On the Theophany

EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA: FRAGMENTS OF THE WORK ON THE THEOPHANY

^A [(1)] [(2)] Just as, to take an example from ourselves: the mind within us is invisible and hidden—whatever it may be, and of whatever essence it consists—and no man has ever known it. Yet, like a king seated deep within his secret chambers, it deliberates upon what is to be done. Then, a word proceeds from it, generated from the hidden recesses of the father, resembling an only-begotten; and this word becomes the first messenger to all of the father’s thoughts, and clearly proclaims the counsels pondered by the father in secret, and brings the deliberations to completion by its deeds, proceeding to the ears of all. Yet, while men benefit from the word, no one has ever seen with their eyes the hidden and invisible mind, the father of the word. In this same way—or rather, beyond every image and example—the perfect Word of the all-sovereign God, as an only-begotten, exists not by any faculty of utterance, nor is He composed of syllables, nouns, and verbs, nor is He signified by a voice striking through the air. Rather, as the living and active Son-Word of the God who is over all, existing substantially as the power of God and the wisdom of God, He proceeds from the paternal divinity. He is the good offspring of a good father, self-life, self-light, the intellectual offspring of the eternal light, passing through all things, being in all things, and pervading all.

^{C B} [(3)] This one, whom we call God, became known and was proclaimed of old by the voices of the prophets many ages ago; they, having anticipated the place of His theophany, and the times of His coming, and the manner of His life, and His powers, and His words, and the great things He would accomplish, recorded them in sacred books [(4)]. For the name "Jesus" is most appropriate for healing and salvation; for the Hebrew language is accustomed to call "Savior" and "salutary" by the name Jesus.

[G] [(5)] And that famous death [(6)], which the image of the Word is confessed by all to have endured, is not

^A without any great prodigy, and had nothing in common with those of others. For Christ was not destroyed by disease, nor by a noose, nor by fire, nor in the very trophy of the cross was he cut down by iron like the other criminals; nor, having suffered anything mortal from any man, did he undergo a violent death. But he only released his instrument to those plotting against him at the time that he himself willingly surrendered it, and soon raised it up from the earth. Indeed, crying out with a loud voice and saying that he was commending his spirit to the Father, he himself, by his own act, departed from his body. For this reason, even before his death, he had signified this to his own acquaintances, saying: "No one takes my life from me, but I lay it down of my own accord; I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it up again" 87. ^B

What, then, remains after these things, except to relate the head of the whole matter, what cause it had, I mean, the renowned end of his life and the manner of his passion, as well as the great miracle of his resurrection after death? For if, in some other way, after his conversation among men, he had suddenly departed unseen, secretly withdrawing himself and his own bodily image, striving to avoid death by flight, and then had allowed the mortal part to be consumed by corruption and destruction, such an event would have seemed like a phantom to all. He would not have acted in accordance with his dignity, being the living Word and Power of God; nor would it have been known where he had gone, nor would it have been verified by those who had not received it, nor would he have appeared naturally stronger than death, nor would he have liberated his own nature from mortality, nor would the matter have been heard of throughout the habitable world of men, nor would he have persuaded his disciples to despise death, nor would he have offered to those following his teaching the hope of life with God after death, nor would he have fulfilled the promises of his words, nor would he have provided an outcome consistent with the prophetic predictions about him, nor would he have engaged in the final conflict of all, namely, the one against death 8.

^C For all these causes, because it was absolutely necessary that the mortal instrument, after rendering sufficient service to the Word of God, should attain an end worthy of God, therefore, I say, he chose such a kind of death. For since there were only two possibilities of completion, ^D namely, either to surrender everything to corruption and destruction, and thus make the end of life most disgraceful, or to show himself superior to death by demonstrating, through divine power, the mortal to be immortal; the former method was foreign to his promises. For it is not the nature of fire to grow cold, nor of light to be darkened, nor of life to die, nor of divine wisdom to act foolishly. For why, then, would he who offers life to others,

^A be willing to see his own instrument suffer corruption? Therefore, the latter mode was necessary, I mean for him to show himself superior to death. But by what means was it necessary to accomplish this? Secretly and by stealth? Or splendidly and manifestly before all? Yet if this noble work had been done in darkness and secretly, with no one aware, it would have profited nothing; but on the contrary, if it were famous and heard by all, it would produce universal benefit through the miracle. Rightly, therefore, since it was necessary that his instrument appear superior to death, and that he perform this not in hiddenness, but before the eyes of men, he does not flee from death—for he would have been a coward and considered weaker than death—but through an encounter with death, as if with an adversary, he presented the mortal as immortal, taking upon himself this final struggle for the salvation and immortality of all.

For his first struggle was against demons for the destruction of polytheistic error; but when the struggle against them had reached its end, a second struggle ensued for the dissolution of the dominion of death. For the demons assembled against him, and their leader, after having turned their backs in the first battle against him, were waiting for the second, expecting the final catastrophe of his life and looking for the end of his mortal body to be like that of all other men: for they would never have expected a mortal nature to be superior to death. But he, after his first trophies won against demons, was now arrayed against death itself. ^B And just as if someone wished to demonstrate to us a vessel that was fireproof and superior in its nature to fire, he would prove this wondrous thing in no other way than by committing what he had in his hands to the fire, and then withdrawing it safe and inviolate from the fire; so also, the Word of God, who gives life to all things, wishing to show that the mortal instrument he had used for the salvation of men was stronger than death, took the very useful counsel to abandon the body for a short time, and then to snatch what was dead away from death, that he might demonstrate divine power. And this was, then, the first cause.

^C The second cause was to show that divine power had dwelt in his body. For since men had previously deified mortal men who had been overcome by death and had met a common end, and had called them heroes and gods, he deservedly teaches us to confess that only the One who is in death is the true God, who had adorned himself with the prizes of the victory won over death. ^D The third cause for the death of the Savior should be taken…

^A from the mystical words which the hidden accounts contain. What are these? It was a sacrifice, ^B a ransom for the common race, which was handed over to death; a sacrifice offered up on behalf of the common flock of mankind, an averter of satanic deception. For upon this being brought forward, every power of the unholy demons was henceforth overthrown, and all deception was done away with. Therefore, this saving victim from among men—the very bodily instrument of the Word itself—was consecrated on behalf of men; regarding which the words of the sacred writings cry out: at one time, "Behold the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world"; at another time, "He was led as a sheep to the slaughter." And they teach the cause of this by adding: "He bears our sins and suffers on our behalf, and we considered him to be in injury and in affliction. But he was wounded for our iniquities, and he has been weakened for our sins. The discipline of our peace was upon him; by his stripes we were healed. All of us like sheep have gone astray, each one has wandered from his own way; and the Lord delivered him for our sins." The ^C bodily instrument of the Word, then, was consecrated for these reasons. But the great high priest, being distinct from the victim—namely, the Word of God, and the power, and the wisdom—did not for long call back the mortal one from death; and he presented this one as the firstfruits of our common salvation, a partaker of divine life and immortality, a trophy of victory against death and against the satanic host, and an averter of the sacrifices of old, having raised this up on behalf of all mankind. [Wherefore he was also called Christ.] For the name Christ would signify both priesthood and kingship among the Hebrews; for these were the ones who used to be anointed.

(18) Besides the aforesaid, there also existed another greatest cause why the Savior should die, which shall now be spoken of. For since it was necessary that his own disciples should see with their own eyes the manifest restoration of life after death—upon which he had taught them to hang their hopes, and because of which he had exhorted them to submit to the yoke of religion—he quite rightly set this reality before their eyes to be ^D clearly seen. For it was necessary that those who were about to undertake a pious life should first grasp this most necessary lesson through evident sight; and much more so those who were on the point of preaching throughout the whole world, and the teaching set forth by him to all the nations.

^A Since it was necessary for the disciples to have the greatest confidence regarding life being recovered after death, so that, intrepid and fearless of death, they might eagerly undertake the struggle against the error of polytheism. For had they not been trained to despise death, they would never have prepared themselves against terrible things. Wherefore, of necessity, arming them against the power of death, He did not deliver the teaching by mere words and sounds, nor did He discourse on the immortality of the soul in the manner of human arguments through probabilities, but by the very deed He showed them the trophies won over death.

^B Sane indeed was that destruction of the mortal race, death, formerly terrible to all, and the power of it was thought to be the dissolution of the whole nature of man, both of soul and body; nor was there anyone from all ages who could remove this fright from men, and all, small and great, were struck with the fear of death; nor was there any solace for this evil for men, neither discourse, nor manner of life, nor way of living, nor the reasoning of the wise, nor the writings of the ancients, nor the oracles of the prophets, nor the appearances of angels; but death, stronger and superior to all, held the victory over all, lofty, boastful, proud; to whom the mortal race being enslaved, wallowed in all kinds of lawlessness, murders, impious deeds, irreligion, and manifold error. For death was the cause of all these things. For as if they were to be nothing after death, they spent their lives doing things worthy of ten thousand deaths; and as if they were not at all subject to judgment because of the dissolution caused by death, they lived a life without restraint.

^C Whom the Word taking pity on, hastened to their defense; then, as a most benevolent king, He contrived the refutation of death through human nature; although He Himself is Life, and the Word of God, and the Power of God; yet He did not decide to expose the fright of men without the very humanity which He was aiding. Wherefore, using a human weapon, even a mortal body, the Incorporeal One overcame death through that which is mortal; and He manifested a great miracle to all, setting up the trophy of immortality against death by means of mortal weapons. For He delivered His mortal part to the voracious beast, which was immediately nailed to the wood, so that the mortal nature of His body might be recognized by all, and the thing done might escape no one, neither man nor demon. For it was necessary that all should see accurately Him who ^D was dying, confessing His own nature, as in a great theater; so that afterwards the oncoming death, as a dire beast, might prove what it itself was, and then the power of Life, coming after death, might again present to all the victory over death, having shown by proof that the mortal is immortal.

^A For a short time, the power of the Word of God permitted this body to be under the sway of death; but that which hung upon the tree was immediately dead; yet the life-giving Word himself was not dead; it was the mortal that confessed its own nature—though the life-giving Word was not by this rendered extinct.

He was committed to a sepulcher according to the laws of men. This sepulcher was a cave newly hewn in the rock, having as yet experienced no corpse, for it was fitting that the single chamber should serve for one unique dead person. It was a marvelous sight, a stone standing alone in a spacious place, having a single interior vault; for if it had received many bodies, the miracle of Him who overcame death might have been obscured. There lay the deceased, He who was the instrument of the living Word; a huge stone closed the cave. Death, meanwhile, boasted marvelously, as if it had overcome Him no differently than the others from all time. But the three-day period had not yet passed, and Life again presented itself to be seen, after a sufficient demonstration of death. For had He risen more quickly, He would not even have been believed to have died. But because He was truly lifted up, and truly had died, and had truly endured death for an interval of time, then indeed the life-giving Word of God revealed for all men in Him the entire hope set before them, through the resurrection of Him who had been so dead. ^B [And when His body had been taken down by His acquaintances and committed to a fitting burial, after three days He took it up again for Himself; and again He showed Himself to His own disciples, incarnate and embodied, just as He was before; with whom having conversed for a short while, and having spent some time, He ascended to where He had come from, making His journey into the heavens as they watched.] ^C What then follows these things? I should no longer be the narrator of these events to you; but those who saw them, these must be the reliable witnesses of the whole matter; who by their blood and the cost of their own lives confirmed the truth of the deeds they had witnessed, and filled the whole world with the religion which they themselves preached. These, then, confirmed by their own testimony the resurrection which they had beheld with their own eyes. For they did not learn of these things merely through words and voice, the things of which they stood as witnesses, but they had contemplated them while they were happening, and indeed had touched them with their hands. Wherefore, having obtained evidence both by their eyes and by the reality of the matter, and having seen the trophies of the victory won over death, they deservedly learned to despise death; and they taught the same to their own ^D

^A peoples, since they had received from the Savior certain proofs of immortal life.

IV.

There was a certain nobleman in the Roman army, holding rank and authority; and when his beloved servant lay at home suffering from paralysis, being conscious of the kind of prodigies the Savior had displayed toward others—healing the sick and driving away every disease and every infirmity—and reckoning in his mind that a miracle of this kind was not human, he approached Him as God, not looking at the visible organ of the body through which He held converse with men, but rather at the invisible God who was manifesting His own virtue in human form. Wherefore he himself also entreated that he might obtain divine beneficence for his boy. And while the elders of the Jews requested the favor for a trivial reason—namely, because he had provided expenses for their synagogue—the Lord did not grant Himself for this reason, but for a much greater one: desiring to establish faith in His power among all men; and wishing both to bestow a gift upon the centurion, who was well-disposed, and through him to lead others toward the faith. Nor was He in any way ignorant of the future, that the centurion would ask Him to refrain from reaching his house; but knowing of the request that would come from his humility, He assents to the faithful petition, adapting His will to each movement of the man: to the petition, the promise and the following; to the request to refrain, the power so that He might heal even without being present. Thus, in order to show His own foreknowledge, He would not have hindered [the centurion's] virtue, which would have been unjust; but without pride, in human fashion, as if He were ignorant of the future, He followed the centurion, so that He might leave room for his pious response and intention, and grant health from afar to one who requested it.^B

Such are the acts of the meek Savior, even more admirable than the power of his prodigies; for He was no less wonderful in these things than when He drove away disease and warded off death. With what power did the voice of the Savior go forth, and with how much virtue was it filled! And how great was His philanthropy and readiness for beneficence, in that He announced His coming as though prepared! And the wonder of the beneficence itself—it is not possible to conceive of it worthily. For to speak only, and at the same time with the word to grant healing to the centurion's boy, and to deliver him at once from sickness when he was held on the very threshold of death—how does this not demonstrate that it was truly God speaking through a human voice? He is not present, and yet He acts as if He were; for between the words and the deeds of God there is no interval. Nor did the praise bestowed on the centurion remain merely in words, but He also restored the sick boy to health on account of his faith, and thus wove for him a brilliant crown. For He spoke, and immediately the works accompanied [His word].^CD

and the boy was healed forthwith.

But if anyone is incredulous regarding this on account of the magnitude of the miracle, he could not reasonably cast doubt upon the prediction, by which a clearer demonstration of the fact is established, if one should take into account that at that time only one Roman, the centurion ^B who had approached the Savior, had displayed a confession towards Him greater and more grateful than that of the Jewish nation. Our Savior, however, predicts that instead of one, many would come to Him from the regions of the rising and the setting sun, who, by reason of their knowledge of and confession of Christ, would be counted worthy of the same honor before God as the ancestors of the Hebrews. For even their patriarch, that celebrated Abraham, having sprung from irreligious parents, changed his life, withdrawing from the error of polytheism and acknowledging the one universal God. Moreover, He predicted that there would be countless others like his sons, Isaac and Jacob, throughout the whole world, and especially the nations of the East and those dwelling at the setting of the ^C sun. And He adds to these the greatest of His predictions: that the Jews themselves, the descendants of those men beloved by God, who boasted of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because of their own madness and disbelief towards God—as if deprived of the light of knowledge—would be driven out into the outer darkness, thus predicting their ignorance, their utter lack of understanding, and their deprivation of the saving light. From this, one must observe the outcome of events and contemplate with one's own eyes how the Jews, who boast of being the offspring of said men beloved by God, have been cast out not only from the kingdom of God, but also from their own sacred and royal metropolis; whereas, in the example of the one centurion who once ^D approached the Savior, a countless multitude of men from all nations has likewise been joined to Christ, having been taught by Him to acknowledge the same God as those glorious men among the Hebrews, having been deemed worthy of the same reward from the King of all, God.

V. The Lord commands Peter to cast his nets for the catch; and he obeys the command. But when they had enclosed a great multitude of fish, and the nets, burdened by the weight, were tearing, they ask for help from the neighboring boat; and thus, having pulled up the fish, they filled both boats, so that they were in danger of sinking. Wherefore, Peter, struck with wonder, confessed himself unworthy that the Savior should come to him. But He, who had shown him an image of the time to come, also provides the interpretation, and says to him: "Do not fear; from henceforth you shall be catching men alive." And to all at once: "Come after me, and I will make you fishers of men." Galilean men, lowly rustics, knowing nothing but the Syriac dialect, by the art of

and applying themselves to ^A the humble craft of fishing, our Savior reasonably promised to make them hunters of men and heralds of his own teaching. And he did so, not failing in his promise, but manifesting God’s power, which is effectively operative in the matter. For if he had taken certain learned and wise men, or even those from among the Jews who were of noble birth and wealthy, and had used them as teachers of his own words, it might have been imagined as a more human endeavor; for in this way most men are accustomed to be swayed—either won over by money by the rich, or deceived by the outward appearance of words and the illusions of wisdom, or awestruck by the prominence of celebrated persons. But because Jesus did not use such disciples, but on the contrary, used men ^B who were poor and obscure, unlettered as to their learning, Syrians in their language, humble in their appearance, and vile in their work, it was evident that he was employing only the divine power. This he demonstrated first of all when, with but one utterance, he called them and established them as his followers, and then promised that he would make them captors and fishers of men, so that in place of the nets they then held, they might take from him the dragnet woven from all the Mosaic and prophetic words, and from his own divine teaching, and cast it into the sea of human life, to encompass as many as they might find, filling their own rational nets with every kind of rational fish.

But these things, heard through the voice, were words and sounds, and nothing more; yet the work of the divine power he set forth not long after. He fulfilled these very things that were fore-announced by his words with deeds, so that in a short time he acquired the whole inhabited human world, and an innumerable ^C multitude of those captured by these unlettered men, and all places were filled with churches of both Greeks and barbarians, because of that one promise of the divine voice, by which he promised not that he would teach his disciples, but that he would himself make them fishers of men. Thus, he not only foresaw or predicted the future, but also proved to be the creator of so great an achievement; he said it with his word, and he brought it to pass with his deed, and he foreshadowed the future through a symbol and image, and simultaneously perfected it through the efficacy itself. For those disciples, who formerly labored in the darkness of the light of truth and in the night lacking the knowledge of God, and who had been unable to catch anyone for salvation, he illuminated with his own light, and placing them in the day and in the light, he commanded them not to trust in their own skill, but in his word, to cast their nets into the deep. And they gathered such a multitude of fish that their fishing gear began to break, and the boats were in danger ^D of sinking from the heavy weight.

And when these things, ordered in such a way, brought Peter into no small amazement and fear, the Savior said to him: "Let not these things disturb you greatly; for these are still mere play and images of things to come; the fish indeed are mute and irrational, and these boats...

^A are constructed of inanimate material; but their archetypes are not such as these. A little later, or rather from this moment and henceforward, you shall be catching men, having departed from this toilsome and fruitless fishing, and becoming a hunter of rational beings instead of irrational ones; and no longer out of the depths of the sea, but out of the salty bitterness of life, and out of the dark recesses of impiety and wickedness, you shall draw up into the intelligible light and pure air those who will be hunted by you; or rather, you shall catch them alive, to the end that you may bring to them life and not death. For the fish of the ocean, living previously in darkness and in the abyss, perish as soon as they partake of light and air; but men, who shall be hunted by you, transitioning from the darkness of ignorance into a divine life, shall be caught alive. Therefore, from now on you shall be catching men."

(44) The Savior predicted these things by divine power, and the same [Savior] proved them faithful and true by His deeds; that is to say, that famous caster of the net, the fisherman, the Syrian, instead of the hunting of fish, caught so many myriads of men in the nets of ineffable doctrine woven by divine power that they cannot be comprehended ^B by number. The things that appeared are demonstrations of the arcana. For those things which the wide age of the world did not bring forth before the manifestation of God the Savior; which neither Moses, the lawgiver of the Hebrews, nor the prophets of God after Moses, laboring much through the whole night before the epiphany of Christ, were able to accomplish—these things did the Galilean, the poor man, the barbarian in speech (46), that very Peter himself accomplish. And proofs of the things then performed by Peter are the Churches shining even now, filled with rational fish much more than those boats were with irrational ones; such as is the one in Caesarea of Palestine, such as the one in Antioch of Syria, such as the one in the very city of the Romans (47); for it is recorded in memory that Peter himself established these Churches and all the ones around them (48), and that he established those in Egypt and in Alexandria itself, not, however, by himself, but through Mark, who had been taught by him. For he himself was occupied about Italy and all the nations around it (49), but he appointed his own alumnus, Mark, as teacher and netter for the people of Egypt. ^C

^A Similar to the acts of Peter, if one but turns his mind to it, he will find the acts of the rest of the Savior’s disciples, whom, having promised to make fishers of men, He demonstrated by deed to be the truth of His word. For even unto this day the same One works and performs, being present everywhere and filling His rational nets [(50)] throughout the whole world of human habitation with every kind of rational fish, both Greeks and barbarians, drawing up their souls from the abyss of wickedness and from the darkness of atheism, and raising them to the light of the divine knowledge delivered by Him. Thus also concerning ^B John, son of Zebedee, whom, having seen when he was mending his nets in the fishing along with his father and brother, He bestowed upon him the same calling and promise; his name shines throughout the whole world, and his words enlighten the souls of men through the Scripture of the Gospel delivered by him, which, having been translated into every Greek and barbarian tongue [(51)], is preached to the ears of all nations every day.

§ 1. Because it is said in prophecies regarding His own person: *Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations for thine inheritance, and the ends of the earth for thy possession* (Ps. II, 8), therefore, as if the prophetic testimony were now brought to effect, He says to His own disciples, according to Matthew (Matt. XXVII, 18): *All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth*; and according to Luke (Luc. XXIV, 47), that it behooves *repentance and remission of sins to be preached in his name among all nations*. For He possessed dominion over the heavenly things from eternity; but of the earthly, He says that the authority is now given to Him. ^C For of old, as Moses testifies (Deut. XXXII, 8), the care of the inhabitants of the earth was committed to the angels of God; but when the human race had declined into the error of polytheism, and none of those set over the angels could provide any help in this matter, then the Savior of all Himself, by His own divine manifestation, after the victory won over death, teaches that the authority over the nations on earth is no longer given to angels, but to Himself from the Father. Wherefore He commanded His disciples, not before, but now, to go around and disciple all nations. Necessarily He adds the mystery of ^D purification; for it was fitting that those who turned from the nations should be purified from every stain and pollution by His power, from diabolical and idolatrous error and all abominations of old.

^A and newly converted from a licentious and lawless life. And He exhorts them to teach them—after their purification, which was accomplished by the power of His mystical teaching—not the Jewish precepts, nor the Mosaic ordinances, but whatever He Himself had commanded them to observe. These things, indeed, all of them—as they went about through the nations—unanimously delivered to the Churches established throughout the whole world. And as was necessary, He encourages them and makes them readier to go out like hunters to the nations and to instruct the whole human race, adding the promise: *Behold, I am with you;* and according to Luke, promising the Spirit. By this word of the promise, He added the work, ^B and by His divine power being present with each, breathing and working with them, He confirmed the success of the undertaking, and established them as teachers of the religion delivered by Himself to all the nations.

2. Encouraged by this promise, they fulfilled His words in deed; at once, delaying nothing, with all readiness they sped forth to the instruction of the nations. By the very event of the matter they were persuaded, seeing with their eyes Him living who had shortly before been put to death, and whom, because of what had happened, they had denied with an oath. Him, I say, seeing evidently and personally present, and speaking in his accustomed manner, and promising the things we have already mentioned: to such an extent that they knew they could not fall away from what was promised, on account of the appearance offered to their eyes. For if these things had not been so, they would surely have been sluggish toward those commands, conscious of their own rusticity and the simplicity of their language, on account of which they might perhaps have refused the task; ^C rightly reflecting that it was impossible for men of the Syrian tongue, and knowing nothing beyond the fisherman's craft, to be established as teachers of Greeks and Romans, Egyptians and Persians, and the other barbarian nations at once, and to legislate before lawmakers and kings, in opposition to the opinions concerning the primary gods that had existed throughout all ages. But it was not permitted them to dwell on these things, since they had heard the voice of God saying to them, *Behold, I am with you,* and had seen clearly the divinity of the Speaker who appeared superior to death; wherefore, a fear of disobedience came upon them. Hence they went forth to meet the dangers, having received from the Master the pledge of a life to be lived after death; and with great courage they traversed all the nations, confirming by their deeds the promises of their Master, ^D to whom He also said: *But you are witnesses of these things,* namely, of the death and the resurrection.

(55-56) 3. Since, therefore, He had once declared that repentance must be preached in His name to all the nations, if the deeds had not followed the words, we would not believe even that He had risen from the dead. But if, even to this day, the prediction is still coming to pass in reality, [index: entries preserved]

^A and we behold His word living and active throughout the whole world, it follows that we should not withhold faith even from the Author of the word. For he whose power is seen to be living and active, it is absolutely necessary that he should be living all the more, and that he should possess the life of God, he whose living works are shown to be in harmony with his words. Therefore, His words have reached the hearing of all the varied nations, being translated and explained into every language, whether Greek or barbarian, so that His teaching might become widely known to all nations, in order that ^B countless multitudes, who formerly lived impiously and shamefully in the error of polytheism and the worship of idols, might be brought to conversion and repentance. And He does not command that remission should be preached first and repentance afterwards, but repentance first, and then remission. For to those who show true repentance for their former sins, the Savior’s grace bestows the forgiveness of what has been done; for whose sake He also accepted death, offering Himself as a ransom and a substitute for those who are to be saved through Him. Thus, indeed, His disciples, men who were ignorant of languages and altogether unlettered, being poor and of humble appearance, ^C emboldened by the power of Him whom they had seen after His death, and who had manifestly dwelt with them, beginning from the city of Jerusalem according to His commands—so that the incredulous Jews might be left without excuse—went forth to all the nations and performed what was commanded, preaching repentance to all and the loosing of their former soul-entanglements.

VI.

^C When, therefore, the princes of the Jewish nation, the high priests and the teachers of the law, were gathered at Jerusalem, and Christ was spending His time in the temple itself, He foretold in an obscure manner through a parable the wickedness that was about to be perpetrated against Him by them, and the final punishment that would overtake them for their audacity: "There was a householder who planted a vineyard, and set a fence around it, and dug a winepress in it, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went ^D abroad. And when the time of the fruits approached, he sent his servants to the husbandmen to receive his fruits. And the husbandmen, having seized his servants, beat one, killed another, and stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first, and they did to them likewise. Finally, he sent his son to them, saying: They will respect my son. But the husbandmen, seeing the son, said among themselves: This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize his inheritance. And having seized him, they cast him out of the vineyard, and killed him. When, therefore, the lord of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those husbandmen? They say to him: He will miserably destroy the wicked, and will hand over his vineyard to other husbandmen, who will render him the fruit in due

seasons. Jesus says to them: Have you never read in the Scriptures, "The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner? By the Lord was this done, and it is wonderful in our eyes"? Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken away from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof.

This parable is akin to that which is written in Isaiah, which takes this form: "A vineyard was planted for the beloved in a horn, in a fertile place; and I made a hedge about it, and I hedged it in, and I planted it, and I built a tower, and I dug a winepress, and I expected it to bring forth grapes, but it brought forth thorns." But the one in the prophet is a rebuke concerning the vineyard itself; and he also interpreted what it was, saying, "For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel." ^B But the Savior's parable, though told similarly to that one so that it might be clearly understood by those present and listening, is not in fact spoken about the vineyard, since the prophet had already anticipated the prediction concerning it. But those things which were passed over by the prophet, the Savior sets forth in the parable; I mean the matters regarding the husbandmen of the vineyard. These were the elders of the people and the chief priests, the rulers and teachers; they who have been the cause for the multitude of the producing of evil fruits; for whose sake the vineyard has been left desolate, that is, their present nation, and its hedge has been pulled down—those, clearly, who had long fought for the nation and kept the people along with the place itself; and the tower within it, that was the Temple; and the winepress, the altar. All these things were utterly razed from their foundations because of the slaughter committed ^C by the husbandmen, who killed the slaves sent to them once and again, those namely, the prophets at various times.

The ancient Scripture also bears witness to this account; for the prophet Elijah also, in his prayer to God, says: "Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and have dug down thine altars, and I am left alone, and they seek to take my life." Thus does the prophet, through his prayer, accuse the rulers of the Jewish nation. And they, not content with the slaughter of the prophets, afterward killed the Son himself, not in ignorance, but well-knowing and fully aware that he was the heir.

^D These things the Savior, before his passion, was hinting at concerning himself, anticipating the future through his foreknowledge. And he says these things while tarrying in the Temple to those husbandmen of the vineyard who were his contemporaries, to those presiding over the people; very clearly preparing them through the parable to pass judgment against themselves, not yet understanding that it was spoken about them. For this reason he also spoke through a parable, so that they themselves might bring forth the verdict; which is what also happened in the case of

^A David, when he judged Nathan’s parable. But when they understood what had been said, they then said, "God forbid." Now, Matthew has already recorded this [*] for the third time through three parables of the vineyard. In the first, he indicated the various callings of those who came to work in the vineyard, to all of whom he gave an equal wage of a denarius. ^B In the second, he alluded to the calling of the two sons: the one who refused at first, but finally showed obedience and worked in the vineyard; and the one who acted with the opposite intent. By the present parable, however, the Word teaches a complete transfer of the vineyard from the first laborers to others, and makes known the cause of the transfer. It seems to me, moreover, that the vineyard was transferred from the son who promised to work but did not apply his words to deeds, and was given to the one who initially refused but in the end showed his compliance by his deeds.

^C It would be a clearer discourse if we were to interpret the vineyard as the godly way of life that is proper to the kingdom of God: and thus, we would believe the former laborers, who did not justly perform their work in it, to be the Jews, who were the first to be deemed worthy of being enlightened by the divine knowledge—these being identical to the son who is reproved. The later laborers, who rendered the due fruit in its proper season, we would consider to be the Gentiles who, through Christ, received the knowledge of God, and who turned out to be like the son who testified to his obedience and submission to his father by his actions. ^D Now, the cause for the vineyard being taken from the former ones, since it was not stated in the parable of the two sons, was necessarily brought forward through the one at hand. This was that they did not return the fruits to the householder at the proper time; and not only this, but that they even plotted against the servants who were sent to collect the fruits; and not only this, but that they even dared to lay hands upon the son; whom, although they recognized and confessed to be the son of the householder, they nevertheless killed, having employed an impious rationale. The Savior recounted the first of the three parables of the vineyard to his own disciples while he was staying with them in Galilee; wherefore he introduced all men as laborers, called at different hours, who all obey and receive the same wage. The second, he spoke while in Jerusalem, teaching inside the temple itself, to the high priests and the elders of the people, with great boldness, saying in a reproving manner to them that publicans and harlots would go before them into the kingdom of heaven. And finally, he necessarily brought forth the third one to the same people, explaining the causes on account of which

which the kingdom of heaven was snatched, being about to be transferred to others: and He recounted three causes in all; the first, concerning the fruits which the wicked husbandmen refused: for they did not do what was commanded, but violated the laws given to them. The second cause, He said, was the crimes against the prophets: for these were the ^A servants of God sent beforehand. The third cause, finally, He brought forward was the slaying of the son of the householder. Wherefore, the penalty for all the blood shed shall be required of them, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah.

These things, cast into the face of the high priests and elders, created no small disgrace for them. Wherefore one might admire the Savior, who, beyond other things, also exerted power of speech with great authority, and like a judge, most wisely decreed their punishment in their presence. Now, this parable of our Savior ^B corresponds, as has been said, to that of Isaiah. But yet, the prophet chides the vineyard, making no mention of the cultivators; whereas the Savior chides the vinedressers, who were standing there and present. These, furthermore, were the rulers and leaders of the people, to whom He pointed out the crime they were about to commit against Him: and He predicted that the vineyard would be taken from them and given to other husbandmen. Then He explained what the vineyard was; namely, He declared that the kingdom of God was to be understood by the name of vineyard: which kingdom of God, through pious religion, had ^C long ago been entrusted to the rulers of the former people. But since these men neither rendered the due fruits, and besides the violation of the law, had stained themselves also with murders, the Savior rightly delivered this judgment against them, saying: "Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation that will produce its fruits." Since, however, He said that they slew (the lord’s son), it might no longer seem that the sequence of the parable allows Him to be the one who will be present for the punishment, with which the evil husbandmen, the murderers of their lord, deserved to be punished. But in truth it is established that He is the same, ^D because He is the Judge.

The Lord is called a stone on account of His earthly body: a stone cut without the ministry of hands, as is reported in the vision of Daniel, on account of His birth from a virgin: for there was no need for Him of human seed, since divine power administered His generation, and He had a mother who was a maiden inexperienced in marriage, who in a new manner among men conceived of the Holy Spirit. He was a stone, not gold nor silver, nor some glorious king, like those who through such symbols were revealed to Daniel.

^A For he was ^B—as I said—vile and abject; wherefore he was called also a stone of stumbling and a rock of scandal. A certain one therefore says: *Thus saith the Lord: Behold I cast into the foundation of Sion a stone, [a stone] precious, elect, corner, honorable; and he that believeth in him shall not be confounded* (Isai. XXVIII, 16). And he cries out: *The stone which the builders rejected* (Psal. CXVII, 22); and, *When they called him a stone of stumbling* (Isai. VIII, 14). But Isaiah makes bold to say that this stone is the Lord himself, defining it thus: *Sanctify the Lord himself; and he shall be your fear. And if you have trusted in him, he shall be to you for a sanctification; and you shall not meet him as a stone of stumbling, nor as a rock of a fall. But the house of Israel is in a snare, and they who dwell in Jerusalem in a pit; therefore they shall be powerless* (Isai. VIII, 13-14). For whom Symmachus translated more clearly: *Sanctify the Lord of hosts himself; and he shall be your fear and your strength, and he shall be for a sanctification; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of scandal to the two houses of Israel, for a snare and for a scandal to him who dwells in Jerusalem.* And at this place consider how he says that the Lord of hosts himself shall be for a sanctification to those trusting in him, but not as a stone of stumbling and as a rock of a fall. But he teaches that to those not trusting in him, he is seen to be a stone of stumbling and a rock of a fall. And who these are, he prophesies, clearly showing them to be such of the circumcision as rose up against Christ. ^C The Savior was also in another way a stone, because he was laid as an immovable and stony foundation beneath the whole edifice of a life lived according to God. *Other foundation*, says the divine Apostle, *no man can lay but that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ* (I Cor. III, 11). And again: *And the rock was Christ* (I Cor. X, 4). Therefore he was himself the stone and the rock and the foundation of the life lived according to God; a corner stone, elect, honorable, not confounding any who have hoped and believed in him. Yet the same stone was also a stone of stumbling and a rock of scandal on account of the passion, in which it happened that the unbelieving stumbled; and it is the stone which the builders rejected. He confirms this interpretation himself through the parable, introducing a vineyard and husbandmen, and servants sent first and then others, who were treated with injury by the husbandmen; and finally a beloved Son, sent by the Father and killed by the impious husbandmen. After which parable he adds what it is that: *The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner* (Psal. CXVII, 22).

VII.

Since however the Word of God also uttered an oracle regarding this place, let us observe his own words concerning this matter. ^D Since they of the Jews, not enduring his reverend teaching, nor his prophecy, nor his rebukes with a balanced mind, [misinterpret] the prediction, and not the prophecy.

^A The rulers were bringing it about that he should depart from the city. But he, as he departed from Jerusalem, uttered such words against the city: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often have I wished to gather your children, and you would not! Behold, your house is left to you desolate.” By calling the temple and the sanctuary therein no longer God’s house, but their own, he declared it so, for on account of the unspeakable crime to be committed by them in the time that followed—and this was the outrage dared by them against the Savior—it was necessary, indeed, that not only the inhabitants of the city, but the very soil itself, of which they were so proud, should receive the recompense for what the inhabitants had done. This is what they suffered, and not long after, when the Romans attacked the city and, by the law of war, slaughtered some of its inhabitants, led others away as captives, ^B caused others to perish by famine, and drove others away and scattered them into every land, and burned their house and temple, casting it into the uttermost desolation. But because these things happened in later times, the Savior, as God the Word, using his foreknowledge to foresee what would come to pass, predicted it beforehand through the words set before us. He calls the nation of the Jews the children of the city, and their temple he calls their house. Thereafter, he testifies that it was through their own fault that these dire disasters would befall them, since he himself had often wished to bring their children under the yoke of piety, applying through every prophet and in every generation his constant care for them, turning them back and calling them, but they would not heed the call; for which reason he pronounced the judgment against them, saying: “Behold, your house is left to you desolate.” He says most precisely not that the city would be desolate, but the house in it, that is, the temple; which he refuses to acknowledge any longer as his own, or indeed even as God’s house, ^C but says it is their own. And he prophesies that it will be desolate in no other way than by being abandoned by the Providence which formerly watched over it. And truly, the result of the saying is to be wondered at, for the place never underwent such desolation at any other time, not even when, because of their surpassing impieties and idolatries and the murders of the prophets, it was captured by the Babylonians; for the seventy-year period of the desolation of the place came about at that time. Wherefore, it could not rightly have been said to them then, “Your house is left to you desolate,” for it was not abandoned; rather, it enjoyed a visitation shortly afterward, at which time it was deemed worthy of a restoration more glorious than the former, as a certain prophet had predicted, that “the latter glory of this house shall be greater than the former.” But after the utterance of our Savior, the manner in which they were abandoned ^D and how their house fell into the utmost desolation is demonstrated by the very sight of the result to those who visit those places; and the duration of time, having become so many years and so long, is such that it is not merely double the seventy-year desolation…

^A that occurred in Babylon, but four times that amount, as our Savior’s pronouncement confirms.

And that all things relating to the building and the rest of the workmanship of the temple there were sights worthy of admiration, histories reveal; and as a token, some remains are even now preserved, by which the traces of the ancient structures are apprehended. But more wondrous than all is the divine voice of our Savior’s foreknowledge. For as He was walking about the sanctuary, and His disciples were admiring and pointing out to Him the buildings of the enclosure and the magnitude and beauty of the temple itself, He ^B responded appropriately to those who were astonished at the buildings at which they were marveling, saying how not one stone would remain upon a stone that would not be pulled down. For it was necessary, by reason of the deeds that would be dared by the inhabitants, that the place should undergo complete destruction and desolation, seeing that it had become a dwelling-place of impious men. And just as the prophecy has proceeded into deeds, since the entire temple and the enclosure, and the sacred and exceedingly beautiful structures within it, have endured from that time even to the present a desolation beyond all speech; and as it grows with the passage of time, the power of the word devours [the place], so that not even a trace of the foundations appears in certain spots, which it is permitted to him who wishes to examine with his own eyes. And if anyone should say that some parts still remain, one must expect their disappearance as well, with the desolation growing daily and the power of the said prophecy acting upon them forever by an ineffable force. I know that I have heard some interpreting the aforementioned utterance differently; namely, that He did not speak about all the buildings, but about a certain part which His disciples were admiring and pointing out to Him; for it was regarding that part that He had delivered the prophecy.

VIII.

^C 75) Seeing the city, He wept over it, saying: "If you had known, even you, and indeed in this day, the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For days will come upon you, and your enemies will encircle you, and press you in on every side, and will dash you and your children within you to the ground." [The things said above were concerning the temple;] but these were prophesied concerning the city itself, which the Jews used to call the City of God on account of the temple of God founded therein. Indeed, the philanthropic Savior laments the whole city, not so much pitying the buildings or the ground itself as the souls of the former inhabitants ^D and their destruction; but He also sets forth the features of their desolation, saying, "If you had known, even you, in this day, the things that make for peace for you." He signifies, namely, His own advent, which took place for the peace of the whole world. For He is the one of whom it was said: "In His days shall righteousness spring forth, and abundance of peace." 18 For He had indeed come, bringing peace to those near and to those far off; and regarding those who receive Him, He says:

"Peace I leave with you; my peace I give unto you," 18 which very peace the nations who believed in Him throughout the whole world have received. But the circumcised people, not believing in Him, did not recognize the things that made for their peace. Therefore the Savior adds: "But now they are hidden from your eyes; for days will come upon you, and your enemies will surround you." The calamities, then, that were soon to befall them in the siege against them, because they did not receive the peace announced to them—these calamities, I say, were hidden for the time being from their eyes, as they foresaw nothing of the sort. Yet He, by a manifest prophecy, foretold these very things, hinting at the future siege by the Romans and graphically setting forth the rationale of the war itself. And how these things were accomplished, it is possible to learn from the histories of Josephus, who, being a Jew by race and born into the very tribe of Judah, and a man noble and famous among his own people during the times of the siege, recorded each of the events with his pen, showing the results to be in accordance with the aforementioned prophecies. That, therefore, holy and famous Jerusalem fell due to the calamities of war, the event itself bears witness.

IX.

^C "But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains; and those who are in its midst, let them depart; and those who are in the regions, let them not enter into it; because these are days of vengeance, that all things which have been written may be fulfilled. But woe to those who are with child and to those who are nursing in those days! For there shall be great distress upon the earth, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led captive into all nations. And Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the nations, until the times of the nations are fulfilled." 19 By these words the Lord offers signs of that time when that place was to be called to an utter desolation. For no one, He says, after the siege that is to come and the desolation of the place that will follow from it, ^D no one, I say, should expect another restoration; such as happened in the times of Cyrus, king of the Persians, and then also under Antiochus Epiphanes, and finally under Pompey. For often, having suffered military incursions, the city subsequently recovered a greater dignity. But now, know that the final desolation and the total destruction of the city will come upon it when you see it surrounded by armies. By the desolation of Jerusalem, He means the destruction of the temple, and the abolition of the rites which had long been performed there according to the Law of Moses. For do not think that the solitude of the city itself is signified by these words, as if no one would dwell in it ever again. For He says below that it would come to pass that the city would no longer be inhabited by Jews, but by foreigners. By the name of desolation, however,

^A he understands the abandonment of it by its own people, and the end of the performance of sacred rites in the customary manner. That this has indeed happened so, there is no need of many words to confirm. For it is clearly visible to see the Jews scattered everywhere among every nation, while foreigners and those of alien birth reside in the city which was formerly Jerusalem, but is now named Aelia after its captor, Aelius Hadrianus. Therefore, the oracle becomes marvelous because, he says, the Jews will be taken captive and scattered among all nations; but as for the nations, he says that "Jerusalem will be trodden under foot by the nations." ^B Indeed, it is a terrible event! For since the Jews occupy the whole inhabited world, and dwell even among the Ethiopians and the Scythians as far as the ends of the earth, they alone are unable to approach their own city and the place which was once held in religious reverence by them. And if the city were completely devastated and uninhabited by any, perhaps one might suppose this to be the cause of the aforementioned exile; but now, although the place is inhabited by alien and foreign nations, it remains inaccessible to the Jews alone, so that they cannot even set eyes upon their ancestral territory. And this has been accomplished in such a manner, in accordance with the One who said that Jerusalem shall be trodden under foot by the nations.

And demonstrating further that the temple would not be restored, nor would the Jews return to their former manner of life, he adds to his predictions ^C a definition of time, as to how long Jerusalem will be trodden under foot by the nations; for he says, "until the times of the nations be fulfilled," thus signifying the consummation of the age, and the interval of time up to the end. He also signifies the war that was to precede the captivity, saying: "For there shall be great distress upon the earth, and great wrath upon this people, and they shall fall by the edge of the sword." And how these things happened in detail, and how the things foretold by our Savior met with their fulfillment, one may learn from the History of Josephus, who also clearly presents the outcome of our Savior's prediction which said, "Woe to those who are with child and ^D those who give suck in those days!" for he records how women, having roasted their own infants with fire due to the excess of the famine that had seized the city, did eat them.

Foreseeing this very famine that was to come upon the city, the Savior advised His disciples not to flee into the city during the coming siege against the Jews, as if to a safe place guarded by God—which is what many did—but rather to depart from there and to flee to the mountains; and that those who were in the midst of Judea should withdraw to the nations, and that those who were in the country should by no means flee to the fortified citadels, nor

^A believe it prudent to retreat into them, even if the time should seem to demand it; but they should rather consider it a gain to flee, on account of the wrath of God impending over both the temple and the city. For these things would make it clear and beyond all ambiguity for what reason He exhorted them to flee to the mountains, and not to turn back to the cities. Wherefore He says: "And let those who are in the country not enter into it; for these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled," most especially in Daniel. ^B But the "Woe to those who are with child and to those who give suck in those days," regarding the end which occurred at the time of the siege of Jerusalem, Flavius Josephus is a sufficient witness, having accurately recorded the war after the imprecations of our Savior; and how, as the Romans stood by and took the city by siege, myriads of the Jewish nation were cut down by the edge of the sword, while more than those who were killed perished by famine; and that women even roasted their own infants with fire and used them for food because of the overwhelming deprivation. These things happened first under Titus and Vespasian, and afterwards under Hadrian, the Roman emperors, in whose time their ancestral land became completely inaccessible to the Jews, and Jerusalem became trodden down by the nations, so that it had no other inhabitants or citizens than foreigners and aliens, new settlers being established there in place of the former inhabitants. ^C For thenceforth the city was surrounded by arms, and its sanctuary was reduced to the utmost desolation; and finally that abomination of desolation which had been predicted by Daniel the prophet stood in the sanctuary—I mean the bronze image of the victor, which was set up in the midst of the temple.

I have therefore taken care to note these few points out of many on account of the divine prophecy of our Savior, which says, "Woe to those who are with child and to those who give suck in those days!" And since to the other predictions of the Savior this also is added, "There shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people," or according to Matthew, "tribulation such as has never been," it is worth the effort to hear the historian who narrates the outcomes of these things in this way: "It is impossible to recount the crimes of the citizens in detail; but to speak summarily, no other city has suffered such evils, nor has any generation from the foundation of the world existed more fertile in wickedness. ^D The Jews themselves utterly destroyed the city and forced the Romans, though they were unwilling, to carry out a grim victory, and in a way they dragged the fire to the temple, though it was almost hesitating. Indeed, while they saw it being inflamed from the upper city, they neither grieved nor shed tears." These things happened on account of the words, "For there shall be great tribulation," which, having been predicted by the Savior, was testified to by the author as having been fulfilled after forty years, while Vespasian held the Roman empire.

^A Exin the Savior turns his discourse to the time of the consummation, saying: "And there shall be signs in the sun, and moon, and stars." The context of the passage seems confused because it does not strictly distinguish what is said about the siege of the place from those things said about the consummation of the age. However, this obscurity occurs by the providential will of the divine Spirit, in order that these things, which the Savior had secretly entrusted to his disciples alone, might be cautiously withheld from the knowledge of the multitude. Thus, therefore, we should read it, as if it had been stated with a distinction in this manner: "Regarding the consummation of the age, see that no one deceives you; for many will come in my name," and the rest that follows. "But regarding the siege of the place of the end, after which there is no hope of it being rebuilt again, this must be taken as the sign: when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has drawn near," and do what follows upon these things. "But regarding the presence of the Antichrist at the consummation of the age, I say these things to you: 'Then there shall be great tribulation.'" So much for the supposed confusion of this evangelical passage.

(82) These things, ^B related to those which are said to the apostles on the Mount of Olives in Matthew concerning the end of the world, are recounted in Luke as having been spoken before his entry into the city of Jerusalem, while Jesus was staying between Samaria and Galilee. By these words, however, he teaches that no one ought to be carried away by error if, at some time, while the time of the Antichrist is imminent, a rumor spreads concerning him as though Christ had appeared. Therefore he says: "If they say to you, 'Behold, here,' or 'Behold, there,' do not go out, nor follow; for it is impossible that he who once appeared on earth should again make his dwelling in the corners of the earth." If, therefore, a rumor is reported, "Behold, here," or "Behold, there," do not go, nor believe those who say it; for that one will be someone else, and not the true Christ, to whom therefore one must not pay attention. For the greatest sign of the second coming of our Savior will be as lightning, not at all like the many things that are always appearing in some part of the world, but something singular and strange, suddenly pervading the whole world. Therefore he says: "Beaming from one part under the sky to another part under the sky." "So shall it be," he says, "the Son of man in his coming." For ^D indeed he will not proceed clothed in corruptible flesh, and fashioned from blood and bones, nor will he be seen walking on the earth in the manner of an ordinary man, but he will shine forth entirely through and through, showing the light of his divinity to all, since he himself is "the light that enlightens every man coming into the world." Thus, therefore, he teaches that he is to be expected by us. But if they say that someone is on earth, or if one hears of it,

and it is bruited and noised abroad by the many that Christ himself is present in his second coming, “Do not believe it,” he says, “nor go out from your own place.”

The Samaritans, for their part, firmly believed that Dositheus, who came after the time of the Savior, was that prophet promised by the prophecy of Moses; and they were so taken in by his deceits that they judged him to be held in the place of Christ. Others, indeed, in the very age of the Apostles, called Simon Magus the great power of God, thinking him to be Christ; and others in Phrygia did the same with Montanus; and elsewhere in the past, others have thought the same of others. Nor will deceivers come to an end; for many more of this kind are to be expected, who themselves also confirm the truth of the oracles delivered by the Savior.

XI.

^B It is right for us to admire the sincere and veracious character and philosophy of the evangelist Matthew. For he did not begin the earlier part of his life from a holy profession, but from the office of a tax collector and from the pursuit of avarice. And no one of the other evangelists had revealed this to us—not his fellow apostle John, nor Luke, nor Mark, who wrote the other Gospels. Now Luke, having suppressed his present name, employed his ancient appellation. But Matthew himself, publishing his own life and having become his own accuser, writes of himself by name in his own volume in this manner: “And as Jesus was passing by from there, he saw a man sitting at the tax office, Matthew by name.” By these words he was accusing his own wound, so that you might admire the skill of the one who healed it. And advancing further again, and enumerating the catalogue of the other disciples, he himself applies to himself the name of tax collector, not concealing his former way of life on account of his surpassing goodness; and he counts himself among sinners, and records himself as second after his fellow apostle. For in combining himself with Thomas, just as Peter with Andrew, and James with John, and Philip with Bartholomew, he puts Thomas before himself, preferring this fellow apostle to himself as being superior, whereas the other evangelists have done otherwise.

Through these men, however, the error of polytheism was soon overthrown, and the kingdom of God was preached to all. ^D Therefore it was necessary that we should not be ignorant even of their names. The first pair, therefore, is Peter and Andrew, whom we have already stated were fishermen; the second pair is James and John, both born of Zebedee, and these too were fishermen; and next to these were Philip and Bartholomew. But who this Philip was, the evangelist John teaches, when he says that he was

^A from Bethsaida, which was the native town of Andrew and Peter. Bartholomew, indeed, is introduced as a man of simple character, and a stranger to the curiosity and troublesome nature of the many. Matthew, too, had formerly been occupied with the business of the tax collectors. Such were the first heralds of the heavenly kingdom, whom the Savior employed as ministers and deacons of his words, thereby demonstrating that his work was accomplished by divine power, and not by human exertion. For if any other person, intending to appoint legislators, reformers of the world of men, and heralds of piety, had looked to the magnitude of the task, he would certainly have thought them ^B in need of men powerful in speech and deed, or would have chosen those endowed with wisdom and understanding, or wealthy and distinguished men, who might encourage others by bestowing money and persuade them with their speech; who might expertly refute the accepted opinions concerning the gods and establish the knowledge and piety concerning the Creator and Maker of all things by demonstrative arguments. And above all, if he were about to send them out to every nation, he would have taken care to provide them with interpreters of his words, so that they might address each nation in its own tongue and might bring forth their utterance in a way familiar to the hearing of all. But the Savior did not set about this in such a ^C way, because he was not acting according to a human manner.

(87) He chose seventy disciples, just as the number of nations throughout the whole world is said to be. The Scripture of Moses also indicates this while it is compiling the list of the sons of Noah who were born after the flood; from whom were produced all those seventy, whom true history holds to have been the forefathers of the nations over the whole world.

XII.

We, for our part, shall also mention here the prophecy of Daniel, so that we may show that the Roman empire too ^D was arranged according to Him, since He did not display himself in human forms. As, however, through gold, the things concerning Him were pre-ordained and foretold by the Spirit, even as He wrote His laws, not—like Moses—on tablets of stone, but as it were on sacred pillars—the souls of those who knew Him.

^A For it was foretold and announced by the Spirit that Christ would be born under it, who was to destroy all the kingdoms among men, and show His own alone to be reigning over all, and one that admits no end. The oracles, indeed, of the "man of desires" [Daniel] had this subject.

Just as Joseph became the interpreter of the things seen in dreams to the ruler of Egypt of old, so did Daniel make clear to Nebuchodonosor, the ruler of the Chaldeans, the vision—that the image seen by him in his dreams, whose head was golden, whose chest was silver, whose belly was bronze, and whose feet were iron, signified four kingdoms. ^B He himself was the golden head, on account of the vast wealth and luxury of those who had reigned among the Assyrians. Great indeed was this Assyrian empire, for they held Egypt, Libya, and the whole of Asia, and extended their borders even to the region of the Indians. It lasted for long periods of years, beginning from Nimrod and extending down to Nebuchodonosor; nor did it cease before he laid hands upon the temple of God in Jerusalem. For this deed having been performed, the Medes immediately dissolved the Assyrian rule, and Cyrus first transferred the hegemony to the Persians. ^C The Persians, therefore, as the second after the Assyrians, ruled the world most brilliantly and openly; and this was what the second parts of the image, made of silver, signified. Then Alexander the Macedonian supervening fought against the Persian Darius, and having conquered him, transferred the rule to the Macedonians; and these, as the third after the former, became masters of all nations. The third parts of the image, by means of the bronze, indicated them as well; for this material is resonant and capable of sounding far and wide. Such was the Macedonian hegemony, being Greek and of a more refined language. ^D After these, the iron empire was indicated, being mighty and, above all previous ones, strongest; for the nature of iron is accustomed to drive away and overcome the other materials. And what is this, if not the Roman empire, which succeeded the Macedonian? Under this iron empire Christ is born, the stone cut from the mountain, not by iron but without hands; yet to the prophet, it was shown under the forms of irrational and fierce wild beasts.

(90*) Just as the gold represented the vast wealth of the Assyrians, so by the lioness their effeminate and soft life was indicated; the slowness and weight of the Persians, by the bear; but he compared Alexander to a winged leopard on account of the sharpness and mobility of his nature. For in just thirteen years—and not even full ones—while he reigned, he ran through the entire world, swifter than any bird, traversing both Europe and Asia until he touched the ocean itself. But the Romans stripped the Macedonians of their rule, deposing their last king, Perseus; and they subjugated the Syrians through the generals Pompey and Gabinius, and through the same made Asia tributary.

^A Augustus took Cleopatra, the last of them all, having mastered Egypt and Alexandria. From that time the fourth kingdom began to rule altogether, which the visual aspect of the statue named as iron, as it subdued and crushed everything; but the prophet’s vision called it a creature terrible, astonishing, and exceedingly strong. The outcomes of the prophecy bear witness to the statement. The Roman authority alone, in fact, overthrew at once the democracies, the governorships, and the ethnarchies of those who for long ages had been tyrannized by their own rulers in every nation; and it alone established one monarchical dominion over all, under which Christ is also born.

XIII

^A These things the leaders of the Jewish nation, having had them inscribed long ago among themselves as if upon columns within the sacred books, since it was reported to them that John was preaching in the desert and near the Jordan river, compared their predictions with the events and conjectured that he, and no other, was the one indicated by the prophet; and having sent deputies, they asked whether he himself might be the Christ. But he denied it, and confessed that he was not the common Savior of all; but since the one who was expected was already present, he declared himself to be his forerunner, and taught that he himself was nothing other than the voice announcing the Savior. The divine Scripture of the Gospel reveals this: for it says that he confessed he was not the Christ, but a voice crying in the desert, "Prepare the way of the Lord. I baptize with water, but in your midst stands one whom you do not know." Luke likewise narrates the same, that while all were deliberating about John, whether he might be the Christ, John answered, "I indeed baptize you with water, but there comes one stronger than I; he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire." ^B But what is the fire? Truly, the consumption of useless things and the fervor of the Spirit. John (the apostle) held the same opinion, saying, "He came for a testimony, to bear witness to the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but [was sent] to bear witness to the light." But while this man was thus beginning the proclamation, bringing in, in the manner of a voice, the souls of men to the reception of the perfect Word—wherefore Mark rightly taught that he was the beginning of the Gospel—once the voice had become silent, having completed its own role, and had cleared the minds of men with its small light like a morning star, then finally the Only-Begotten and pre-existent Word of God, having become flesh, sent forth his own splendors.

XIV.

^C By the symbol of salt he hints at the virtue of his disciples. For since the nature of salt consists of water and spirit, participating in a small amount of earthly matter, and is accustomed to restrain the flux of corruptible bodies, in such a way that by its prevailing power it even preserves dead bodies; suitably he compares his disciples to the nature of salt, since they too had been born of water and Spirit, and were living entirely by the Spirit, and not living according to the flesh; they were in a certain way like salt, correcting and strengthening the corruptible life of earthly men; and those who drew near to them through the probity of their morals, they were perfecting and bestowing upon them, as it were, a sweet flavor. Therefore

^A Moses also legislated, through symbols, that salt should be offered to God, speaking thus: "And every offering of your sacrifice, with salt, shall be seasoned." And he commanded that these things be done by means of sensible bodies. But the Author of the new laws clearly indicates to us that those who are dear to God are the salt, affirming that these are the guardians of His commandments; to whom He also said face to face: "You are the salt of the earth."

[IE] (96). ^B For He says: "Whoever shall confess Me, him will I also confess before the angels." For just as, in the presence of leaders and kings, the true soldier of my kingdom will openly make his confession regarding Me, so I, in turn, rewarding such a one at the time of My kingdom, will stand as a witness of his pious confession for him, recounting the struggles performed, the alacrity of soul, the endurance, and the perfect love toward God, and the remaining labors of his God-loving service, and will present his defense before My Father who is in heaven; this reward I promise to bestow from now on to My confessors and witnesses, who before all men have openly proclaimed My kingdom. And what could become more blessed than such a promise? What could be better and more glorious than that the Only-begotten Word of God Himself should undertake the confession in our behalf before the divine tribunal; and that He should show the reward of the testimony in deed, becoming present within the very soul ^C of the one who is testified for, and dwelling in him as in a holy temple? This, then, is what He promised, not speaking casually: "I also will confess him." For I am not somewhere outside of the one whom I am confessing, but I dwell in him, and filling him with My divinity, I shall make the confession regarding him through the operation itself by which I work in him.

Furthermore, having emboldened them with good hopes through such a promise, He again turns the same ones back by means of a more fearful threat, saying that, "Him who denies Me, I will deny." And it was necessary that He should also extend this threat to them, so that they might not despise the confession made to Him, but on the contrary, that they might shudder at the denial of His testimony, because of the punishment following it, which was to be denied by the Son of God. ^D To be denied by the Father would be the same as to be denied by the Wisdom of God, and to fall away from life, and to be deprived of the light, and to be cast out from all good things. And to suffer all these things before the Father who is in the heavens, and in the presence of the angels, and to be condemned and cast out of His kingdom as it were at the very divine tribunals—what could be worse than such a final punishment

^A For when the Lord says that He came to cast fire upon the earth, and to send not peace but a division, He taught through these words that He did not come to bring to this life things that are dear or customary to the many, or things that are pleasant. Rather, He came to bring things that to them will be like fire—most searing, consuming every wickedness and malice of the soul as if it were a foreign substance, and, like gold, illuminating every soul that receives His power. By this power, He will without delay, as with a most sharp sword, sever those related to one another by birth, so that He divides sons from parents, daughters from mothers, and daughters-in-law from mothers-in-law, ^B by the rational dart and the divine sword and the divine saving fire, since those among men who are superior are inflamed with heavenly longing, and can no longer bear communion with the wicked. Hence, a civil war is reasonably fanned among them, with wicked fathers rising up against their faithful sons, godless mothers against their temperate daughters, and mothers-in-law likewise against their own daughters-in-law. For He himself causes this, as He holds a selection of human souls and, with invisible and divine power, discerns between them, enrolling those worthy ^C of His grace and calling according to their merit of virtue, and separating the unworthy by their own choice. Having anticipated these things with divine foreknowledge, He explained them to the disciples, testifying to the civil war that was destined to arise because of His words; and how He would kindle fire and cast a sword into houses and among kindreds—His power effectively dividing them from harmful parents and relatives, but joining them to God and uniting the worthy to the kingdom of heaven. For there will be very great difference and conflict between His soldiers and those who live differently, in every house, while some pursue an unrestrained, godless, and hostile manner of life, and others live modestly, properly, and piously. ^D Hence a serious hatred and irreconcilable war will be stirred up in every family. By the term peace, He denotes the knowledge of and friendship with God, which He was winning for His disciples, as well as the tranquility of the soul and the calm and stability of the mind. For that truly is peace which glories in the justice of God and in piety.

Nevertheless, the Savior was ordaining these things, not contradicting the law of Moses which says: Honora

^A your father and your mother, but rather confirming it and sealing it by a better and more perfect commandment, one which bids us love God with all our soul. For while every person is bound by the law of nature to honor father and mother, yet since there is another Father who is better than those who gave us birth—He who even created them—namely, the Word of God Himself, who ordains these present matters, He says that it is not right to pursue our earthly progenitors with an affection greater than that which we owe to the Word who implanted in us our rational part. Rather, we must show them all due honor and appropriate affection, while rendering to God the surpassing and principal worship, loving and cherishing Him above all things. Thus, we should not hesitate for His sake to dissent from impious parents, to be separated from irreligious brothers, and to turn away from sons and daughters, using the most cutting sword of the Word to sever all the natural bonds of these if they ever become an obstacle to a pious disposition toward Him.

Wherefore He precisely said in Matthew: "He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me." For while He indeed left room in these words for affection toward those joined by kin, He did not permit them to be honored more than Himself, nor, out of reverence for a father or mother, or for the sake of the affection one bears toward those most dear, to abjure friendship with God. Instead, we are to love them, as both the law of nature and the divine word demand, yet we must love them only so far as affection toward them does not harm the piety due to God. But if they happen to become an obstacle to the laws of religion, the Father of souls must be preferred; and He was none other than the Word of God Himself, who ordains these things and lays down these laws, namely, that His soldiers must love Him above all those related by race and not prefer to the affection for Him the ties of flesh or bodily kinship.

^B Then, the most cutting sword of God, severing the unworthy from the worthy, would justly divide and separate the pious sons from the impious parents. Likewise, sons and daughters are to be held in value and loved according to the laws of nature, yet not so that for their sake we refuse to confess Him. He uttered a voice threatening the greatest punishment when He said, according to Luke: "He cannot be my disciple," and according to Matthew: "He is not worthy of me." Indeed, He who was saying these things was that very only-begotten Word of God from the beginning, who is life, wisdom, light, and the sum of all good things. Therefore, the phrase "He is not worthy of me" amounts to saying "He will not be worthy of life, nor of any other good thing."

^C Then, strengthening the sinews of our soul and kindling the powers of what I might call a military fortitude according to God, He proceeds to say: "And whoever does not bear his cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple." For He says that it is not only to fathers, mothers, sons, or daughters that we must prefer love for Me, but also to one’s own body and to this whole temporal life. Therefore, the body, which the soul is now clothed in, must be crucified, and as if it were dead...

is included, and it is necessary to crucify it, and to render it as if dead, by nailing down its desires and mortifying them, so that one does not appear to bear around a living flesh, but one that is dead, and is transfixed by divine precepts; so that the soul, being of another substance, incorporeal and intellectual, while raising a victory trophy against its enemies, may appear to carry around the body like a cross, and like a dead instrument, carrying it along, may follow the Reason (or Word), like a noble soldier who carries off the spoils of victory against his enemies. For if he does not follow me in this way, he says, the one becoming my disciple, by mortifying his own body and flesh, and imposing upon himself a cross, as it were, inanimate, he could not be worthy of me, nor could he be a disciple. He represents, therefore, the highest summit of the philosophical way by these words, inviting his disciples, as though they were military men, to ascend to the pinnacle of virtue. ^B

(5) Since he had taught that one ought to esteem his friendship not only more than father and mother and children, but even more than one’s own body; with one thing still remaining, which is even more necessary than the body, that is the soul; stretching his discourse, he spoke also about this: “He who does not hate even his own soul cannot be my disciple.” And according to Matthew: “He who finds his soul will lose it: and he who loses it for my sake, will find it.” For, says the discourse, my concern is not with things outside me, nor with parents and children, but not even with the body itself and this easily corruptible flesh, which I indeed exhort one to care for little, while exhorting one to prize my discourses above all things. But although the soul is more precious than all things, so that no one has anything better, its Creator must be preferred even to this; so that if time should perchance demand that one not spare even this, and deliver it to destruction (to speak hypothetically) for the worship of God, this too must be done without hesitation. For it is possible for God alone to recover and find the soul that has been lost (I speak by hypothesis) for his own sake. For he who first formed it when it was nowhere in any way existing, and brought it into being from that which did not exist, would not be unable to bring it back to the light again, when it has been driven from the fellowship of men and banished from this mortal life. For what has been lost has not indeed dissolved into non-existence, but it exists and is and remains; it only withdraws itself and lies hidden from those who destroyed it; yet it does not escape the great eye. Wherefore nothing perishes in actual fact with God. But if someone, disbelieving in God, and thinking that he is unable to recover and quicken the soul that is thought to have perished, should deny the confession made concerning God, and on that account escape the death that is hung over him by men, and considers himself to have attained a secure and untroubled life among men, and thus hopes that he has found his own soul, inasmuch as he has escaped the plots of men and the ^D

^A death brought about for the sake of the word of godliness, let such a one know that he has deprived himself of the true life, and has delivered his own soul, which he thought he had found, to perdition in the true sense. For falling away from God and being denied by the Son of God is worse than any extreme perdition. And what more has he procured for himself, having deceived himself and supposed that he had found his own soul, when, by fleeing from death, he denied God? For since life is short and temporary, after a little time he will be deprived of this mortal and short-lived life, and having been caught by the death he fled from while denying God, he will be delivered to eternal punishment after death, having truly lost the soul which he supposed he had found. Contrariwise, let him who for the sake of hope in God has despaired of himself, and has denied his own life, and, as far as his own intention is concerned, has lost his own soul, yet cheerfully endured all these things because of his faith in God, be confident, as if nothing at all had been lost to him; for such a man has not lost, but has found his own soul. If, therefore, for the sake of argument, the soul were mortal and could truly pass into non-existence, and if it were destroyed being finished off by men, nevertheless it would not be necessary to persevere in the struggle for piety without hope; since it is possible for God to bring back into existence and to make alive even those things that have perished and that are in no way existent, from what is not. Why then would it be impossible for Him, for one who was thought to be no longer, but who had perished from among men on His account, to raise him up again, and to grant the finding of the lost soul to the one who had lost it for His sake? ^{B C} XVII. No one ever of the prophets proclaimed the heraldry of the kingdom of heaven openly to all; but all the prophets knew of it, yet they did not declare it to the people of the Jews, because of the childishness of their minds and the weakness of their nature for enduring the magnitude of the preaching. But when John as the first clearly heralded that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, and announced to men the remission of sins through the laver of regeneration, those who gave their assent to the preaching have grasped it as something seized, beginning from those days from which John brought the word concerning it. For he says that the observances of Moses and the Jewish worship had their proper time; and that this was circumscribed up to the arrival of John; and that the prophets also were the guides for the Jews up to John to keep the observances of Moses. But that John was the first to make the beginning of the New Testament, inasmuch as he came as His forerunner. And through him as the first, and from him, the kingdom of heaven having been heralded to all men, we shall understand those who are worthy of it to be forcing their way into it, if we consider how great a struggle it is for men dwelling on earth to stretch their path to heaven. For that men, born and clothed with mortal flesh, should become superior to natural appetites, and should control pleasure and every base desire, and from then on should wish to imitate the angelic life on earth; so that they may be able to say like Paul: But our conversation is

in heaven. How is this not a violence, and, as one might say, contrary to nature and seemingly beyond one's strength? And who, seeing the ascetics of piety almost killing their own flesh, as those who truly say, "I am crucified with Christ, yet I live, and yet not I," would not confess that ^A they truly do violence to the kingdom of heaven? And if one were to consider the wondrous resolve of the holy martyrs, how would he not say that they do violence to the kingdom, in accordance with the Savior’s prediction?

XVIII.

Christ delivered the first parable, very appropriately, not only to the crowds and multitudes then present, but also to those who would come after to hear His words; for He declared the differences by divine foreknowledge, and prophesied the causes on account of which some fall away from divine grace. The beginning of the parable is the sower, and his going forth to those who were outside, the falling of the seed, and the regions that did not receive it in the same ^B way. He Himself testified that these are the mysteries of the kingdom. For the sower both went forth from above and descended, even as He Himself taught, saying: "I came forth from the Father, and I come." But He also went forth from the inner chambers of His own kingdom to us who had become outsiders to Him, ever since God cast out Adam and settled him opposite the paradise of delight. For he, having become an outcast on account of disobedience and cast outside the paradise, lost the seeds of inner cultivation, like that son who rebelled against his father and dissipated the substance he had received in a foreign land. But Christ, by the kindness of the most good Father, went forth, becoming the sower, and came to us who were outsiders, for no other reason ^C than to sow the heavenly seed in us. Moreover, He alone went forth to sow, since He alone was the sower of all things. For many indeed came from the heavenly stations and visited men, but not for the purpose of sowing; for they were not sowers, but ministering spirits sent forth for service. But Moses and the prophets after him did not disseminate the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven to men, but rather educated them as infants, turning them away from the folly of wickedness, and attempting to heal their disease of idolatry, cultivating their souls as if they were fallow ground. But the one sower of all, the Word of God, out of the benevolence ^D of the Father, went forth...

^A to announce new seeds and the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, and to unite the human race with the heavenly ministers of God. For this reason, he alone departed from the paternal kingdom. Those, however, who received his seeds, presented their souls like fields to the Word as the cultivator, and through their hearing welcomed the heavenly seed.

If, therefore, those who were being discipled belonged to one and the same intention, there would be no need to distinguish and separate them from one another; but since the power of free will prevails among all men, and some make use of themselves and the heavenly seed cast into their souls in one way, while others do so in another, the Word of God, as one who possesses foreknowledge of future events, ^B rightly predicts what will happen to the seed he has sown among men. And so, he wonderfully calls the casting of heavenly seeds into men a "fall." He teaches that there will be two orders of those who receive the seed: the first, of those who are deemed worthy of the heavenly calling, but who fall away from grace through listlessness and sloth; and the second, of those who multiply the seed in good harvestings. He establishes three differences in each order. For those who lose the seed do not all have the same manner of loss; and again, those who cultivate it and bring forth the fruit from it do not all yield the same abundance. Furthermore, he presents the causes of the fall of those who lose the seed through divine foreknowledge. For those who, through sloth, have left their own souls unguarded have lost the saving seeds cast into them, when these were snatched from their mind and memory by certain enemies and treacherous spirits, or evil demons flying through the air around the earth, or by deceitful and cheating men, or by teachings contrary to the truth—all of which he called "birds of the air." Or second, ^C through avarice and love of pleasure, and through the distractions of life—which he called "thorns"—they have caused the seed within them to be choked. Or third, because they did not endure the struggles of persecutions and hardships, which he also called "heat" in the parable, they were exposed as having the seed not rooted deeply in their souls, but only on the surface and to the extent of appearing to flourish for a time, and of being thought virtuous by the opinion of the many—men whom long time hidden at last reveals, a time that acts like a fire to prove them, and which the Savior ^D aptly named "heat," exposing those who are not genuine.

XIX. The same Lord taught the reason why he delivered his discourses to the crowds through enigmas, saying that it was permitted to [the disciples] to learn the mysteries of the kingdom of God, but that it was not granted to the crowds. For he says: "But this is the parable. The seed is the word of...

^A God," etc. (12) The Lord very clearly reveals the differences in the souls of those who were to receive his teaching in the times that followed. He foretells that there would be three classes of those who do not rightly receive the seed of his teaching, and likewise three groups of good men who, like fertile ground, would produce a rich and multiplied fruit of the teaching. He says, therefore, that there are three causes for those who lose the seeds sown in their souls. For either they are entangled by the worries of life, by a zeal for things that are by no means necessary, and by riches and luxuries, and by smothering the seed within themselves in this way, they seem to choke it with thorns; or, not having received it from the depths of their understanding, they are quickly extinguished when some circumstance arises; or, as a third cause, they become responsible for the ruin of the seed within them by giving their ears freely to those who wish to deceive them and to snatch away the seeds sown in their souls. These things were foretold by the Savior according to his foreknowledge; but the evidence of actual events shows that matters are indeed thus, for no one falls away from the teaching of religion except in one of the ways predicted by him. ^B Similarly, Matthew sets forth three classes of the better order, namely, of those who are to attain the heavenly kingdom. For all of them, from one sower and husbandman, cultivated in their souls—as if in fertile and good fields—the one and the same seed they received, according to their strength; yet they do not multiply it in equal measure, but each person shows a very great difference in their good fruits. For although the seed was one in all of them, and the sower and the same one, yet the diligence and will of each did not produce an equal fruit in all; wherefore the return from the cultivation was not everywhere the same: for some returned thirtyfold, others doubled that thirtyfold number, and others, excelling in labor, rendered a hundredfold fruit. The former group is not deprived of divine fruitfulness except through one of the aforementioned modes. But those who are in the contrary state, with a pure soul and a genuine purpose of mind, having received the saving seed, in turn multiply their own fruits according to the strength of their own ^C soul and inclination.

Even to those in the world, he says, the words are spoken only through a parable, so that seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand, because of their unbelief; nevertheless, the whole discourse will be clear to everyone who is worthy. For a lamp is not lit so that it might not shine, nor to be hidden under a bushel or a bed; nothing will be so hidden that it will not become known to anyone at all. So also the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, spoken through parables, even if they remain hidden to those outside the faith—for whose sake they were also expressed in an involved manner—will not have a sense that is impenetrable to all. Thus, therefore, are they spoken, so that they might be recognized only by the worthy. Wherefore you, my disciples, both see and hear with the eyes of your mind and with ears purified, ^D those things which are not to [the crowds]...

mysteries shall also be added; but to those who do not have a sincere faith, but pretend to have it, not only will nothing further be known from the parables, but they will even be stripped of what they seem to have, when their feigned faith is exposed at the proper time.

For time is the test of all things: even if for a little while slander and false accusation against you should prevail, yet the long time following, and the teaching sown by you and shining through to all men, will make what is now hidden from the many shine forth and will refute the slanderers. ^B Observe, therefore, how you hear; for he who has a good determination will receive the grace of the Spirit and wisdom and knowledge, and a reward worthy of his labors; and he who does not have it, even what he seems to have will be taken from him. For those things which are in us by nature, or which are given by grace, if we do not guard them with continuous attention and diligent zeal, we shall suffer loss, not only gaining nothing further, but even losing what we thought we had. And again, he who has a nature ready to listen to the Word, to him the Word is truly given, and to his natural intelligence is added the wisdom that comes from divine instruction. But he who does not keep intact the endowment given to him from the first creation, perhaps because he has no mind, becomes crazed, having been rendered mentally damaged by the evil one; ^C just as he who has eyes but does not see is equal to a blind man, and one might say that he has been deprived of his eyes; so, too, many through their own fault are dull toward the Word, because they did not heed it from the beginning, but rejected the Word out of negligence.

XX.

The Lord portrays Himself here as the sower, and calls the world the garden. ^D Wishing to hint at the power that resides in the seed, He compares it to a mustard seed, which, among the discourses of men, both Greek and barbarian—which make a show of some wisdom of this world—seems to be the smallest and most insignificant, yet it carries within itself no ordinary power. And the same [seed] is wheat in that it is the nourisher of souls and the provider of food from God; but it is a mustard seed in that it is the smallest of all seeds. For there is no other among the seeds that are sown in the earth that can be compared to its smallness, in that it resembles a point, and is almost an atom and an indivisible body; yet it grows to such a size that it covers the whole class of vegetables. And this is exactly what He showed to have an outcome in its works consistent with the predictions; for one can straightway see with one's own eyes how the evangelical seed, at the very beginning of its sowing...

^A was invisible, and truly the most insignificant and smallest of all teachings. Yet it went on to receive so much growth and magnitude, that it filled the whole world. It truly became greater than the wisdom taught among all nations, both Greeks and barbarians—that which Matthew compared to herbs, thus signifying the weakness and corruptibility of human doctrines. For it is also said of them among the prophets: "Like grass they shall quickly wither, and like the green herb they shall quickly fall." Such are the teachings and disciplines of sophists and philosophers, verdant for a time and blossoming for a short while, but before long falling away and perishing of themselves; just as elsewhere David compares them to grass on the housetops, which has withered before it is plucked up.

These, therefore, are the teachings of the wise men of this age, weak and herb-like, indeed, and similar to flourishing grass. But the seed that is the smallest and most minute of all, the evangelical word of the kingdom of heaven—acrid and biting, like mustard—has nevertheless grown far beyond and surpassed human wisdom. Having risen on high, it has occupied all places, so that a great tree has arisen from it, capable of holding the birds of the air that rest in its branches. Long ago, this was proclaimed by the simple words uttered by the voice of the Savior, but with divine and prophetic power. ^B Now, as to the nature and magnitude of the work into which that prediction has progressed, and how much the voice of the doctrine has grown, it cannot be described as it deserves. So much, then, in the course of time, has this saving seed exerted its power, that the tree germinated from it—that is, the Church established by the Savior throughout all the earth—has filled every place. Thus, the birds of the air, namely divine angels and heavenly powers that invisibly traverse the earth, inhabit its branches, along with holy souls of high degree—that is, those endowed with life and perception that are sublime and heavenly. For the Savior’s parable signifies by these "birds of the air" these and nothing else. Just as, conversely, in the parable of the sower, by the term "birds" he denoted powers that lie in wait for men, using the same term to say that the birds of the air snatched away the seed sown in those who received it by the wayside.

XXI. ^D And these things the Savior necessarily delivered to his disciples, healing a very grievous disease of their soul—namely, vanity and arrogance—and forbidding ostentation, so that they might not in any way become puffed up, nor think anything great or haughty about themselves. Conversely, he teaches that it rests with our own will to enter or not enter into the kingdom of God. For if, according to Matthew, we are converted and become as little children, being childlike in malice, according to the Apostle, and if we receive the kingdom as a simple and guileless child, and if we [embrace] the purity and innocence of childhood years

we shall enter into it. Indeed, even if we make ourselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven—for thus does a man, by cutting away from his soul every shameful and licentious passion, even if he has grown into a man in the maturity of his body, turn and become as a little child. But if we do none of these things, we shall be subject to the judgment of the Savior, along with the pronouncement of the "Amen," declaring that if we do not perform these things, there will be no entry for us into the kingdom.

KB (19). ^B XXII. A similar parable is also found in Matthew. For he says: "A man, going on a journey, called his own servants and gave to one five talents, to another two, and to another one"; since the gifts are many and the distributions of the Holy Spirit are diverse, and to each is given what is profitable. It happens, indeed, that one person possesses one gift, another two, and another still more. So, therefore, it is said that five talents were given to one, because as many gifts of the Holy Spirit were bestowed upon him; but to another, not so many, but only one had been given—one who would meet with a heavier condemnation because, though he had not received many, lest he should be sluggish regarding a more demanding task, nonetheless he did not even produce fruit from the one, but having guarded it idly and not distributed it to others, he will be deprived even of this according to the saving judgment, the Judge convicting him of idleness and sloth, and bearing against him a terrible threat and a sharp sentence. ^C But they who have been deemed worthy of more gifts of the Holy Spirit, and then have multiplied the fruit of these through practical labor, at the time of the reckoning of the account of what was given and received, will bear a favorable and good testimony. For the Lord will deem those who have been tested in a few things in the present life worthy of greater and heavenly rewards in the age to come. But having convicted the wicked and slothful servant for his wickedness and his sloth, He will deliver him over to the punishment that is fitting; calling him "slothful" because he did not wish to work at what was required, and "wicked" because he dared to say to his own master, "You are a harsh man," and so forth. Having, therefore, first convicted him as one who speaks against [his judge] and having condemned him out of his own mouth, because, even though he had called Him a harsh and inexorable judge, he nevertheless was so negligent that he did not wish to perform any good at all, He will pass the most just verdict against him, handing him over to outer darkness, as not only an idle and wicked, but also a useless and despicable servant. ^D It will seem, therefore, without further investigation, so far as the sequence is concerned, that this was said regarding the one who did nothing but hid the talent. But since the Gospel which has reached us in Hebrew characters did not lead the threat against the one who hid it, but...

rather against the one who lived intemperately. ^A For it contained three servants: one who consumed the master’s property with harlots and flute-girls; the second, who multiplied his work; and the third, who hid the talent. Then, one was accepted favorably, the second was only rebuked, and the third was cast into prison. I suspect whether, according to Matthew, after the completion of his discourse, the threat that follows against the one who did nothing was spoken, not concerning him, but concerning the former—by way of repetition—that is, regarding the one who eats and drinks with the drunkards.

These things, then, were spoken in this way by Matthew on the Mount of Olives, where the Savior was with his disciples and was instructing them beforehand concerning the consummation. ^B But the parable before us was recorded only by Luke, as having been told by the Savior at the time when he was staying in Jericho. Therefore, one must not suppose that this is the same as that one, since the things contained in them are not similar. For here ten servants are spoken of, but there not the same number; and here each one receives a single mina, but there one receives five talents, another two, and a third one. And here the one who has increased his mina ten-fold hears: “Well done, good and faithful servant, because you were faithful in a very little, have authority over ten cities.” The one who made five out of one hears: “And you also be over five cities.” But in the parable of the talents it was said: “Well done, good servant; you were faithful in a few things, I will set you over many; enter into the joy of your lord.”

^C But bringing the explanation of the parable to a summary, we say this: Some supposed that at the first coming of our Savior his kingdom would come to be, and they thought this would occur immediately when he ascended to Jerusalem; so greatly had the miracles performed by him struck them with wonder. Against this opinion, the Savior teaches that he would not receive the kingdom from the Father before he had departed from men to the Father. He confirmed this through the parable, saying, “A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom and to return.” ^D He calls himself a nobleman because of the birth according to the flesh, which he had from Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and from David and his descendants; and for this reason he also called himself a man. By saying, “He went into a far country,” he signified his return from earth to heaven. And by adding, “to receive for himself a kingdom and to return,” he points to his second Theophany, the glorious and royal one. But during the aforementioned journey, he says that his servants had traded with the minas received with varying success; and that his own citizens were hostile to him, having sent an embassy after him... [original-script column: see facsimile]

to reject his kingdom. By his servants, he refers to all those who have believed in him; by the mina given equally to all, he refers to the knowledge of the kingdom of heaven; and by the work performed by each alongside that knowledge, he refers to the fruit produced in good deeds. By his citizens who hate him, he signifies those from the circumcision, whose manner of life he endured, and, having been born under the same law, he rightly called himself their citizen. ^B Those who hate him and have demonstrated the works of their hatred through their plots against him were not content with that alone, but even after his departure from among men, they rejected him with curses against him and with prayers to God, and refused his kingdom, wishing that it might not come to pass. But he, even against their will, will receive the kingdom; and yet, upon his return at his second Theophany, he will reign over those who are worthy, his own servants. And he will make a distinction between these very people first, welcoming some and honoring them with royal gifts because of the achievements they have performed; for he will establish them as leaders over cities and rulers of others. But he will rebuke others for their slothfulness, and will deprive them of the portion of goods they previously seemed to possess. Finally, he will order those who were called his citizens, those who were his long-standing enemies and who demonstrated the works of enemies against him, and who afterwards sent an embassy behind him to reject him—the means by which they were accustomed to utter curses against him—to be brought into the middle before the royal throne of his glory, and then, using justice as his criterion, he will hand them over to the punishment that is due to them.

GENERAL ANNOTATION ON THE GREEK FRAGMENTS OF THE THEOPHANIA

Hitherto we have edited the fragments, or rather the portions, of Eusebius’ *Theophania* from three Vatican codices, A, E, and L. Furthermore, the same *Theophania* is recited in two other Vatican codices, B and F, which, however, are merely copies, and indeed imperfect ones, derived from codices A and E. Therefore, the use of neither of these was necessary for us. Now, indeed, whatever we have published in the preceding pages was either specifically designated by the title of *Theophania* in the codices, or it agreed with the Syriac or English translation of the work, or in the aforementioned codices it was so closely connected with parts bearing the title of *Theophania* that it could not be separated from them, even if at times they bore only the bare name of Eusebius. We have admonished our readers concerning all these in their respective places, for nothing was of greater concern to us than to appear faithful and accurate. Certainly, there were also other parts to which the name of Eusebius was inscribed (though not *Theophania*), and which in some places partly agreed with the said work; but because it would have seemed too free and bold to combine them with the more certain parts of the *Theophania*, we deservedly omitted that plan. Therefore, those parts appear in the aforementioned commentary of Eusebius on Luke, to which we have appended from time to time—and as the occasion required—whatever was to be observed.

Now a great question arises, which we scarcely dare to touch, lest we seem to defend a matter that is in some way our own (which is a harmful and odious prejudice in literary affairs); namely, what judgment should be passed on the Syriac *Theophania* when compared with the Greek parts; whether it is complete, or whether it has been diminished by some abridgement or omissions; especially since the Greek fragments—that is, the originals—in the Vatican codices differ sometimes quite enough, and, what is more important, are not infrequently more prolix, while at other times they do not appear at all in the entire Syriac *Theophania*. I publicly attest that I desire or wish for nothing but the truth, and that I am held by no eagerness to patronize this opinion rather than to refute the other, and I gladly leave an open field in which anyone may exercise or contend according to his own will. However, I am not insignificantly moved by the similarity that the Syriac translation of the three epistles of Ignatius, now discovered in the same Nitrian manuscripts and edited by the most learned Cureton, is found to be so much shorter that eleven chapters were omitted here and there (as I learn from French journals, for I lack the English edition), which are read in the Greek text long since published. Besides the fact that in the Ignatian epistles as well as in the Eusebian fragments, there occur other variations of minor moment, sometimes by inserting something, sometimes by changing, and finally, sometimes by transferring. Indeed, regarding

Eusebius, I am not unaware of the somewhat freer method of the Greek catenae, by which the excerpted texts are sometimes wont to be varied slightly; yet whoever compares our Greek with the Syriac will find it difficult, I think, to persuade himself that so many and such grand additions could have been taken from anywhere else than from the original work. For why would the authors of the Vatican catenae, Nicetas and Macarius, or some other anonymous writer, have invented the title of *Theophania* so many times, and without any cause, and then assigned such long segments to this title rather than to another? Certainly it would have been most easy—as happens sometimes—to inscribe the mere name of Eusebius onto fragments of the *Theophania*, whether by the carelessness or the whim of some amanuensis; but that the title of *Theophania* should have been so often attached by Nicetas and Macarius to some Eusebian writing of a different subject is highly incredible. If this is so, it follows that the Syriac translator of Eusebius, studying brevity, seems to have subtracted several parts of the work.

And to return to the example of the epistles of Ignatius, some, and especially the learned Cureton in his vindications, will say that the Greek context of the Ignatian epistles was rather interpolated and augmented; which perhaps some might think should also be said of the Greek Eusebian texts. I do not wish at all to enter into the Ignatian question, which is neither my present purpose nor within my remit, and which has long been ventilated by eminent critics. Furthermore, to the variety of those epistles I have indeed contributed my mite by the fragment published from an epistle to the Tarsians, which the priest Anastasius preserved for me (Script. vet. t. VII, p. 22), and which I do not regret repeating here, since it does not occur in the epistle to the Tarsians of Ignatius published heretofore. ^A *Ignatii Theophori ac martyris, ex epistola ad Tarsenses. Si enim ipsum Dei Filium fuisse scires, utique etiam cognosceres, eum qui corruptibile corpus suum, quadraginta dierum spatio, cibo non indigum effecerat, potuisse etiam in perpetuum tale praestare. Cur ergo esurit? Nempe ut ostendat se vere corpus assumpsisse, aeque ac caeteros homines passibile. Priore ergo modo Deum, altero etiam hominem se esse demonstravit.* ^B Otherwise, that opinion pleases me more, which maintains that Ignatius was diminished by the Syrians and men of other nations rather than augmented by Greeks and Latins; for I would bear it most ill to be deprived of so many heads of sacred and dogmatic doctrine as are lacking in the Nitrian exemplar of the Syrians, especially because the parts omitted by them are praised by very ancient authors.

Now, that I vehemently suspect the *Theophania* to have been perhaps abridged by the Syriac translator, I am compelled above all by several Greek parts which, as I have said in individual places, partly bear the title of *Theophania* and part of which are continued along with them. Then, when I consider that it could scarcely have happened that Eusebius would not explain any prophecy in this work more clearly, I could not discard that part of the prophecy of Daniel, especially since it is adorned in the codex with the title of *Theophania* and the name of Eusebius. Concerning the other additions, I have spoken accurately and faithfully on almost every page. But come, the Vatican fragments of the *Theophania* are taken principally from the third and fourth books; a few from the fifth; and finally, one from the first, which the Greek catena of the Fathers on Heb. IV, 12, furnished me. Now the reason why Greek fragments remain most of all from the third and fourth books is that in these two books Eusebius had concluded the public life of Christ the Lord—namely, his preaching, miracles, and death; and this was material most suitable for the authors of catenae, who were appending commentaries to the evangelical history. ^C Furthermore, anyone who reads the third and fourth book in Syriac or English translation will easily recognize that the whole of Eusebius's narrative proceeds in almost no order, with arguments taken now from this evangelist, now from that, without any bond connecting them to one another; the fourth book, indeed, is written with such free rein that anything can be added, removed, or inserted without the course of the discourse appearing disrupted or interrupted. Eusebius himself says at the end of the third book that there were many more things that could have been discussed concerning Jesus, yet he chose but a few, which he was about to complete in the fourth volume—the rest being promised to be more prolix; from which statement we understand that the power to expand or contract his book was very great; which matter we would not indeed propose for the consideration of readers, were it not that the Greek fragments now discovered confirm our suspicion or conjecture.

Furthermore, there is in a way a double class of our fragments; the former, containing eleven fragments, agrees for the most part word for word with the Syriac, except in those places that run on longer. The other class, having a like number of fragments, likewise shows the title of *Theophania* in our codices; and yet it partly agrees more rarely with the Syriac text, and is in part altogether new and unheard-of. And this was the reason why we have kept these latter ones somewhat separate; for if it had pleased us to follow the order of time and the work, they would have had to be mixed with the former; which, in this first edition at least, we did not wish to do, so that the state of the whole matter might be more evident. Will someone say with the common proverb, that it is easy to add to things already discovered? Indeed, in the matter of which we are speaking, I deny the adage. For both in the Ignatian epistles and in the *Theophania* of Eusebius, it was far easier to omit than to add; ^D for whoever omits, takes care of almost only one thing: that he does not break the sequence of the discourse too incautiously; but whoever adds, must both devise new things and arrange them aptly with some imitation of style and similarity of matters. Certainly, we discern few, if any, works of the ancients that have subsequently been augmented by others; but very many, indeed, have been abbreviated. For to omit those that have long been present in published books, behold, in this volume we have the Evangelical Questions of Eusebius to Stephanus and to Marinus, abbreviated by some anonymous person or other. I have brought to light two abridgments of Valerius Maximus, by Paradisus and Nepotianus. In the Vatican codices, likewise, I have seen abridgments of the histories of Josephus and Orosius. I have known Chrysostom also to be contracted in manuscripts, and additionally abridgments of commentaries on Isaiah by a certain Damianus Daniel Remigius, and on Paul by Claudius Taurinensis. In the Vatican relics of civil law, I have published several laws intact, which were later diminished in the Theodosian code, and finally reduced to minimal brevity in the Justinianic. Finally, I also published an epitome of Augustine’s books *De Musica* preserved in a very ancient codex. But enough of this, lest I seem to abuse the reader’s leisure. I have said all these things not because I wish in any way to diminish the praise of the Syriac *Theophania*, which is a most precious work, or to resolve this doubt with certainty, or to favor the Greek fragments more than is fair; rather, I desire to provide a cause for critical men, and especially for the most learned and praiseworthy Leo, that he may, if it seems good to him, ventilate the controversy according to his wisdom, exercise his judgment, and incline the scale as truth shall demand. For there is nothing I desire more than to accede to his upright opinion.

ON THE SOLEMNITY OF PASCHA

NOTICE ON THE SUBSEQUENT WORK (Mai, *Bibl. Patr.* IV, 208.)

In the *Life of Constantine the Great* which he wrote, Eusebius narrates in book IV, chapter 54, that he had composed a descriptive treatise on the most holy Paschal solemnity and its rationale, which he had announced to the aforementioned Constantine. In the following chapter, the same Eusebius recites Constantine's letter to him, in which the Emperor acknowledges having received and read the book, highly commends it, and announces that, by his royal command, it has been made known and useful to many others as well. The very words of the most Christian Augustus are: "It is indeed a most significant matter, and one exceeding all power of speech, to set forth the mysteries of Christ according to their dignity, and to explain in a becoming manner the Paschal controversy and the origin of this feast, as well as its useful yet laborious celebration. For divine matters are such that not even those who are able to attain them in thought are sufficient to recount them. Nevertheless, I have greatly admired your learning and diligent endeavor, and I myself have read the book; and I have commanded that it be transmitted to the hands of many who sincerely profess the observance of the divine religion, just as you wished. Since, therefore, you understand with what pleasure we receive such gifts from your ingenuity," etc. The emperor proceeds shortly to say that the same book had been translated from Greek into Latin, which it merits deservedly by the fame and worth of its author.

Now, this highly praised little work, which Eusebius had written on account of the Paschal controversy discussed at the Nicene Council, had long since perished both in Greek and in Latin; were it not that Nicetas, Bishop of Serrhae, had preserved a significant and lengthy portion of it in his great manuscript catena on Luke; which I, having discovered it in a Vatican codex, edited some years ago in Greek; but now I have judged it worthy to be presented with a Latin translation as well. And I rejoice because in this writing, beyond its other erudition, Eusebius also gives noble testimony to the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist. To be sure, Balthasar Corderius, a learned man whom I mention for the sake of honor, seems to have brought forth in his catena of the Fathers on Luke (which is different from our Nicetiana), p. 544-545, this excerpt of Eusebius translated by himself into Latin; but first, it is not intact, because with him the sixth and eighth sections are entirely missing, as well as almost the whole of the tenth and eleventh, besides other scattered, mutilated, and disordered passages. Furthermore, Corderius's interpretation is of such a character that if I were to weigh and correct it item by item, I would appear as a truly fastidious and unpleasant judge. For he speaks sometimes in such a way that one cannot easily recognize what it was he read in his Greek manuscript. But what is of greater interest is that the Greek text—that is, the original text of Eusebius—was entirely unpublished before our book.

EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA ON THE SOLEMNITY OF PASCHA.

^A 1. It will perhaps not be inopportune to discourse once more on the Pascha, as it was formerly handed down to the Hebrews in the form of a figure. When, therefore, the Hebrews, performing (a rite) for the sake of the imagery of what was to come, first celebrated the feast of the *phasek*, they took for themselves a beast from the flock: there was then a lamb or a sheep. They slaughtered this victim with their own hand. Thereafter, each of them smeared the blood on the lintels and doorposts of their own houses; smearing the thresholds and the tops of the doors in this way, certainly, for the frightening away of the destroyer. Eating then of the flesh of the sheep as nourishment, and with their loins girt about, ^B

^A partaking of unleavened bread, and offering bitter herbs, they passed from place to place, that is, from the land of the Egyptians into the desert. These things they were commanded to do, along with the slaughter and eating of the sheep. Wherefore that departure from Egypt gave the name of "the Passing" to the festival among the Hebrews. But these things happened to them in a figure; yet they were written for our benefit. And thus Paul interprets this, when he reveals the truth of the ancient symbols with these words: "For Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us." The reason for His being sacrificed the Baptist sets forth, saying: "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world." For truly the Savior’s body, the offering that averts all evils, was handed over to death, which, as a propitiation, took away the sin of the whole world; wherefore Isaiah clearly cried out: "He bears our sins and suffers for us."

^B 2. Therefore, nourished by the intellectual flesh of this saving victim, who by His own blood saved the human race—namely, by the teachings and doctrines announcing the kingdom of heaven—we are deservedly delighting in divine delights. But also by faith in His blood, which He gave as a ransom for our salvation, sealing the houses of the soul, that is, our bodies, we banish from ourselves every kind of insidious demon; and celebrating the solemnity of the passing, we study to pass over to divine things, just as they once migrated from Egypt into the desert. Thus we, too, make a journey through a certain pathless and desert place to many, expelling from our soul the old leaven of godless error, and setting before ourselves the true bitter herbs through a bitter and unpleasant way of life.

The time of the festival, moreover, is opportune; it does not fall into the middle of winter, which is gloomy, nor, conversely, into the middle of summer, at which time the scorching solstice destroys the beauty of those working in the fields; likewise, the hours are too long, not divided into equal parts. But neither does the autumnal equinox offer a pleasant appearance, with the field widowed and despoiled of its fruits as if of its children. There remains from these seasons of the year the joyful spring, which is in a way the head of the whole year, as it were of a body, when the sun runs the first part of its course, and the moon likewise transforms the course of the night into a bright day with the full light of its orb. ^C Spring, I say, dispels the terrors of the winter storms, takes away the long spaces ^D of the nights, and restrains the flooding of waters. And now, with a new and shining serenity, the seas become tranquil for those sailing, and the air becomes clear for those traveling upon the land. Regions meanwhile in the fields are pregnant with seeds, and the trees, swelling with fruits and adorned with the gifts of God, offer to the farmers the reward of their labors in a blessing.

^C 3. This time of the festival, while it brought destruction to the Egyptians as friends of the demons, brought an end to evils for the Hebrews, who celebrated God with festival rites. This was the very same time also kept at the original creation of the universe, the time when the earth brought forth its products, and the luminaries came into existence; the time when heaven, earth, and all that is in them were produced. ^D At this very time the Savior of the whole world performed the mystery of his own festival, and he illuminated the world with the splendors of true religion, and the birthday of the world seemed to return. At this time the figure was being fulfilled, namely the ancient Pascha, which is called the "passing over," but it also bore the symbol of the slaughter of the sheep, and the eating of unleavened bread was the image of a certain likeness. All these things were fulfilled in the Savior's festival; for he himself was that sheep, insofar as he was clothed with a body. He is also the Sun of Justice, when the spring of divine and salutary renewal arrived for the human way of life, changing it from worse to better. For the Egyptians, the divinely sent plagues are even now being inflicted upon their demons, while the peoples inhabiting every part of the earth joyfully celebrate their freedom from the multiform error of impiety. ^B Therefore, with the deceptive spirits of the peoples suppressed and the winter of evils past, the abundance of new fruits adorns the Church of God with the various gifts of the Holy Spirit; and to speak summarily, the whole human race has crossed over to our side; all regions, having experienced the cultivation of the soul by the Word as farmer, have brought forth the beautiful flowers of virtue; and we, having been snatched from the darkness of evils, have been deemed worthy of the light, the day on which we drank in the knowledge of God.

4. These are the new teachings, formerly overshadowed by symbols, but recently brought forth into the manifest light. And indeed, we too renew the head of the festival in the cycles of the years, taking up the forty-day exercise before the feast for the sake of preparation, imitating the saints Moses and Elijah, and repeating the feast itself for an unending age. Therefore, having undertaken the journey to God, we gird our loins well with the belt of temperance, and securely guarding the steps of the soul, we set out on the course of heavenly calling as if shod; and using the rod of the divine word with the power of prayer for the repelling of enemies, we pass over with all eagerness the passage that leads to the heavens, hastening from these lower things to the higher, and from mortal life to the immortal; for thus, having successfully completed the passage, a greater festival will receive us from thence, which the children of the Hebrews name Pentecost, bearing the image of the kingdom of the heavens. For Moses says: *Ex quo falcem in messem miseris, numerabis tibi septem hebdomadas, novosque panes ex nova messe propones ante Deum* (Deut. xvi, 9).

^A This prophetic figure signified the calling of the nations through the harvest, and the souls offered to God by the merits of Christ through the new loaves, as well as the churches formed from the Gentiles, for whose sake a most great festival is celebrated before the benevolent God. For, reaped by the rational sickles of the apostles, gathered together from all parts of the world into the church as if into a threshing floor, joined together in the concordant sentiment of faith, seasoned with the salt of divine doctrines and disciplines, and regenerated by the water and fire of the Holy Spirit, we are offered as pleasing and acceptable loaves to God through Christ.

5. Therefore, since the prophetic symbols of Moses have passed into effects of a holier reality, we have learned by tradition to celebrate a more joyful solemnity, as we are already united with our Savior and enjoying his kingdom. For this reason, we are not permitted to be worn down by any ascetic labor during this feast, but we are taught to present an image of the rest hoped for in the heavens. For this reason, we neither bend the knee in prayers nor afflict ourselves with abstinence from food. For it is no longer fitting for those who have been granted the grace of resurrection in God to fall to the ground again, nor for those freed from the passions to suffer the same things as slaves to desire. Wherefore, after Pascha, we celebrate Pentecost for seven full weeks, having manfully endured the preceding period of forty days of exercise before Pascha in six weeks. For the number six is active, so to speak, and efficacious. It is for this reason that God is said to have created the universe in six days. But to the labors endured in that period, the second solemnity worthily succeeds in seven weeks, our rest being multiplied, the symbol of which the number seven is intended to signify. ^C Yet the number of Pentecost, or the fifty, is not strictly composed of these seven weeks; for the last [week] being exceeded by a monad, we seal this most solemn day of the ascension of Christ. Worthily, therefore, representing in the days of holy Pentecost the future rest, we are glad in spirit, and at the same time we indulge the body with rest, as if we were already dwelling with the Bridegroom, and therefore it is not permitted for us to fast.

6. But that the sacred evangelists narrate that the passion occurred during the days of the unleavened bread of the Jewish Pascha, no one will doubt. For this was the cause of the law given by Moses which is called paschal. For because the Lamb of God was to be led by the Jews themselves as a sheep to the slaughter, and was to suffer this for the common salvation of all men, at no other time than the time indicated, God, prefiguring the future event by demonstrative symbols, commanded a material lamb to be sacrificed by the Jews at that very time which, as the cycles of years revolved, was to occur. ^D And this was done by them every year, until complete truth circumscribed the old images. Wherefore, from that time, the true solemnity of the mysteries remains among the nations; but among the Jews, even the memory of the symbols themselves does not survive, the place where they performed the rite of the feast having been taken away from them.

Fittingly, therefore, does the divine Scripture of the Gospels say that the Saviour suffered at the time of the Jewish unleavened bread; since even then, as a sheep, he was led to the slaughter in accordance with the prophetic voices.

^B 7. And while those in accordance with Moses used to sacrifice the Passover lamb once in the entire year, on the fourteenth day of the first month, toward evening; we, however, the men of the New Covenant, celebrating our own Passover on every Lord’s day, ARE ALWAYS FILLED WITH THE BODY OF THE SAVIOUR, AND ARE ALWAYS PARTAKING OF THE BLOOD OF THE LAMB. We are always girding the loins of our own soul with chastity and modesty, we are always prepared in our feet with the preparation of the Gospel; we always have staves in our hands, and we rest by leaning upon the rod that sprang forth from the root of Jesse; we are always departing from Egypt, we are always pursuing the solitude of human life, we are always setting out on the journey to God, we are always celebrating the feast of the passing over. For the evangelical word desires us to perform all these things not once a year, but always and through every day. Therefore, also in each week we perform the feast of our Passover on the saving and Lord’s day, completing the mysteries of the true Lamb through whom we were redeemed; and we do not circumcise the body with iron, but with the cutting word of the Gospel we cut away all malice from the soul; nor do we use physical unleavened bread, but only that of sincerity and truth. For grace, having set us free from the aging custom, has handed over to us the new man who was created according to God, and the new law, and the new circumcision, and the new Passover, and him who is a Jew in secret ^C (Rom. II, 29). Thus it has left us released from the yoke of the ancient times.

8. Furthermore, when the God-beloved Emperor ^D sat in the midst of the holy synod, as the question concerning the Passover was brought into the middle, he said what he said. The triple portion of the bishops of the whole world, however, prevailed, which was contending from the other side against those of the East. For the peoples of the North and the South, and also those towards the setting sun, having fortified themselves with harmony, held an opinion contrary to those of the East, who were defending their old custom. Finally, those of the East yielded; and thus one feast of Christ came to be; and thus they departed from the killers of the Lord, and were joined to those of the same faith. For nature...

draws like to like. But if anyone says that it is written: "On the first day of unleavened bread, the disciples came and said to the Savior, 'Where wilt Thou that we prepare for Thee to eat the Pascha?'" and that He sent to a certain man to tell him, "With thee I keep the Pascha"—we answer that this is not a commandment, but a ^A history of an event that happened at the time of the Savior’s passion. For it is one thing to narrate an ancient event, and another to legislate and leave behind these things as commandments for those to come.

9. But the Savior did not celebrate the Pascha with the Jews at the time of His own passion. For not when they were sacrificing the sheep did He Himself also perform His own Pascha with His disciples. For they celebrated it on the Friday, the day on which the Savior suffered; hence, not even did they enter the praetorium, but Pilate went out to them. Christ, however, sat down with His disciples on the very fifth day of the week, and while dining with them, He said: "With desire have I desired to eat this Pascha with you." Do you see how the Savior did not eat the Pascha with the Jews? Because that ^B was something new and strange, contrary to custom and Jewish habits, He necessarily insisted, saying: "With desire have I desired to eat this Pascha with you before I suffer." For those ancient and indeed antiquated habits which He ate with the Jews were not desirable; but the new mystery of His New Covenant, which He was transmitting to His own disciples, was deservedly desirable to Him, since many prophets and righteous men before Him had desired to see the mysteries of the New Covenant. And the Word Himself, always thirsting for the common salvation, was transmitting a mystery by which all of mankind was to celebrate the feast, and He confessed that this was desirable to Him. The Pascha of ^C Moses was not suitable for all the nations of that time; for how could it be, when it was ordained to be performed at one place, that in Jerusalem? Therefore it was not desirable. But the Savior’s mystery in the New Covenant, being suitable for all men, was by best right desirable.

10. But He Himself, before He suffered, ate the Pascha with His own disciples and performed the feast, [and] not with the Jews. Now after He had celebrated the feast in the evening, the high priests, with the traitor, set upon Him and laid their hands upon Him; for they were not eating the Pascha themselves at that evening, otherwise they would have rested from His persecution. Him, having been captured, they led to the house of Caiaphas, where, having spent the night, as day dawned they gathered, and they examine Him ^D first; then after this, having arisen, they led Him with the multitude to Pilate. And then the Scripture says that they did not enter into the praetorium, that they might not, by entering under a Gentile roof, be defiled, as they thought—but that remaining pure, these most impure men, as evening approached, might eat the Pascha; they who strain out the gnat but swallow the camel, and who were defiling their own souls and bodies with the murder of the Savior, feared to enter under a roof; but

they, on that very day of the passion, ate the Pascha that was the destruction of their own souls, imploring the saving blood not for themselves, but against themselves. Our Savior, however, did not eat it then, but having reclined with his disciples the day before, he had celebrated the feast he desired ^A with them on the very day of the Lord’s passion.

11. Do you see how, from that time, Christ was separating himself from them and was turning away from the murderous disposition of the Jews, but was joining himself to the disciples, celebrating with them the desired feast? Therefore, we too must eat the Pascha with Christ, purging our mind from every leaven of malice and wickedness, and filling ourselves with the unleavened bread of truth and sincerity, having within ourselves in the soul the Jew who is in secret, and true circumcision, and anointing the doorposts of our mind with the blood of the Lamb sacrificed for us, for the averting of our destroyer. And this is not for one period of the whole year, but throughout every week. Let the preparation for us be fasting, a symbol of mourning, for the sake of our former sins, and to keep the memory of the suffering Savior.

12. I say that the Jews have wandered from the truth from the time when they persecuted the truth itself and drove the Word of life from themselves. And the Holy Scripture of the Gospels clearly demonstrates this. For it testifies that the Lord ate the Pascha on the first day of Unleavened Bread; but they, not on the day when it was necessary, as Luke says, ate the Pascha customary to them, but on the day following it, which was the second day of Unleavened Bread, and the fifteenth of the moon; on which day, while Pilate was exercising judgment over our Savior, they did not enter the praetorium. Therefore, they did not eat the Pascha on the first day of Unleavened Bread, on which it was necessary for it to be sacrificed, as the law required—for thus they would have performed the Pascha with the Savior—but at that time, being occupied with plotting against our Savior and blinded by their own malice, they fell away from all truth. We, however, celebrate the same mysteries throughout the whole year, on every day preceding the Sabbath commemorating the passion of the Savior with fasting, which the apostles first observed when the Bridegroom was taken from them; and on every Lord's day we are quickened by the sanctified body of the same saving Pascha, and are sealed in the soul by his precious blood. ^{B C D}

TO THE READERS, BY JOANNES HENRICUS NOLTE, GREETING

EUSEBIUS OF PAMPHILUS AGAINST MARCELLUS, BISHOP OF ANCYRA BOOK I

EUSEBIUS PAMPHILI AGAINST MARCELLUS BISHOP OF ANCYRA BOOK ONE.

^A CAP. I. Whence Marcellus was incited to write such a book. ^B Materiam illi subjectam et quasi styli argu- [mentum].

(1) *Eusebius.* The father of this book, Eusebius, renowned for his intimacy with the martyr Pamphilus and for the name he bears, is too well known to need our illustration. His *Ecclesiastical History* and those *stromateis*-like writings, the *Preparation and Demonstration of the Gospel*, which are in the hands of all scholars, have won him a magnificent reputation. But this work of his, *Against Marcellus*, is known to few today even by name, and I think it has been read by very few, or consulted anywhere. I have seen many catalogues of the more famous libraries throughout Europe; nowhere have I found Eusebius *Against Marcellus*. Yet a glutton for books and a vortex of all libraries, Franciscus Turrianus, has seen it somewhere, and even read it. For I remember reading in this man’s *Dogmatica* that Eusebius’s testimony against Marcellus was recited. In the third book, page 175, he says that Eusebius reproaches the heretic Marcellus—in the book which he wrote against him—for mutilating the Scriptures. And certainly this objection is made by Eusebius; so it seems Turrianus read this. But mention of it is also very rare among the ancients. It is not contained in Photius’s *Myriobiblos*. It escaped the diligence of Jerome. Only Socrates, so far as I know, has transmitted it to posterity, having cited some parts of it verbatim, in order to make mention of it. He brought it forward to that end, in order to whitewash the author, blackened by Arian soot. But in vain, says the most illustrious Baronius in the year of Jesus Christ 340, section 39, for he attempts to wash an Ethiopian white. It must be admitted that this most learned founder of the *Annales* frequently shows himself to be harsher than Eusebius. Whether he exercised an untimely censure in this place, we shall say in the proper place, God willing. Meanwhile, whatever may be the case regarding Eusebius’s Arianism, this much is certain—even by the Socratic testimony—that the twin offspring of his are the books we provide, and the inscription *Eusebius of Pamphilus* is not a lie, nor [is it the work of] some surreptitious scoundrel. Furthermore, the author comprised the entire work in five books: the first two simply *Against Marcellus*, but the three later ones *On Ecclesiastical Theology*.

^B The subject of the name is deduced from the subject of the work. For thus in the proem of the first book, where he teaches why, after the bare presentation of the Marcellian opinion, he proceeded to the refutation, "lest perhaps some should be subverted from ecclesiastical theology." The subject matter of both parts is set forth in the dedicatory epistle to Flaccillus. But we shall see about this whole matter much better part by part. When and in what year this was written by Eusebius is not certain. It is certain that it was after the Council of Nicaea, and after the death of Constantine, whom the Greeks, fawning, I know not why, call "Equal to the Apostles." For the author himself mentions in the end of the second book the Council of Constantinople, and that that council was held by the Arian bishops against Marcellus in the last year of Constantine, and of Christ 338. So it is necessary that this was from the latest writings of Eusebius. For, as the most learned founder of the *Annales* reported, Eusebius of Pamphilus ceased to be among the living by the year of Christ 340, in the fifth year of Constantius Caesar. If, therefore, this writer is found in these books to lean toward Arianism—a question regarding which the struggle concerning Eusebian faith has been decided in the *parts* after the Council of Nicaea—I confess I have had my doubts about it. Montacutius.

(2) *Against Marcellus, Bishop of Ancyra.* Galatia was entirely, as Gaul once was, divided into three parts. One was inhabited by the Trocmi, another by the Tolistobii or Tolistobogii, a third by those who were called Tectosages; the metropolis of this part was Ancyra. Strabo in book iv: "Of three tribes, of which he [the author] speaks, the one around the city of Ancyra is called the Tectosages." Apollonius, in *Carica* according to Stephanus, supposes it to be named from anchors, which—

(3) *Subject.* The "subject," in this place, is not the base man, and the subject matter, but the intention of the mind, and the plan of writing, from which, being stimulated, he approached the writing. For Eusebius wishes it to be said that Marcellus, stung by hatred, bit with his pen against Asterius and the others; which is said by him gratuitously, and is not proven. M.

^A

The cause of this was rivalry and envy; and it provided fraternal hatred: which itself, as Mithridates and Ariobarzanes had taken, he took away from the vessels of the Egyptians. The Turks call it Angur, as Busbequius observes, who illuminated the ruins of that city, when the example of the tablets was transferred to Europe, in which Augustus had summarized an index of his deeds. It was the metropolis of Galatia Prima, as it was subsequently called: and it had under it eight suffragan bishops. Marcellus presided over this same church with the episcopacy under Constantius Caesar: concerning whom there is frequent mention in the Athanasian affairs and the Arian contests under that Father. But he presided over it for a long time even before the empire of Constantius, under Constantine. For among the others who subscribed to the Council of Ancyra, after Vitalis the Patriarch of Antioch, and Agricola the Bishop of Caesarea in Palestine, Marcellus of Ancyra subscribed in the third place. Now this council is older than the Nicene, celebrated in the year of our Lord, according to the calculation of the most learned Cardinal Baronius, 316, or, as others, 308. ^B Deservedly, therefore, did Athanasius call him an "elder." And certainly it is necessary that Marcellus be reckoned among the extremely long-lived: for he lived up to the year of our Lord 373. Epiphanius teaches this, who, in heresy LXXVII, concerning his departure, says: "For still even now, from this year, as from two years [ago] he died"; he says that Marcellus had died two years before he himself wrote this. Now he wrote his *Panarion* against heresies, as he himself confesses, in the xii year of Valentinian and Valens, and the viii of Gratian, that is, in the year of our Lord 375. The most illustrious Baronius anticipates the year. Thus he was with the episcopacy for 60 whole years, perhaps more truly 65. He was a man, through those most calamitous times of the Church, if any other, after Athanasius, tossed by various tempests, and experienced most hostile Arians. For he was present at the Nicene Council; and he rendered outstanding service against the proponents of Arian treachery, [as a] champion of the Catholic Church. He himself testifies to his own zeal in Epiphanius, page 355: "I," he speaks of the Arians, "in the Synod at Nicaea, ^C refuted, [and] they dared to write against my piety to your holiness." He says this to Julius, the Roman pontiff: and it is certainly true that the Eusebians, as they were then called, had given letters to Pope Julius against Marcellus and Athanasius. But even Julius himself, in a letter in Athanasius, *Apologia* II, [says]: "For Marcellus was testified to by us, and in the Synod at Nicaea [he] spoke against those who held the opinions of Arius." Nor did he only stand [firm] while present in the council: but he also always afterwards abhorred their communion. He sent word to their conspiratorial meeting at Tyre; he refused to attend the one at Jerusalem: he harassed in his writings Asterius the sophist, their henchman and parasite and advocate: of whom Eusebius makes mention several times in this work, and in every way opposed himself to their efforts. On account of these oppositions, it is certain that the Arians, inflamed with capital hatred against him, moved every stone so that, together with Athanasius, being driven from his see, he might be removed from the Church. The pretexts, however, were sought by them, as they were wonderful artificers of weaving frauds: and were found without great effort. In the Arian council at Jerusalem, which Marcellus refused to attend, the dedication of a certain temple, built by the order and at the expense of Constantine, was celebrated. They therefore give slanderous letters to Constantine: they accuse Marcellus of showing himself a despiser, not only of ecclesiastical order, but also of imperial majesty. For he had disdained to attend the dedication of the temple built in Jerusalem. Sozomen recounts this in book II, cap. 31. Constantine lent an easy ear to this slander; for the Arians were of very great influence at court: and the emperor was more than inclined toward Arianism, [and] inconsistent in his faith, as was truly written by Severus Sulpicius in book II, by Rufinus in book I, c. 17, by Lucifer, and by Jerome. Nor was he only indignant, but he punished Marcellus with exile to Constantinople. The interpreter of Athanasius, for those leading a solitary life, has made a mistake; for he translates it "drove into exile," whereas the Arians, since in the Greek it is *καὶ πεποιήκασιν ἐξορισθῆναι*, mean that they had obtained this from Constantine. Finally, Eusebius of Pamphilus, a deserter of the Arian faith, joined them: but always ^D *κακότεχνος*, and he harassed this in his own writing. He indeed, thus driven, went to Rome to Pope Julius: to whom he offered an apology for himself and his faith, which was later disparaged by this Eusebius here. Not immediately: but after he had remained there for a year and three months, received into communion. For the adversaries had written letters against him: and sufficiently insolent ones toward the pontiff: because he had sent *παραινοῦντας* to them [admonishing them], that they might wish to institute a correct accusation. These things Athanasius [states]: and Marcellus himself [states] in Epiphanius. Furthermore, concerning his confession of faith, Julius himself thus [writes]: "Concerning Marcellus, since you have written about him as one acting impiously toward Christ, I was eager to show you that, having come here, he declared that it was not true that what [was written] from you [should be written] about him: yet, however, being required by us to speak about the faith, he answered by himself with such boldness that we understood that he confessed nothing outside of the truth; for so piously did he confess his thoughts about our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, just as the Catholic Church [does]." These things Julius [says] in a letter to the Antiochene synod in Athanasius. But the pontiff speaks from the Marcellian confession: which Epiphanius reported in his own writing, concerning which opinions formerly varied, as Epiphanius says, who, as far as he was concerned, left it in doubt. Pope Julius, with others, as it seems, held it as orthodox: but the Sardican Council proceeded further: by whose suffrage he was absolved, having read and approved this very work, which Eusebius undertook to refute. The Synod itself, in Athanasius: "*ἀνεγνώσθη δὲ*," it speaks about the Arians, "in the Synod at Nicaea, also the writing of my fellow-minister Marcellus, and the *κακοτεχνία* of those around Eusebius was discovered." At that time both Eusebiuses had died, the Nicomedian and the Caesarean. The *κακοτεχνία* was in the writings. That Nicomedian one wrote nothing in this genre; but the Caesarean wrote. In what, however, the *κακοτεχνία* consisted, he teaches. "For those things which Marcellus said as if inquiring, these they have slandered as if they were confessed." Which is a familiar vice among the Eristics. Thus what is to be thought of this Eusebian writing, from the suffrage of that Sardican synod, is clear. The authority of Basil the Great is opposed to this determination of the Sardican council. He writes in epistle 74, Paris edition, from our library, page 876, concerning the opinion of Marcellus. "The dogma of Marcellus contains a setting aside of all our hope." He speaks about Marcellus himself. For also in epistle 52, he says that he "exhibited his impiety diametrically opposed to the Arian," so that no one might refer it to his disciples and followers, as for example Photinus, when he himself had established it orthodoxly. Others excuse it, [saying it] that it be possible that Marcellus might subsequently have fallen into this impiety, and propagated it in his other writings. I will not answer that which can be assumed from this work of Eusebius, [that] no other writing besides this one has flowed from Marcellus; for indeed Jerome affirms this: and Eusebius can be explained [as speaking] of the time preceding his own *ἀντίρρησιν* [refutation]. It stands from Basil that the same things were objected to this Marcellus by that divine man in all respects, which were previously produced by Eusebius, unless perhaps it be said on behalf of Marcellus that Basil was no less deluded than Eusebius, and had accepted as resolutely determined those things which he [Marcellus] had proposed as inquiring. It is certainly clear from that same epistle that the Westerners persisted in the opinion of the Sardican synod and with them Paulinus of Antioch (with whom, for Meletius, Basil had entered into communion) and thought Marcellus innocent. *Ρῆ-*

Ρῆ-* ^A and countless others to the furthest reaches of calamity. ^B Zeal, then, and envy were the origin of fratricide. ^C From this starting point, the man, having written in this book—and only in this, would that he had not!—immediately, beginning from his own hearth, set himself to make war upon the holy ministers of God, neglecting to speak or write against the great and numerous phalanx of those ^D who were ravaging his own region—the heretics—which was what he most of all ought to have done, had there been in him any power of the saving word, to act like a good shepherd and drive away the enemies of God's Church among the nation of the Galatians, as if they were wolves and wild beasts. But he, like one who needlessly and in vain stirs up the soil that is full of creeping things for the ministers of God, let loose his anger. And not against these chance persons, but against those who even excel among all by the grace of God ^D in their life and philosophical way of living. And not only against these, but also against those who have fallen asleep in Christ.

Editorial Notes

(4) "Zeal, then, and envy," etc.: He understands what is obvious to everyone, that righteous Abel was killed by his brother Cain out of envy. Basil of Seleucia calls this murder committed by Cain "the fruit of a brother-hating mind," or "a plantation of hatred of brothers," most shrewdly, and in alignment with Eusebius's thought. M.

(5) "From this starting point": The Greek word *ev tauti* (in this) is not used once by Eusebius. But Jerome differs in the *Catalogus*: "Marcellus, bishop of Ancyra," he says, "flourished under the emperors Constantius and Constans, and wrote many volumes of various hypotheses, especially against the Arians." Did Marcellus therefore write these other things after the death of Eusebius, which the blessed Jerome understood? Certainly he lived for many years, under and after the emperor Constantius, and after Eusebius was gathered to his fathers. My manuscript codex does not read "Constans" in Jerome's *Catalogus*, which I note in passing: it is more correct. But it is clear from Athanasius, who places Marcellus before a hundred Eusebiuses, that he wrote other things not only after these times, but also before them, so that he may have erred by mistake: or, led away by envy, he departed from the way, having reported in this book—and only in this book—his writing; although another probable reason can be brought forward, which he explained in the preface to the three books *On Ecclesiastical Theology*. M.

(7) I have removed the word *Articulum* (Article) before *syngr.*

(8) "To the holy ministers of God," etc.: Namely, he means Asterius, Narcissus, Eusebius, Paulinus, and the other Eusebius. But they were not all "ministers of God"; Asterius was a sophist and a *thutes* (sacrificer), and therefore not admitted even by the Arians themselves. There is no "holy minister" except by reason of a holy ministry. Eusebius, surely that Nicomedian, was a most wretched gulf of wickedness. But "I know Simon, and Simon knows me." It is strange that he would address his own consorts, fellow-tribesmen, and fellow-heretics so honorably. Eusebius. M.

(9) "Ravaging his own region": Galatia, and its metropolis Ancyra, rendered hostile by heretics during those times. This region was fertile in monsters of this kind. He refers, I think, to those portents of names and heresies, about which Jerome writes in the preface to the second book of his *Commentaries on the Epistle to the Galatians*: "The Galatians were pronounced foolish and dull." Anyone who has seen Ancyra, the metropolis of Galatia, knows with me that it is to this day torn apart by schisms, corrupted by a variety of dogmas, omitting the Cataphrygians, Ophites, Borborites, and Manichaeans. For these are already recognized names of human calamity. Who has ever heard in any part of the Roman world of the Passalornicitas, the Ascodrobus, the Artotyritae, and other monsters more than names (not spirits)? In these things, the most learned Jerome acts as the interpreter of Eusebius. M.

(14) "Excel among all": Certainly note, and everywhere in speech and proclamation: but as ungodly, and as pests of the Christian world. He means the living and the dead. That Nicomedian Eusebius, the *alastor* (destroyer), survived the son of Pamphilus. Paulinus, I believe, had died alone. But what the reality of that *on* (*in*) was, the histories of those times pass over in silence: perhaps he was among the others the most innocent, yet not to be celebrated with this illustrious proclamation. He commends their philosophical way of life, that is, one lived according to God, and refined, such as those ancients used to call by celebrated names: that is, it is really philosophy.

^A And he has treated them—those whose reputation for virtue and godliness and the practice of divine words is sung throughout almost the entire world, so to speak—with poison; and in vain and to no purpose has he poured forth his simmering wrath. Nor against those of the common people, I know not whom, but against those very men who, by the grace of God, had acquired a celebrated name for themselves through a divine—or rather, a philosophical—way of life. And he obstructed not only the living and the seeing, but even those who had long since fallen asleep in Christ: these men, whom piety toward God and a practiced knowledge of the sacred scriptures had made most renowned throughout the world—men preferred above all others—he did not merely content himself with insulting them once, but, like a wicked calumniator, he heaped up boundless and immeasurable slanders, often repeated and variously composed; ^B and furthermore, he even hurled imprecations upon them, just as women are wont to do in quarrels and brawls, attacking men who had never done him any wrong. Hence, indeed, his writing grew to an immeasurable and excessive length, so that that single work swelled to nearly ten thousand lines. Why should we wonder, then, if, having honed his tongue so sharply against the holy priests of God, and having exercised his impious audacity in this way as if by a preliminary exercise, he has advanced his steps of impiety to such a degree that, finally, he has subjected the very head and apex, the only-begotten and beloved Son of God, to such blasphemies of his—blasphemies which you will hear described, not by my own words, but by his, for I judge this to be better. ^C When I have set down in writing the things he himself has uttered, I shall proceed no further in this book to refute and disprove them; nor is there any need to lengthen the discourse by weaving arguments, since those whom he has lacerated with insults are by no means unknown or ignoble, but, even if they remain silent, are celebrated by the mouths and speech of all: and since that blasphemy which he belched forth against the Christ of God is so manifest and stands so self-evident that there is no need for any more rigorous diligence to confute it. ^D For those who have partaken of the divine grace in the Church, both small and great alike, have perceived this new-fangled speech of this strange theologian as soon as it was uttered. Therefore, I shall only use brief annotations, weaving the discourse together in order and sequence, and pointing out only the irrationality of the things included. Before I proceed to his own words, it is necessary to advise those who encounter this man's treatise—and especially if any of them should be Galatians—not to lose sight of the divine voice of the apostle Paul, who, writing to the Galatians themselves, warned them not to be moved away from Him who called them in the grace of Christ unto another Gospel.

For there is not another, as he himself says, save that there are some who trouble them and wish to pervert the Gospel of Christ. And it is necessary to fix one’s attention also on that passage by which that great Apostle, even while touching upon himself, puts forth a word to bring to shame those who were attempting to distort the men, saying: ‘But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel other than that which we preached to you, let him be ^A anathema.’ And taking it up again, he repeats it, saying: ‘As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than that which you have received, let him be anathema.’ But what was this, for which there was no other gospel [to be preached]? Is it not certainly that same thing which the Saviour is recorded to have said when entrusting it to His disciples: ‘Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit’? For this grace of the knowledge of the holy Trinity ^B He alone has bestowed upon us through the mystical regeneration, when neither Moses nor any of the prophets had ministered this to the former people. For it was fitting for the Son of God alone to announce this grace of the Father to all men; since the law was given through Moses, but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ alone, as the only-begotten Son. Whence, the lawgiver, after the manner of a pedagogue, was delivering the elements of the first principles of God's oracles to the former people, who were in their infancy, restraining them from the error of polytheism, but preaching that there is one God alone who should be known; while saving grace, providing ^C us with a certain super-mundane and angelic knowledge, revealed openly the mystery that had been kept silent from the former people for ages—that He who is the God beyond all things, He who was known to the men of old, is God and simultaneously Father of the only-begotten Son, and it supplied to those who are worthy the power of the holy Spirit through the Son. By this means the Church of God, having received the holy and blessed and mystical Trinity of Father and Son and holy Spirit for a saving hope ^D through the regeneration in Christ, [maintains it]. For the time was still such that the veil was not yet removed, and it was before the revelation. The orthodox Fathers cite in the first place that passage in the beginning of Genesis, "Let us make man," etc., of which Basil of Seleucia speaks. See Tertullian against Praxeas. Epiphanius draws the matter out by degrees. "One Deity," he says, "was especially announced by Moses; the duality of persons, strongly predicted by the prophets; but the Trinity of persons was made manifest in the Gospels." This he says in the *Ancoratus*, hence the most learned Nyssen calls it "knowledge by addition" in his book *On the Holy Spirit* and similarly [in his book] *On God*: "By addition our nature has known the mystery of the Trinity."

^A And this was the ^A Gospel, which it is not permitted to alter into another Gospel; which is not another, as the great Apostle continues to testify to the Galatians even now, crying out through his Epistle to them: *Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel to you other than that which you have received, let him be accursed*. [He does this] from afar, as is expected, so that one should not pay heed even to bishops, nor to rulers, nor to teachers, if any of them should distort the true word of the faith, teaching one to know God the Father, and handing down that one must recognize the Son as God; and to be zealous to share in the Holy Spirit (which things alone could become the hallmarks of Christians), ^B by which process the holy Church of God is distinguished from the Jewish mode of life. For just as that [former dispensation] rejected the polytheistic and Hellenic error through the confession of one God, so also does the Church’s singular knowledge concerning the Son present something greater and more advanced, teaching us to know the same God as Father of the Only-begotten Son—one who is truly Son, and living, and subsistent. For just as the Father (29) *has life in Himself*, as the Only-begotten of God Himself taught, so that the Father might also truly be Father—not merely acting in name, nor possessing the title falsely, but in truth and act being Father of the Only-begotten Son; and the Son being truly Son. But he who assumes the Son to be a mere Word, and testifies that He is *only* Word, and frequently says this very thing, that the Word was nothing else remaining within the Father who is at rest—[that is, the Father] who is at rest in silence and at work in those who speak—he clearly would be in agreement with some Jewish and human opinion, while denying the truly begotten Son of God. For if one were to ask any of the Jews if God has a Word, he would surely say [yes]. For every Jew would agree that He has both a word and many words. But if He also has a Son, he ^C does not acknowledge Him as the Only-begotten, nor as Father, as he explains at times. Nazianzen calls this opinion "poverty" more than once. And Gregory says: "You Jews, confessing the divinity as most singular, bring poverty upon its simplicity, settling cheaply on matters concerning the divinity." And the Greeks, worshipping empty idols and multiplying the divinity, are of necessity inclined toward the deception of idolatry, being attached to many gods who are in opposition to one another. But we, the Christians, treating the divinity of the Trinity, proclaim it as transcendent in wealth and power. Confessing one God, the Trinitarian power. Your poverty—and their polytheism—we equally reject and avoid. ^D

^A

He might go on to confess, if questioned, that if not a Jew, some bishop might introduce this view: granting that the Word is indeed united with God, and that He is eternal and unbegotten, and that He is one and the same as God, though titled by the differing names of Father and Son, while being one in essence and subsistence. How would he not clearly be seen as ^B adopting the view of Sabellius, while being alienated from that knowledge and grace which is in Christ? For the Church’s rule

Discipline concerning the Son

If, therefore, one were to appear as an opponent of these things, defining the Word of God as analogous to the word in men, without understanding or considering that one ought to attribute nothing mortal or human to God, who is beyond all things—nor anything at all that arises in our own conceits, even if the divine Scriptures, instructing those who encounter them as if they were children, speak of Him ^D somewhat humanly, attributing to Him hands, and feet, and eyes, and voices, and words, and mouths, and a face, and ten thousand other such things—things which it is appropriate to translate into God-befitting conceptions, [taking care that] nothing mortal or human in Him is active when He is creating the universe.

[alt-version omitted]

^A For God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth, the Savior Himself has taught us. And if He is Spirit, it is clear that He is divine, superior to every sensible and composite body; so that He has neither a sensible word expressed by a tongue and audible to mortal ears through vocal utterance, nor tongue, nor voice, nor face, nor anything else comparable to mortal and human reasoning. For if, as the divine Apostle taught, things which eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor have they ascended into the heart of man—such are the things that God has prepared for those who love Him—if this is so, then He who is the Giver of all these ineffable things would be more ineffable still; and one might with much greater truth say in the theology concerning Him that eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has the knowledge of the conception regarding Him ascended into the heart of men. ^B And the same argument would apply to the generation of the Son. The Savior Himself might be a competent hierophant for us in these matters, saying somewhere thus: "All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father, nor does anyone know the Father except the Son."

If, then, anyone should speak against these things, and would dare to say that the Son—to whom the Father handed over all things—does not subsist, but should define Him only as a Word, similar to that which is in men, which is sometimes silent in God, just like the one who is silent among us, and sometimes active, just like the one among us who, when speaking, utters sounds; and then, at some certain time—not even four hundred years ago—to say that He took on flesh (I know not how) and through it has completed the dispensation regarding man, and that only then did He become the Son of God, and was named Jesus Christ, and was proclaimed King, and was shown to be the image of the invisible God and the firstborn of every creature, not having been so before; and then, in such an absurdity, not even granting to Christ, from the time he conjectured, the life and kingdom that is into infinite and endless ages; but also not imposing upon Him an end, nor [the prospect] such as belongs to those who through Him will be counted worthy of the promises which the Savior Himself has promised—eternal life, and incorruption, and immortality, and the kingdom of heaven, which He promised to those who love Him—at that time, according to the awaited...

^A hope, he should assert that for all others the things of the kingdom will endure for an endless age, but for Christ alone there will be a sudden deprivation of all these things, with His kingdom to cease, and the flesh which He assumed to be left desolate, and the Word, who (51) is present in God, to be separated from the body—even if this body be immortal and incorruptible—and to be joined to God, in such a way as to become one and the same again with God, just as He was before; what excess of impiety could be left for this man? Wherefore, for these reasons, the testimony of the Apostolic distinction is necessary, saying: "Even if an angel from heaven should preach a gospel to you contrary to what you have received, let him be anathema." It occurs to me to marvel, in observing the Apostolic intent. For as if prophesying the future, he was specifying the theology of the Savior to the Galatians, writing in this way at the very beginning of his epistle to them (52), more ^B unusually than according to his custom: "Paul, an apostle, not from men, nor through (55) man, but through Jesus Christ." One would not find him having written in this way to others; for, as is likely, no others were the same as the ones to whom he was writing regarding the faith. For since they were assuming that Christ was a "bare man," he brought in the correction, teaching that He was not a man at the beginning of the epistle. And proceeding, he said to those same people: "That my gospel, which was preached to you, is not according to man, nor did I receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but through a revelation of Jesus Christ." By which he again demonstrates ^C that Jesus Christ was not just a bare man (54). If He was not merely a man, who was He? Advancing further, he explained, saying: "But when it pleased God, who set me apart from my mother’s womb, to reveal His Son in me." See how he clearly proclaimed the Savior as Son of God, and for this reason, God. And that he understood Him to be the Son of God even before His incarnate presence, he demonstrates most clearly by adding in the same epistle to the Galatians: "But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman." Therefore, it was not then, but before He was born of a woman, that the Father sent the Son, who was the Son and (55) pre-existed, as if the ancient Son of God and Son of man.