Jesus, and the sum of their discourse was the cross, and the victory and trophy to be won from death. Therefore, what Peter, James, and John were with respect to the other disciples, this the Savior declared Moses and Elias to be with respect to them (the ancients), and he exalted them. That they conversed with him and occupied the first rank, the sacred Scripture thus relates: ^D “And as he was praying, the appearance of his countenance was altered, and his raiment was white and dazzling. And behold, two men were talking with him, who were Moses and Elias.” Do you hear? Moses, he says, and Elias were there, who appearing in glory, were speaking of his departure, which he was about to fulfill in Jerusalem. Or if you prefer to understand the glory, concerning which another Scripture testifies—that the transfigured Savior presented Moses and Elias as spectators of his divinity, as far as it is possible for man to see—and [index: entries preserved]

^A coordinates them with his disciples, or rather, as has been shown, sets them before them—not that the latter would in all respects be inferior, but because the ones were still obliged to wander in their minds through life as if at sea, and to be tossed as human affairs entail, while the others already held the unruffled harbor. For he who has not yet attained to safety and the harbor is in a worse condition than he who already possesses both; and he whose salvation is still uncertain is much inferior to one who has already found it. Yet, those whom Christ, who is Truth itself, deems worthy of such glory, so that he makes them converse with him and proclaim his glory and his departure, do you not fear to mock them, or rather to refer them to a source of evil? ^B And who indeed would call him a source of good and a fountain of goodness who wills that those who are not his own, but are rather by nature evil, should be cherished by him—both in the ways we have mentioned and by being summoned to himself? For they did not come of their own accord from anywhere, nor could they have done so; rather, he himself drew the one up from the grave, and brought the other down from heavenly dwellings immune from corruption, and attached and joined them to himself. And not only this, but the Father himself from above, while the aliens—as they who belong to the alien one say—were present, spread out a cloud of light overshadowing them, and sent forth a voice from the cloud saying, *This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear him.* Is it not then fitting that those who were spectators, mystics, and guides of such a great spectacle be treated with every kind of honor, they to whom the account of the Lord's actions and judgments is in any way committed? Indeed, even the Savior, who does all things out of the riches of his wisdom and his love for men, and who accepts whenever he is praised by the hymns of children whom his wondrous ^C works had moved to laudation—and since by this very thing the blindness and hardness of heart of the Jews were fanned into murmuring—does not restrain them by rebuking them from elsewhere; but he brings forward again the inescapable Davidic oracle as an argument; and by it, he puts them to shame, while teaching them to offer hymns to himself. But where is this good? And where is the consistency, and how could it be just and fair that he who came to destroy the power of the devil should, through that very one, procure for himself a share and subject matter of glory (for this is the fruit of the apostate sowing)? And at the same time to make the enemy, who is devoid of all faith, arrive at being ^D at a loss for any belief, and at the same time to cause himself the greatest harm and fail to realize that he is struggling against and strengthening the very one whose power he had come to take away? For whoever tries to demonstrate the truth through the words of a liar, which he himself possesses, and...

And yet, may God be merciful! He no more shows himself to be immune from the accusations of the Jews, than he frees the one by whose aid he wards off these things from the guilt of the lie of which he is the author. Therefore, your love of defection surely does not redound to your advantage, when you proclaim the Father of truth to be the author of a lie, and say that substantial truth has borrowed the true from Him, and—not to say with greater—is bound to reciprocate the things borrowed with equal zeal.

XXVIII. But come, let us also see, through the parables—not parabolically, but clearly—the dogma of the impious destroyed. ^B For that the Savior came to seek and to save that which was lost, no one has hitherto called into doubt. But if He desired to deliver from destruction the sheep that was truly lost, and to bring it back to Himself and recall it to salvation, it will not be difficult to perceive that the parable teaches that human substance is the work of a beneficent hand. For, in all respects, the lost sheep was first of the fold of those that were saved, and then, springing away from the flock, it turned aside onto the path to destruction. For that which from the beginning was born into perdition has not even the nature to return to salvation, or rather, it cannot return ^C or be saved. Indeed, it could not even have come to pass that it should perish, if it had originated from an evil principle at its very birth, and had never been seen to be a partaker of good and of salvation. For how can one be said to have fallen from that which he never was, and how can he who was not a partaker of salvation at his very birth be said to have reached destruction or to have perished? But our Lord, most loving of men, the teacher and author of truth, though He would most often make mention of the lost one, never mentions its depravity or destruction—not even remotely—as though created with it; ^D but He always provides occasion to think that it came to destruction after having been separated, by a subsequent falling away, from its original order, connection, and communion with the rest. For He says: *What think you, if a man have a hundred sheep?* Behold, those hundred sheep are the whole flock not yet wandering; not one of them was then wandering or lost. If subsequently one of them strayed from the flock, it separates itself from the saved, it wanders away from those not wandering, it departs from the fold. Therefore, the most loving of men seeks it the more quickly, and when found, counts it among the rest who are not wandering, and rejoices over the repaired loss, and stirs up His friends, the angels, into a fellowship of joy, because the sheep, before separated from their order and glory, [He brings back] to its own felicity, in which they themselves rejoiced.

^A And the parable of the ten drachmas, from which one was lost, beyond question sets forth the same understanding. For at that time, that the ten drachmas bore the same imprinted character and possessed equal weight—or if you will, that the same material substance was the foundation for all—teaches us from every side the immutability of the innate goodness and salvation. And even if none of these things were taken into account, at least the fact that they all exist under the one same Lordship proclaims that the [nature] of authority is uncut and undivided; and that all of them were being saved, [shows] that they were indeed works of a beneficent power. ^B By the dignity of self-determination, some remained in the goodness and salvation to which they were brought, while he who was moved from there turned aside towards destruction. And the self-mastery of the will became, for those who made use of it in the manner they ought, a guardian of the indwelling salvation and goodness, and an addition of greater perfection (for that which is admired even without actions, when it takes on glory from works, is much more to be admired and regarded as more precious); so, for those who misused this grace to fall into destruction, [it became a cause] of proceeding from their native beauty and, having exchanged the better things to take on a change for the worse—unless one, through much diligence, saves oneself from the change that leads to ruin—they have betrayed their nature to be swallowed up by the fall.

^C XXIX. Turn yourself now also to the two sons born of the same father, of whom the younger, having received a portion not less than the elder, departs into a far country, and having consumed and wasted such great wealth ^D upon his journey, being brought to extreme poverty and need, he partook of the husks, the food of swine. Who would not shed a tear at such a great wandering? He who was lord of such great wealth, being given over to mercenary labors and filching from the needs of nature with the food of swine, then being instructed by sufferings and the famine in his error, returns to his father; and with a contrite heart pouring forth his repentance—oh, for the great philanthropy of the Father and Master toward me!—he is deemed worthy of a reception greater than he dared to ask for in his request for pardon. For the father does not reproach his youthful folly, nor does he lead him into shame for his wandering; nor does he consider that his conversion was born of famine rather than of his own intention. Nothing of these [does he bring] against the delinquent.

For he knew that he who had returned was his own offspring (even if he had been debased by foreign seed); he knew that he had been produced by his own love, and was not a new creation from elsewhere. And so he brought nothing of these things by which he could be saddened; nor did he add anything to the long-standing miseries of the son. Would that I might perceive the fruit of thy conversion and your favorable reception, just as I do of your error! For the most humane and excellent Father, seeing him still from afar, coming to Him with penitence alone, and bearing no fruit as yet, did not wait for the struggles of penitence, but seeing him so squalid and looking only to penitence, was moved with compassion; and running, he fell upon his neck and kissed him.

^B But the son? Who could recount the affections by which he was torn? There were present shame, sadness, fear, anxiety of soul, timorousness, hope fluctuating in desire alone, memory of former things, recollection of unspeakable deeds, thought of those to come. Yet by penitence he is superior to all these. For he says: "Father, I have sinned against heaven and before thee, and I am no longer worthy to be called thy son." And this confession, made in words, not differing from the habit of the soul, causes the Father forthwith to clothe him in the first garment. And with the ring of His hand, He seals his actions, and with sandals He protects his feet, that the serpent might no longer bite the heel. Afterward, He also slaughters the fatted calf, and the Father feasts with splendor and great expense with his son who had returned from the dead, and who, after that long loss, was found again. ^C You see how the parable delivers these things by the most exquisite and clear enigma of all: that this prodigal son, and that other of the same origin—who is greater than he both in age and in deeds, and who remained in the father’s house and retained his former glory and his possessions with the prerogative of age—were both born and brought forth from the good and the Maker and Creator. He does not derive the elder son from one stock and the younger from an opposite stock or generation, but deduces both from the same origins, production, and education.

At the same time, it is right also to consider this, that if someone should judge that the sons mentioned in that parable signify human nature, and that by the elder ones he understands those who have preserved the original grace and have not corrupted that gift by their intemperance; but by the younger ones, those who have chosen evils over goods and have dissipated their possessions in luxury; or if he should judge that the former represents the state of the angels and the latter that of men, and the mutation thereof; or if, finally, it should please you (for it is permitted to think whatever one wishes) to understand by them those who are, some under the law and others under grace; certainly both these meditations clearly and without exception— ^D

^A show that the race of angels and of men, the law as well as grace, and human nature—whether it has preserved the innate good or received destruction in place of the gift of grace—proceed from the one Father, both good and Being. And what is most useful and remarkable in this parable is that one power dominates those three, which no less effectively than if those three had won an equal victory, overturns the opinion of the apostates.

XXX. It will be overturned in the same way by those things with which Christ denounced the Scribes and Pharisees of the Jews, because while they neglected the laws given to them, they promoted their own reasonings ahead of them. For "Woe to you," he says, "blind guides, who say: 'Whoever swears by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple, is bound,'" ^B that is, he is liable to judgment as a transgressor of an oath. See then the magnitude of your error, even now, if you did not see it before. For he adds to the preceding rebukes this also: "Fools and blind! For which is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifies the gold?" He acknowledges and calls not only the temple under the Law holy, but even the earth full of holiness. But the Savior uttered such a judgment concerning the temple. Do you not shrink from heaping upon it the greatest ignominy, attributing it to a hostile hand? And to whom would these words, "fools and blind," more fittingly apply: to those who honor both as holy, but prefer the gold, or to those who tear apart with blasphemous tongues the temple itself and everything in it, and do not tremble to defile it with unspeakable insults, and thrust it away from beneficent providence toward a groundless concept of tyranny? The Lord continues: ^C "And whoever swears by the altar, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gift that is on the altar, is bound." And for the same insolence, an equal rebuke is again provided: "Fools and blind! For what is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifies the gift?" While calling the temple and the altar sources of holiness, the Savior says that all things in the sanctuary were indeed holy; but in the sharing and distribution of holiness, some occupied the first rank in honor, and others followed in the second. And the Light of the World, the substantial Wisdom of God, condemns the Jews as blind and foolish, not because they had behaved insolently toward them, but because they had dared to invert the order. And he who well knows the Father—"For no one knows the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son ^D chooses to reveal him"—revealing to us the grace through the paternal temple and the altar, teaches that they also make other things partakers of sanctity. But you—O, by what name could anyone properly call you, since your insuperable audacity carries you far beyond "fool" and "blind"! You do not fear to [desecrate] holy things first

by offering them to the author of all abomination? And he, indeed, surrounds the legal sacred rites with such honor and glory, and makes the Jews liable to such great curses and punishment—not so much aiming these at them as at you—because, although they worshipped them, they did not follow them with the fitting reverence. But you do not even wish to perceive the magnitude of your own blasphemy.

Indeed, the substantial Wisdom of God cries out "Woe" to the Scribes and Pharisees, because they did not render the due observance to the Law in all things, but observed the law in minor matters while neglecting it in weightier ones. But as for you, who sharpen your tongue against all laws and sacred things, and who drag even those who once lived according to the Law into the depth of impiety—do you not think that manifold punishments await you? For the Savior says, "Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the Law: justice, mercy, and faith" [Matt. XXIII, 23]. But according to the speech of the apostates, they should have been called to account for punishments not because they neglected the precepts of the Law, but because they had concerned themselves with their observance! For that which does not please the good man—he refers to its practice for examination and punishment; thus, the turning away from it places one beyond all guilt.

But our Savior, being Lord and Author of the Old Testament just as of the New, passes judgment against that modern impiety even more than against the Jewish negligence. For, "These things," he says, "you ought to have done, and not to leave the others undone" [Matt. XXIII, 23], in this way gravely and with supreme authority establishing the old Law through the new. ^B If, therefore, the just Judge extracts such great punishment from them because they neglected half the legal requirements, what will you have to pay, you who so impudently pour out such great injury upon all laws—not out of negligence, but out of hatred?

And if he did not judge those who built the sepulchres of the prophets and adorned the monuments of the just—assuming as they did a semblance of piety in part, even though they were sprung from the race of prophet-killers—to be immune from guilt, but subjected them to inevitable punishments because they harbored a mind not different from the bloodthirsty nature of their fathers, then what punishment will be found that would not fall far short of your crime? For you breathe slaughter against the prophets even more than they did, and you do not merely apply yourselves to the construction of sepulchres and monuments, but you exercise an implacable and insuperable enmity and insult against them even after death! But if indeed the divine prophets had been worshipers of an evil principle, then it would not only have been improper to subject to curses either their slayers or the descendants of the slain, or to drag them to punishment, but rather [you should] have bestowed upon them extraordinary honors. But in truth, our good Savior, who loves mankind ^C and is the avenger of his own servants, not only [does not exempt] those who were the first to [perpetrate the] slaughter, but he does not suffer them to be free from [blame if they are] born of the prophet-killers, nor does he lead them to punishments, but rather honors… ^D

… ^A them with the original honors. For our good and philanthropic Savior, and the avenger of his own servants, does not merely circumscribe the accountability for slaughter to the perpetrators of these murders; but, by declaring their children also to be "serpents" and "offspring of vipers," He proclaims that the inescapable Gehenna of fire awaits them. And, by binding the new even more strongly to the old, and connecting the old to the new, and showing that the transgression in both is equal and leads to condemnation, he simultaneously conveys that the things of honor have been shared by them in an equal and similar inheritance. Therefore, he says, "I will send to you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city." Observe: "That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar." Do you see how he pronounces both those who laid impious hands upon those who were well-pleasing to God before the time of grace, and those who poured out their bloodthirsty fury upon those living under grace—and all those whom He Himself had sent to announce His kingdom into the cities and synagogues of the Jews—to be equally liable for the same murder and punishment? Thus, Jesus, while valuing and accepting both the time of grace and those things that preceded it—as He is the author and creator of both, and establishes the agreement of both everywhere, and shows that they are to be pursued with the same reverence—cuts off every pretext for impiety.

^B XXXI. It was fitting, therefore, for the apostates, even if they did not divide the one principle into two, and even when they mock the mysteries of the Law (and yet, how did I say—loosely—not even when they attempt to steal the creation from the Creator, these wicked men offering a wicked gift to the Most Wicked?); it was fitting, I say, that they, even if they were not held by any of these charges, and not even by that of slandering the prophets—although the absurdity of such things is very great—should at least, in all their arrogance, and for this reason alone, that they claim their body is evil and from a wicked hand, immediately hide themselves for shame. But whereabouts on earth? Nay, they ought to seek places deeper than even the subterranean ones—not because this is graver than the previous instances of impiety, but because that member through which they utter blasphemous voices, having confessed that they received it from an impious source, do they not immediately cast everything away and flee from that impiety, crying out that while they spoke those things, they were serving as an instrument of malice? And yet, these men still dare to appear before the faces of men? O man, what are you saying? Are there two principles? But you are uttering these things through a wicked mouth. Is the Law from a hostile principle, and opposed to grace? But this, too, is an instrument of malice sounding forth. Are the prophets from a worse lot? From that very same vessel of malice, this also flows. Is the body wicked and of a wicked creator? And you—why do you not keep the ultimate silence? Instead, you still speak and offer thanks to the one who fashioned you so wickedly and loathsomely, such that you are not able to utter anything at all that is saving, nor

^A free from deep intoxication and falsehood. For the treasure of wickedness knows nothing but to store up and likewise to pour forth the things of wickedness and error; how, then, could the tongue of a liar speak the truth? How could wickedness conceive of goodness? Falsehood, by speaking, flees from the truth. And how can you trust yourself speaking, when you are a workshop of falsehood? I, however, depart from the things you say, holding the contrary opinion, and I consider it much more prudent and wise to introduce this than if anyone were to suppose that you cherish what you say. For if these things proceed from evil instruments, and are therefore evil or false, how is it—as is the case with evils—not far lighter to advocate for the most contrary of words, than for one to corrupt both the tongue and the mind together? Therefore (50), he speaks of principles; it is proper to think of but one. The Law is hostile to grace. Proclaiming their harmony! The chorus of the prophets is base; and whence could one know more clearly that it is noble? He fashions ^B the body of the wicked one; it suffices as a final proof that it is the work of a beneficent hand. See the depth of madness, the magnitude of the impiety, in those men who are unable to possess even the foundation for thoughts on imaginary matters. Consequently (51), it is not at all necessary to charm the ears, because one might rightly affirm that by this very act one subjects them to an incurable fault. I, for my part, would say: for if anyone were to accept the saving incantations, he would make a beginning toward returning to his former nobility; but if not, he himself brings an irrevocable sentence upon himself, by preferring altogether a wicked transformation to the good formation, and by holding constant to a change for the worse, when it behooved him to keep the good. He cannot, indeed, blame the enchanter for his own silence, but he ought to reproach himself for the entire cause of the silence, and make himself guilty of every fault, he who peddles his own madness and blindness to us as a fault of silence. Therefore, attach the remaining parts to these as well. ^C XXXII. Our Savior, the lover of mankind and the all-good, who came to take away the sins of the world, liberated mankind from other diseases and afflictions, and granted to many the remission of sins, and He sought and proposed as a proof of the remission the healing of the body. Indeed, if the body were the work of an evil creator, as the blasphemous audaciously maintain, it could certainly not be the case that it should receive—through its own depravity—that which is the benefit of the good divinity alone, namely, the forgiveness of sins, as a pledge and confirmation. For this is the same as if you were to say that the structure of wickedness is the fountain from which goodness flows, if indeed the remission of sins proceeded from the healing of bodies, which are the offspring of wickedness. But our Savior, however, — ^D

^A not only bestowed the healing of bodies by word, but also by his hand. Again, in another place, he takes the hand of one of whom he was not the creator, and raises up the girl, and restores the widow’s son to life, and brings back the body, once so well disposed by the soul, and joins it to her again—a thing which, according to the godless tongue, it would have been best not to have received at all; or, having received it, to have put it away as quickly as possible; but the worst of all, to see what had been put away joined together again. And he who came to destroy the power of the enemy contends with all his might to strengthen his works? And what do I mean by "to strengthen"? Nay, rather, he who during his whole life appeared as the destroyer of that tyranny—which was often being dissolved, on the one hand, by the illnesses to which its works were subject, and on the other, by being torn apart and delivered over to death and corruption—he appeared, I say, as the destroyer of that tyranny, ^B throughout the whole time of his sojourn, renewing it, raising it up from corruption, and delivering it from its passions, and doing so as often as he brought the dead back to life and drove diseases from their bodies.

XXXIII. And what is still more intolerable is that from that time until the present, he does not cease, both through his disciples moved by the divine Spirit and through those who succeeded them in their office, to confirm and perfect the same dominion through similar actions. Indeed, is there anything among either Greeks or Barbarians more barbarous or impious than this? I, for one, do not see it, nor do I think myself unworthy to see it, were it otherwise. When the Pharisees at one time inquired ^C whether it is lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause, see how our Lord, the lover of mankind, resolves their difficulty and issues his rebuke, not from elsewhere, nor from his own authority and the doctrines of grace, but from the very history of creation itself. "Have you not read," he says, "that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female?" (Matt. XIX, 4), teaching that one ought not to dissolve marriages lightly, nor be so rashly carried away by that to which the unrestrained nature of impulse inclines. And although they had the creation itself as a teacher that it is not permitted either to take more than one wife or to tear apart the union, they were unwilling either to learn the commandment from the Mosaic school ^D or to see the difficulty resolved. But he, contending against both from that very point, makes the old law exclusively his own, and from it weaves that which belongs to grace. For he who brought all things into being from nothing, out of which he fashioned and articulated human nature into male and female, and joined both into one, he, he says, is the same who also sowed the seeds of the law, who [ordained that those who have been joined together] should not on account of the perversity of their judgment be separated from one another.

nor follow immoderate desires, and by the introduction of the vice of polygamy contaminate the generation of men. You see how he traces his own law back to the very origins of the world, and shows that it has its beginning from there. Later, he silences not only the Jews ^A through the Creator and the creation, but also all those who, emboldened by this, slander human nature and reproach the generation of men from one another; a little later he adds: "What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder." It is not fitting, he says, that the laws which God has established should be overturned by human councils, nor is it suitable for a creature to pass laws against the Creator. And he not only raises up the Mosaic physiologia to this dignity, but even when the Jews, in order to recommend their opinion and view, brought forward and objected against Moses, inasmuch as he had permitted them to dismiss their wives, he cast no reproach upon him whatsoever, nor did he make him liable to any charge. But although, from the very primordial creation and from the objection of the Jews, he had an opportunity to refer the cause of this matter to Moses, yet he so far abstained from accusing Moses, that he rather professed that he had acted wisely as a steward. For Moses, he says, "on account of the hardness of your hearts," permitted you to dismiss your wives. That is, he himself was not led by repentance, neglecting that ancient law which he himself wrote, to turn to that other, nor did he put aside the divine grace of explaining the creation, which he had received, in favor of his own reasonings; nor did he become the cause of this division, but the hardness of your hearts refers the whole cause back to you. For since that heart would not receive the perfect ratio of the law, he brought upon you a change ^B of that former precept, and was compelled to loosen somewhat the bridle of good order for your passions. For the man who saw God did not, neglecting the precept of creation, digress to another, but persuaded by your resistance, he relaxed something of its rigor through dispensation; lest, perhaps, while commanding the marriage bond to be indissoluble, the hardness and rigidity of your minds should bring about much worse results—namely, procuring a dissolution through homicide, which it was not permitted to effect by the power of law and doctrine. By these reasonings and arguments, the Savior chastises the wickedness of the Jews, yet at the same time solves the question put forth sophistically, and teaches everyone to know him as our Creator, whose law it also is that a husband should not depart from his wife. ^C This, indeed, was prefigured at the beginning by the very creation and conjunction, but was later promulgated and expressly proposed by counsel and by the very words themselves. For as the goodness, the kingdom, and the power of the infinite and omnipotent Trinity [are common and indivisible], so also [is] the creation and the ^D

dignity of creation common and indivisible. Therefore, the Son, being equal to the Father in essence, sows the seeds of the present law in creation itself; having assumed our flesh and having lived among men as a man, He brings the same to perfection and explains it by His very words. And who would not shudder to refer our creation, or Moses, or the production of the world, not only to a contrary principle, but even to indulge such blasphemous thoughts—the evil one striving to cast them in—or even for a brief moment to allow the mind to wallow in the waves of impiety, rather than to quickly ward off the attack itself and oppose it with vehemence?

^B XXXIV. Furthermore, the Lord, seeing the world, acknowledges it as His own, and by calling it such, declares that He recognizes it. Will not, therefore, those who withdraw it from His mighty hand be shown to be unworthy of the very name of Christians and deserving of being stripped of it? For the Lord, setting forth to His disciples, who were eager to learn both, the parable of him who sowed good seed in his field, and the sowing of tares, which the evil one undertook while men slept, says: "He that sows the good seed is the Son of man, and the field is the world" (Matt. XIII, 37). The one whom He called "His field" in the outline of the parable, He calls "the world" in the explanation, and by this very fact He manifests that it is not another’s, but His own terrestrial world, in which, present in the body, He sowed the word of salvation. ^C When, therefore, Truth says that the world is His, while the evil one also claims to have all kingdoms subject to him, and boasts of it—yet these men with their reckless tongues steal Him away from the common Creator and Maker and assign Him to the devil—do they not turn the truth into a lie, and adorn the author of lies with the glory of truth and other virtues, robbing the Lord of His own possession, and, joining themselves to the plunderer, appoint the apostate, the scoundrel, and the ungrateful one to be the lord of his fellow servants? And how shall those see the true and philanthropic Lord, who have acted as partners and servants, or rather as ringleaders, of that tyranny? And if the fields and the world ^D were not of our good and philanthropic Savior, but rather the evil principle apportioned their dominion, how, in the distribution of the reward in the present life, does He not take away the fields and other things that pertain to sensible creation from those who have left houses and fields and the most precious rewards of natural kinship for the sake of His name? Rather, He even encompasses them with a hundredfold gift and gives it back to them, they whose inheritance is eternal life; and He honors these, His fervent lovers, whose creation—if it had been evil—would have extinguished their very love for Him; and how does He make those things a part of the reward to be repaid, which they did not even possess from the beginning