A that they were edited by Solomon, the Scripture of Paralipomenon states; but none whatsoever exist now other than those which the Church admits. The mystical Song of Songs is inscribed as having been selected from many songs. Josephus, however, records that the prophet Ezekiel wrote two books of prophecy; but we know that only one is found. (Thus, it is manifest that all these things have perished through the madness and neglect of the impious Jews.)
ADMONITION CONCERNING THE DISPUTATION AGAINST ARIUS
B 1. Having set aside those works which, in our judgment and that of the learned, lack clear indicators of genuineness or spuriousness, we now publish those which are more clearly proven to falsely bear the name of Athanasius. Among the published works, the first one encountered is the *Disputation against Arius at the Council of Nicaea*. This work was long ago judged by learned men to be unworthy of Athanasius. However, it is appropriate to append here what was noted by Peter Felckmann in the various readings at the end of the Commelinian edition, p. 21. "The inscription," he says, "of this disputation in the Augustan codex is: *Disputation in the Council of Nicaea against the Arian.* But the following parts are missing, as they are also in the Basil and Anglican codices." Furthermore, they are also inaccurate regarding the time. For what is said, that the Nicene synod was held in the year of Christ 310, cannot be true; since it was either begun or finished under the consuls Julianus and Paulinus, as is clear from Socrates, *Hist.*, bk. 1, ch. 13, and from the Nicene Acts recently published at Lutetia, and from Alphonsus Pisanus, in his second and third books *On the Council of Nicaea*.
But those consuls were in about the 20th year of the reign of Constantine the Great, this is (for authors vary), between the years of Christ 325 and 326. Therefore, it cannot be that this was the year 310. Furthermore, I do not see how what is said—that Alexander was even then bishop of Byzantium—can be true; since, as is clear from histories and the subscriptions of the Nicene Acts themselves, Alexander was a presbyter and legate of Metrophanes, bishop of Constantinople. Let Alphonsus Pisanus be consulted on this matter, *On the Council of Nicaea*, pp. 71, 322, 323, and 329, and the *Nicene Acts*, part II.
Indeed, I do not doubt that our Athanasius had various conflicts with Arius at the Nicene synod, since Cyril of Alexandria somewhere(48) reports that he was an object of admiration to all at the Nicene synod, and as it were a guide to all things for Bishop Alexander: indeed, a catalogue of libraries among various Greeks living in Constantinople was published long ago by M. Crusius, in which he reports that in the possession of the most illustrious prince Jacobus Marmoreta, there are held dialectical orations of Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, in which he debated at Nicaea in the first ecumenical synod against Arius before Emperor Constantine the Great. But whether this disputation, concerning which there is mention here, or the number of them, or whether it is Athanasius' at all, I see that learned men do not without reason doubt. Whatever may be the case, all our codices with great consensus attribute it to Athanasius.
II. So says Felckmann, who looks back to the title of the earlier editors, where it was read thus: *Disputation in the Council of Nicaea against Arius in the year of the divine incarnation 310, in the days of the pious king Constantine, and of the blessed Pope Sylvester, and of Alexander, bishop of Byzantium.* But what he holds concerning the dialogues attributed to Athanasius has been treated by us elsewhere at length. As regards this particular Dialogue, it is first of all clear that it is supposititious: both from the style, which is strangely abhorrent to the Athanasian, and from the arguments, which are for the most part invalid, not even reflecting the shadow of Athanasian energy. For which reason it appears neither in the ancient collections of the works of Athanasius, nor is it cited by any of the ancients, so far as we know. Nor does anything contrary to this doubt arise from the fact that, as Felckmann says, all codices attribute it to Athanasius. For where it has once received the name of Athanasius from an author, from that point it follows that, with librarians thereafter clinging to the autograph, the name of Athanasius remained prefixed.
III. Furthermore, it lies poorly in the title: *Dialogue held in the Council of Nicaea with Arius*: it is clearly evident even from the very beginning of the work that the disputation is said to have been admitted not in the council, but in a certain inn: nor is the conversation held here with Arius, but with a follower of Arius. But those things which follow in the earlier editions concerning the time of the Nicene synod, etc., do not appear in the majority of codices, and therefore it has seemed proper to expunge them.
OF OUR HOLY FATHER ATHANASIUS: DISPUTATION HELD IN THE NICENE COUNCIL AGAINST ARIUS
1. By the providence of God, I was traveling together with those servants of God whom I most dearly love. A While I was walking somewhat slowly on account of a bodily infirmity, together with the aforementioned servants of God, one of those who were traveling with me questioned me concerning this saying of the Lord, where He says: "My Father who sent me is greater than I" (John xiv, 28). To him who asked this, I replied as follows: "For the present, my dearest brother, forgo this inquiry; but after we have returned home, God permitting, we shall examine this matter as accurately as possible." When I had said this, a sudden impulse of piety arose in my heart, and I began to speak with myself: "Not without cause did the blessed Paul, writing to his own disciple Timothy, say: 'Exercise thyself unto godliness'" (1 Tim. iv, 7). For in truth, piety toward the Divine is a heavenly treasure filled with good things, which we can neither speak of nor fully conceive. B I also considered within myself that piety is something magnificent and august, capable of saving him who approaches it. There also came to my mind that parable of my Lord Jesus Christ which signifies that blessed piety is something great and abounding in every kind of immortal wealth, and that it is rarely found among men, unless perhaps from the many, a few, with minds studious of the truth, scarcely succeed in attaining its incorruptible beauty. Nor indeed did those men attain its lovely vision by their own power, but by their love for God and through frequent prayers they obtained that gift from God, that they might receive into their bosom eternal joy, who contemplate its excellent dignity.
2. The Lord says: "The kingdom of heaven is like unto a treasure hid in a field; the which when a man hath found, he rejoiceth, and goeth and selleth all C that he hath, and buyeth that field" (Matt. xiii, 44).
A Then, as if he were standing in my heart, he spoke to me gently, saying: "Man, even if your sins be many, hold fast to sincere piety toward the Divine. For because of this, forgiveness of sins is granted by God, death is conquered, and man shall best be able to enter into the kingdom of heaven." Furthermore, I have also taken into remembrance: "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished" with eternal fire. For in fact, this lawless one happens to be also ungodly; and from ungodliness sin arises. Ungodliness, therefore, is the mother of all evils; and folly is the nurse of all blameworthy things. Blessed, then, is the son of piety, because he shall be called a son of Christ.
3. B Meanwhile, we arrived at the place toward which we were heading, and having found the genuine brethren, we were all enjoying mutual joy—we, because we had been deemed worthy to see the saints, and they, because they beheld brothers. While we were talking a great deal among ourselves of things pertaining to the most venerable religion with much order and modesty, suddenly from the root of the Christ-fighting Arius, a beast in human form leapt upon us; and having listened for a short while to the words of piety, unable to bear them, he spoke thus: "Teach me your opinion, or I shall teach you my sentiment." And I answered him: "Do not challenge everyone to a disputation; for there are great men in the house of God. But if you wish for the present to examine it with me alone, who am the least, I offer myself to you most gladly for this purpose. C First, bring forward your proposition; only let us conduct the examination as lovers of truth, and let us not be disposed contentiously toward the God-inspired words that are to be brought forward by one another."
4. ARIUS said: "It seems necessary to me, first of all, that each of us, both I and you, should define the matters to be discussed, and each of us should set forth in brief what he thinks regarding God and Christ and the Holy Spirit, so that we may direct our words according to a target, and not fight a battle of words in vain, and that it may be clear what is the prevailing opinion and what is the one being refuted. For I wish to inquire of you regarding the faith, since I have heard in particular that you do not speak correctly concerning true faith and piety toward God."
5. ATHANASIUS answered: D "You have arranged everything in a manner befitting God; but I will speak my opinion in brief: I believe in one God the Father Almighty, who is always God the Father, and in God the Word, the Only-begotten Son of God, that He co-exists with His own Father, and that the Son is from the substance of God and the Father, and that the Son is equal to the Father, and that the Son of God is of equal honor, and that together with His Father He is present everywhere in His divinity—
and that the Son of God is contained by nothing, just as God His Father is not; and in the Holy Spirit, that He is of the substance of the Father, and that the Holy Spirit happens to be co-eternal with the Father and the Son. I say that the Word came in the flesh. A
6. *Ar.* I also believe in one eternal God, and in His Son whom God created before the ages and made Son. And all things which the Son has, He received from God, not having them; and that the Son is not equal, nor of equal honor, to the Father, but falls far short of the glory of God; as a created thing, He falls short of the power of God; and in the Holy Spirit, who was made by the Son. Behold, these are the things I think.
7. *Ath.* Come then, begin the discussion; for I see that you are held fast by great errors, even though you were the one who wished to make us the accused, as if we did not think rightly concerning the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. *Ar.* said: How do you say that God is always Father, who, being the only God, created His Son by His own will, as it is written? *Ath.* said: Where is it written that the Father is alone? *Ar.* said: In the Apostle Paul, who writes thus: "But to us there is one God, from whom are all things." *Ath.* said: Read the words of the Apostle that follow; for he said: "And one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things." *Ar.* said: Do you see that the Son is a minister, and not a creator in His own right, as He Himself said concerning Himself: B "Unless He sees the Father doing something; for whatever the Father may do, these things the Son also does." Attend to how the Son is a minister and not a creator. *Ath.* said: See that you do not fight against the truth. For what you think was said by Paul concerning God the Father, you will find the same thing being said by the same Apostle concerning the Son. For these are his words: "And He Himself placed in the Church, first apostles, second prophets, others evangelists, others pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the peoples, for the work of ministry, for the building up of the body of Christ, until we all come into the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, into a perfect man, into the measure of the age of the fullness of Christ; that we may no longer be children, tossed and carried about by every wind of doctrine, C in the trickery of men, in craftiness toward the scheming of error, but speaking the truth in love, we may grow up in all things into Him who is the head, Christ: from whom the whole body is joined and knit together by every joint of supply," and the rest. Do you see that the same expression is spoken in common of the Father and the Son, whereas you have interpreted it regarding the Father alone? D
A
*Ar.* You have brought forward the whole passage of the Apostle; but I consider the saying of the Lord which I previously mentioned to be more worthy of faith than what the Apostle has. For the Lord said that He could do nothing of Himself, unless He saw the Father doing it.
*Ath.* What did God make in the beginning?
*Ar.* Heaven, earth, sea, and all things that are in them, as it is written.
*Ath.* It remains, therefore, for you to show which heavens, and earth, and sea, and what is in them, God made first, and which, subsequently seeing, the Son made in like manner as His Father.
*Ar.* I consider it impious to say that the first world was created by God, and another by the Son, since a second world cannot be demonstrated, it being obvious to everyone that this one visible world exists.
*Ath.* Therefore, does the Son create the universe from Himself?
*Ar.* I beseech you, how from Himself? Certainly, no one would say that.
*Ath.* Where does the wise man find his counsel?
*Ar.* In his wisdom. B
*Ath.* And is Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God, according to the blessed Paul, or not?
*Ar.* Without controversy, Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God.
*Ath.* Is the wisdom, therefore, made wise from another source?
*Ar.* Far be it!
*Ath.* Therefore, it acts in all things of itself, as wisdom.
*Ar.* It is so.
*Ath.* Did the Father, then, create nothing?
*Ath.* Listen, and do not speak rashly things which it is not lawful either to say or to hear, as if no one could refute these arguments of yours. But for the present, answer me regarding what I am asking. How does the All-Powerful work His own work?
*Ar.* He effects all things by His power.
*Ath.* And does Christ rightfully exist as the power of God?
*Ar.* No one would deny it.
*Ath.* Therefore, since Christ is the power of God, and that power—which is Christ—effects [all things], the Father effects the same things.
9. *Ar.* How is it that what Christ effects, God effects?
*Ath.* Is the power separated from the One who is powerful?
*Ar.* Far be it! For who has ever seen an athlete in a wrestling match acting bravely apart, while his strength acts separately? For if that were the case, the prizes—that is, the crowns—would have to be awarded to both. C
*Ath.* You speak rightly. If, therefore, you grant this in the case of a man, that neither does his power perform anything separately, nor does his body act otherwise, then Christ, being the paternal power, also effects everything without separation that the Father effects.
*Ar.* Be it so, that the Son creates the universe together with God without any separation; but can He D also—
be equal to God, just as you heard from the Savior Himself A when He said: "My Father, who sent me, is greater than I"? *Ath.* I will ask you; do you answer me: Has my Savior spoken things contrary to Himself? *Ar.* Far be it! For the Son of God is found to be everywhere in harmony with Himself. *Ath.* How then does the Lord say in another place, "I and the Father are one"? *Ar.* You are a Sabellian. *Ath.* Why am I a Sabellian? *Ar.* Because you said that the Father and the Son are one. *Ath.* Do not slander me. For I did not say that the Father and the Son are one, but that the Lord said: "I and the Father are one." *Ar.* And yet this is the very heresy of Sabellius. *Ath.* Was the Lord then, who said: "I and the Father are one," a Sabellian? Do we not all Christians know Jesus to be the Son of God? Do you call Him a Sabellian and a teacher of heresy? *Ar.* Far be it from me to think so, but the Savior understood those words, "I and the Father are one," regarding His harmony with the Father. *Ath.* For what reason did the Lord say such things? What did He wish to indicate? The harmony, as you think, or the divinity, according to the right understanding? For if it is the harmony, as you suppose, then He was suborning witnesses B against the Father, lest, forsooth, He be disowned by the Father. But if that is true, then the Son accuses the Father of having shown Himself ungrateful, and of not having kept the pacts of harmony. If you wish it to be so, understand, I pray, whither such an opinion leads you.
10. *Ar.* But what would you have us say: that the Father and the Son are one? *Ath.* The Lord Jesus did not say: "I and the Father am one," but said: "We are one," and by these words, "we are one," He indicated a perfect duality; and by the expression "one," He signified the substance. Because you did not understand this, you fell into absurdities. *Ar.* Did not the Lord say: "the Father, who sent me, is greater than I"? *Ath.* Did not the Savior say: "I and the Father are one," and again: "He who has seen me, has seen the Father"? Nay, the Apostle also clearly declares the equality of the Son and the Father in these words: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal to God, but emptied Himself." Do you see that the Son is equal to His own Father, and not lesser? *Ar.* A great dissonance of the Scriptures on the present matter appears to me. *Ath.* Far be it that a man should dare to slander the divine books, written by the breath of God, as if they did not all agree with one another in these things. Certainly, all the Scriptures, like an even balance, agree D wonderfully with themselves. *Ar.* How can they agree? The Savior says: "The Father who sent me, is greater than I"; the same again says: "I and the Father"
A one we are," and otherwise: "He who has seen me, has seen the Father," by which he signifies his unchanging form, which he holds towards his own Father; as Paul also writes that the Son is equal to his own Father. *Ath.* said: O man, listen and understand that this chapter, which says: B "My Father, who sent me, is greater than I," is not severed from the rest of the chapters. *Ar.* said: If you show this, which is impossible, perhaps you will compel me also to follow your opinion.
11. *Ath.* said: Is the Son of God God, or not? *Ar.* said: God created by God. *Ath.* said: Answer me as you wish concerning that which I ask. Did the Son of God make all things, yes or no? *Ar.* said: It is already granted that he made all things, inasmuch as he is the power and wisdom of God. *Ath.* said: Does the Son of God then contain all things that were made by him, whether visible or invisible? *Ar.* said: It is so. *Ath.* said: Therefore his nature is present everywhere in its greatness. If you say that he is not present everywhere, you will say that the created things are greater than the Creator. *Ar.* said: He is present everywhere. *Ath.* said: If then the Word of God is present everywhere, how do you mean [it when you quote]: "My Father who sent me, is greater than I," C give me the reason. *Ar.* said: I am at a loss concerning this, but I ask you, tell me, by what reasoning did the Savior say the Father is greater than himself? *Ath.* said: If you do not first tell me what I am asking, I will not tell you what you wish. *Ar.* said: Speak, as you wish. *Ath.* said: Are the angels incorporeal, or men? *Ar.* said: Men are in a body; but angels, being spirits, are incorporeal. *Ath.* said: Who then grow weary, men or angels? *Ar.* said: Angels are incorporeal, so that when they minister, they feel no experience of weariness; but for man it is characteristic to grow weary, on account of the heavy weight of the body. *Ath.* said: How then did the Lord become weary? For it is written: "And Jesus, being wearied with the journey, sat down." *Ar.* said: You have drawn me, as you wished, from the example of the angels and of men; [he did so] not as God the Word became weary, but that it might appear that he took on this flesh, which the Word and God did not have before; for this reason he allowed the flesh to suffer its own [afflictions], that it might be evident that it is flesh.
12. *Ath.* said: Remember, that it has been previously admitted D that the Word and God is present everywhere. *Ar.* said: Assuredly. *Ath.* said: If then he is present everywhere, for what reason was he saying, "My Father who sent me, is greater than I"? *Ar.* said: I beseech you, do not delay to uncover the veil from the letter quickly. For I am very distressed in mind. *Ath.* said: Who was it that grew weary, man, or God the Word? *Ar.* said: Man. *Ath.* said: It is therefore now for you to understand. *Ar.* said: I perceive what you understand by this response of yours, namely, that when God
the Word is everywhere present, clearly He said regarding the flesh: "My Father, who sent me, is greater than I," A for it was that which was walking and growing weary, and moving from place to place. Certainly this holds true correctly.
13. *Ath.* Now recall what you said, that God the Word was created. From where shall we take the beginning? I, for my part, do not dare to speak so boldly against the eternal divinity of His Son. *Ar.* said: I indeed prove this from the Scriptures; but from where do you have it that the Son is eternal? *Ath.* said: I have learned from the books written by divine inspiration that the Son of God is eternal. *Ar.* said: What Scriptures are they that affirm the Son is eternal? *Ath.* said: The illustrious Paul, coming forward, will confirm the truth by his testimony: "For the invisible things of him," he says, "from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and divinity; B so that they are without excuse, because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful." *Ar.* said: The Scripture says this concerning the Father. *Ath.* said: Does not the blessed apostle Paul rebuke those who did not recognize the Son of God, who appeared through the body, as the eternal divinity of Him who adorned the universe? For from the magnitude and beauty of created things, the Creator ought reasonably to be recognized with thanksgiving. But it is manifest that all things which were made were made through the Word, and without Him was anything made. Wherefore you also ought, from the excellent cohesion of the elements, to reasonably understand the Creator, and not be ignorant of yourself, and to perceive that the world is the work of an eternal God, and not of a created nature, which is unable to produce so many things.
14. *Ar.* said: Let the Son be eternal; but being created eternally, he possesses eternity. *Ath.* said: If the Son is eternal, he is not a created thing; but if he happens to be a created thing, he was not eternal. *Ar.* said: Do I speak these things from my own authority? The Son himself says that he was created by God first of all. *Ath.* said: Was this mystery of the Son of God revealed to you alone, or to others as well? *Ar.* said: The faith is not for all; yet this faith was made known not to me C alone, but to many others as well. *Ath.* said: From where was it revealed to you—from God, or from men? *Ar.* said: From God. *Ath.* said: Were you yourself the hearer, or did others tell you about this? *Ar.* said: They did not tell me, but many holy men, speaking in the Spirit of God, affirmed that the Son was created. *Ath.* said: Who are these? Can we not also know? *Ar.* said: You yourself know that both the prophets and the apostles have spoken in many places that the Son is a created D thing. *Ath.* said: I heard you saying a little while ago that this was said by the Son, now
A you have passed on to the prophets and the apostles. But tell me, what prophet has spoken such things concerning him? *Ar.* said: And now I affirm that the Son speaks through the holy prophets and apostles, just as he said through Solomon: "The Lord created me as the beginning of his ways for his works." You see that God created him before all things for the sake of the works that were to come into being through him. *Ath.* said: Therefore, according to you, the occasion of the creatures became the cause for the Son's being created? *Ar.* said: It is so. *Ath.* said: Are the things created by God more precious, then, than God? How can that follow? For if he was created because of these, and not they because of him, then according to you, these are undoubtedly more precious than him; but may it not be that we think such a thing! For all things are for the sake of the Son, as it is written: "For it was fitting," says the Apostle, "for him, for whom are all things and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons into glory, to perfect the author of their salvation through sufferings."
15. *Ar.* said: Forgive me for having said that he was created because of the works; nevertheless, he was created before all things. *Ath.* said: Who was created before all the works of creation? *Ar.* said: The Son; for this reason he is written down as the firstborn. *Ath.* said: If someone worships Satan, does he do well or ill? B *Ar.* said: Such a person is to be accounted impious and atheistical, possessing no common sense, and is not worthy to be called a man, but inhuman. *Ath.* said: God, in speaking to Job, spoke thus concerning Satan, that is to say: "He is the beginning of the creation of the Lord, made to be mocked by my angels." You, therefore, in worshipping the first created thing, are worshipping Satan, as the argument has demonstrated. But if you wish to quibble that Satan is a creature existing *before* the Son, do you then claim that he is older than the Holy Spirit? For you have thus defined it: that the Son was created by God, but the Spirit was made by the Son. *Ar.* C said: The truth constrains me, not you. Yet, since you have cornered me in this, I in turn shall close you in with many authorities which declare that Christ is a created thing. *Ath.* said: Bring forth from the treasury the things that have been stored up by your father. *Ar.* said: He is my father, the God whom I worship; but what answer have you to these words, "The Lord created me," when the Lord himself acknowledges that he was created by his own Father? *Ath.* said: Those words have another spiritual power within them, and possess a divine treasure stored up D inside. *Ar.* said: I do not dwell upon the words of Solomon's statement alone; for I am not lacking in understanding, but I perceive that a spiritual meaning is seen here by those who are learned. Therefore, neither am I devoid of initiation, but I say that these words, "The Lord created me," contain a greater hidden power
A which you, being held by ignorance, do not grasp, and thus you wander; but it is the property of a wicked man to envy those who are superior. Ath. Tell me, then, without envy, what you think, what indeed seems excellent to you.
16. Ar. Verily, I take these words, "The Lord created me," as if it were said, "He begat me." Ath. If, therefore, the Son is begotten, He is certainly not created; or if He is created, He is not begotten. Ar. You do not at all understand the force of this word. Ath. Do not, I pray, be weary of enduring me until I understand. Ar. So that no passion might be understood, He says, "The Lord created me"; for in God, the act of creating and the act of begetting are one and the same. Ath. If, therefore, in God, the act of creating and the act of begetting are the same, then surely all created things are begotten of God. And if this is so, then according to you, the Lord is brother to all things that have been made through Him. Where then is the Only-begotten of God? Ar. The term "only-begotten" B is used concerning a thing that is special, excellent, and greatest. Ath. Does not the heaven seem to you to be a greatest thing? Ar. Decidedly. Ath. Therefore, according to you, the Son is, and, by your account, the earth and the sea must also be daughters. Ar. Far be it! God made only one Son. Ath. Do all things seem to you to have been begotten by the same decree of generation, or not? Ar. Indeed they do. Ath. Therefore, if the Son was made even as other created things, how is He the Son of God? Ar. I beseech you, how do you yourself understand these words: "The Lord created me"?
17. Ath. Believe me: I would not have answered you, but for the sake of the hearers I do not refuse. Solomon, being righteous and full of wisdom, was accounted worthy to foreshadow in a parable the creation of the temple, that is, of the body of the Lord Jesus, just as the Lord Himself said to the Jews: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." And He said this C concerning the temple of His body, as John says. But Solomon also spoke more explicitly about these very matters, setting them forth thus: "Wisdom built for herself a house, and set up seven pillars. She sacrificed her own victims, and mixed her wine into a bowl, and prepared her own table. She sent forth her own servants, calling with a loud proclamation to the bowl, and saying: 'Whoever is foolish, let him turn to me'; and to those who lack understanding she said: 'Come, eat of my bread, and drink the wine which I have mixed for you; forsake foolishness, that you may live.'" Clearly, Wisdom is God the Word, who, being rich, for the sake of His and His Father's ineffable benevolence, became poor D that we might be enriched by His poverty; who also, being in the form of God, became in the form of a servant; and
being equal A to His own proper Father, He walked among us as a servant and fellow-servant, being perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity. This Word, therefore, and God—existing as the wisdom and power of the Father, and being incorporeal, just as is God His Father—for our salvation constructed this body in the womb of Mary the Mother of God, without the intercourse of a man; and He became, as I said, man, and made Himself a pattern of every virtue, so that those who wish to follow may have, as if on a path, an imprint of divine virtue, by conforming to which they become partakers of the divine nature, as the 'Vessel of Election' says: "Be ye imitators of me, even as I also am of Christ" (I Cor. xi, 1). Therefore, after His passion and resurrection, Wisdom, Power, the Word and God, sent the apostles to all the foolish, the senseless heathens, those who did not know God, having set before them a table B—that is, the holy altar—and upon it the heavenly and incorruptible bread, granting life to all who partake of it; [that is,] His holy and most holy body; and wine that gladdens the heart and brings sobriety into the soul of each one who has tasted of Him. And thus, as if mixing His own blood in a wine-bowl, He invites through His apostles those who are called and chosen; who, having abandoned all folly, and showing themselves to be citizens of the kingdom of heaven, give heed to His voice, those who obey His utterances.
18. Ar. Since you have correctly understood the words: "The Lord created me," as referring to the body, I therefore agree with you because of the written testimony. It remains that you walk straight toward the truth, and do not act otherwise. Ath. said: What do you wish me to do? Whatever is pleasing and friendly to the truth, I will embrace most willingly. Ar. said: I will bring you a passage which you will not be able to allegorize; C for it clearly teaches that the very essence of the Word was made by the Father. Ath. said: If you bring me testimony from the divinely inspired Scriptures regarding what you assert, I will not be unmindful; only take care that you have not now written it according to your own will, for I will not tolerate that which is said by you. Ar. said: Do not reproach us as though we did not fear God. It is the voice of an Apostle which I said I would bring forward. Ath. said: Produce it, then. Ar. said: Peter, the most illustrious of the apostles, testifying to Israel concerning the matter at hand, spoke thus: "Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Lord and Christ" (Act. ii, 36). Have we perhaps forged this saying? Ath. D You have not exactly forged it, but you have adulterated it. Ar.
You have witnessed your own confusion, and you have turned to insults. Or rather, if you are able, answer to these things, or flee of your own accord to the truth. Ath. Read the whole chapter. Ar. "Let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Lord and Christ." Ath. Do not mutilate the words of Scripture. For if a body remains as it was first formed, it is surely beautiful; but if it be cut limb from limb, and a hand, foot, or finger be torn away, it is rendered deformed. Therefore, recite the words of Scripture that follow. Ar. These are: "—Jesus, whom you have crucified."
19. B Ath. Who is the one who was crucified: the Word of God, or the body which the Word of God took from the Virgin Mary? Ar. Do you not confess that the Word was crucified? Ath. I confess that the Word of God became man, and was crucified in the flesh. Ar. What do you mean, "in the flesh"? Did not the Word suffer? Ath. Confess first what you think. Ar. Even if you do not say it, I affirm that the Word was nailed with the flesh and suffered with the flesh. Ath. By a parable it must be shown whether the Word and God suffered. Ar. Say what you please. Ath. Have you ever seen anyone nailed to a cross? Ar. Certainly. Ath. Does it follow that, as long as the body is held by nails upon the cross, the soul is likewise held, and cannot depart from the body? Ar. It departs, since the soul is spirit. Ath. If it departs, it is clear that it is not held on the cross, that is, on the wood and the nails, and that is true. For while the body is held on the cross, the soul, which is free and cannot be held, leaves the body and departs to its own place. C Ar. This is indeed how it is. Ath. If, then, in the case of a condemned man you concede that the soul suffers nothing in the present bodily punishment, how do you say that the Word and God was nailed with the body? Ar. Let us grant, then, that God the Word did not suffer together with the body. Ath. Therefore the apostle Peter spoke most cautiously, being unwilling that any should perish through ignorance. For since the children of Israel thought that Christ was a man like us, he declared by his testimony that He is the elect of God, and these are the things which he said: "Although you, as a man, have suspended the just one, do not be ignorant that God hath made this same man Christ and Lord." Ar. Behold, therefore, Christ and Lord was made by God. Ath. Was God the Word, the Son of God, Lord before the passion, or not? Ar. Certainly He was Lord. Ath. And yet Peter says that He, whom the Jews crucified, was made Lord. Ar. What do you mean by saying "they crucified Christ and He was made Lord"? I desire to know what you mean. D
20. Ath. God the Word is Lord of all, being always Lord. But after He took upon Himself flesh from the flesh ruled by sin, even as it is written: "The Word became flesh" — and by flesh I mean perfect man, such as we are, in that we are merely men; for He Himself became man without sin—therefore, God made this one, who was born of the seed of David, Christ and Lord, having subjected to Him principalities, and powers, and dominions, and men, and angels; and He became Christ and Lord of all who were simply subjected to Him: Christ, indeed, because of the outpouring A of the Holy Spirit upon Him from heaven, like oil; Lord, however, because He received dominion over all things. Ar. Are then the Son and the Word and God one thing separately, and the man B another? Ath. God forbid! Ar. Tell me, then, how that is. For you called God the Word Lord, and His temple, that is to say the man, also Lord. I myself, however, think that there are two Lords. Ath. There are not two; God forbid! For there is one Son of God, who became man for our sakes. For tell me, does the earthly emperor, the man himself, rule separately, and is the purple robe a ruler separately, or not? Ar. How is it possible for either the man to rule apart from the purple, or for the purple to reign separately? Yet it does not escape me what you intend to suggest by such an example. Ath. If, therefore, it is impossible to call two emperors in the case of one emperor—that is, the man and the purple—why, I ask, do we acknowledge the lordship of the Word and God separately, and distinguish the empire of the holy and precious flesh, which has become a garment, just like the purple, since it has become the garment of the King, the Word of God? But indeed, the Apostle Paul also most clearly signified the unity of the lordship which the Dominical man possesses with God the Word, by saying of Him: C"Whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is God over all, for ever. Amen." Do you see that the Apostle also acknowledges Him who is from the seed of David to be God over all?
21. Ar. Do you not fear to call the man God over all? Ath. Paul did not fear, nor do I fear, since I see the economy of God in part. Ar. What economy? Ath. I speak of the incarnation of the God of all. Ar. I also confess the incarnation of the Word; but I do not dare to call Him who was crucified the God who is over all. Ath. Hear, and marvel all the more, that God, who is over all, D
A professes that He cannot be considered separate from the one who became man and was crucified for us, and who always is God. Ar. He said: Where is this novel statement written? Ath. He said: In the prophet Jeremiah, for he says: "This is our God, and no other shall be accounted equivalent to Him. He has searched out every path of knowledge, and handed it to Jacob His servant, and to Israel who is beloved by Him. After these things He was seen upon the earth, and conversed with men." Was then He who was seen, and is, God, by whose side no other god shall be accounted, or not? Ar. He said: As the prophet says, He is God. For it is unlawful to say concerning the Father that He was seen, or that He became man and lived as one among men, since the fact is manifest that it was God the Word who became man. Ath. He said: Therefore the one Son, who before all ages existed with His Father, being invisible God, became visible man. Ar. He said: That there is one Son of God is granted: but he does not exist with the Father infinitely. Ath. He said: Does not Wisdom and Power exist with the Father and the Holy Spirit? Ar. He said: It is so. Ath. He said: Then the invisible Son of God is one, the same who was also seen; incorporeal, yet He who assumed a body; immortal, yet He who experienced death in the flesh; the untouchable, yet He who was touched. Ar. He said: I agree with what you have said. Ath. He said: He, therefore, is both Lord and God because the flesh was united to the Word; and they are not said to be separated, but the Son of God, Jesus Christ, the Word and God, is one.
C 22. Ar. He said: I think that this definition concerning the incarnation is most correct; however, the Son is not true God, as the Father is. Ath. He said: From where did you bring this to us? Ar. He said: Have you never read the Gospel, where the Lord thus speaks to His own Father: "This is eternal life, that they may know Thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent"? Do you see that He called the Father the only true God, as if He Himself were not true God? Ath. He said: This is a conjunction, which in no way divides the words that were set before and those that follow. Indeed, those who think rightly acknowledge that conjunction in the Lord's utterance. Nevertheless, listen with patience to what I am about to say. If someone were to instruct another concerning Constantine, saying: "Know for certain the only Augustus and emperor of earth and sea, Constantine, and Constantius his son," would he not be confessing the son with the father, or not? Ar. He said: It is no small danger to say that Constantius does not reign together with his father Constantine, just because he is numbered together with him. Ath. He said: Do you then see a most grave danger impending D if you dare to speak thus of Constantine and Constantius, yet you fear nothing when saying such things concerning Jesus Christ and His Father?
A You ought to show the same piety toward the Lord as you have shown toward the aforementioned Constantine. You did not strip his son Constantius of the majesty of Augustus, nor of all other things previously said concerning his father, and the unity of dignity was not known to you from elsewhere than through him.
Arius said: Leaving aside syllogisms, prove to me by the authority of Scripture that the Son is true God, just as I set before you an evangelical utterance.
Athanasius said: Hear, therefore, the words of Scripture concerning this matter, and do not err. The Apostle John says thus: "And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us an understanding, that we may know the true God: and we are in his true Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life." B You see that the same expressions are brought forward concerning the Son and the Father, declaring the Son to be equal to the Father? For just as he said concerning the Father: "This is eternal life, that they may know you, the only true God," so also here concerning the Son he says: "This is the true God and eternal life." The phrase, therefore, "And whom you have sent, Jesus Christ," is a connective, which signifies the same as words of this kind: "You alone are the true God and whom you have sent, Jesus Christ," that is, that they may know your Son as true God, just as also you are the Father; even as in another place the Lord said: "I am the truth." But truth could never become a falsehood.
23. Arius said: I also confess that the Son of God is true God; but can you say, at once God and at once Son?
Athanasius said: What do you mean, "at once God, at once Son"? Because the C Son is both Son of God? Yes. For the Word of God is God, being the Son of the Father.
Arius said: I do not mean this, but that you cannot say, "at once God the Father, and at once Son with the Father."
Athanasius said: Why can I not say this?
Arius said: Because God the Father is unbegotten, but the Son is begotten.
Athanasius said: Is the word "unbegotten" used only of God, or also of some others?
Arius said: May it never be that anything else is called unbegotten; for what is unbegotten, that is also without beginning.
Athanasius said: Is the word "unbegotten" a substance, or that which signifies a substance?
Arius said: It is a substance.
Athanasius said: You speak falsely; it is not a substance, but that which signifies a substance.
Arius said: What do you mean?
Athanasius said: That the substance of God was neither made nor begotten; whence we appropriately call the substance of God unbegotten. Then tell me: was Adam begotten, or not?
Arius said: He was not begotten, but formed.
Athanasius said: I asked about "begotten," not about "formed."
Arius said: He was not begotten.
Athanasius said: Therefore, according to you, he will be without beginning. Likewise, Eve was not begotten, but created. What then do you say of him who is not yet begotten, whether he is begotten or unbegotten?
A Ar. He said: The term "unbegotten" is correctly used. Therefore, the Father will be unbegotten, but the Son begotten. Ath. He said: What, then, do you wish to infer from this? Ar. He said: Was the Son begotten, yes or no? Ath. He said: He was begotten. Ar. He said: You see that before he was begotten, he was not; but if he was, according to you he will be unbegotten. If this is so, the Son will not be begotten. Ath. He said: Is God simultaneously Father, or not? Ar. He said: He is always Father in potentiality, but not always in actuality.
24. Ath. He said: Was the world potentially infinite with God, or not? Ar. He said: It is so. Ath. He said: Therefore, just as God fashioned the world by his will, so too, according to you, did he fashion the Son. Ar. He said: Not like the world; for I remember the things previously demonstrated (35). But I say that he had the Son by his will before the ages; yet I grant a short interval for the begetting of the Son, so that he may be begotten. Ath. He said: Is God’s being Father a good thing, or will it be a reproach to him? Ar. He said: Far be it to attribute any reproach to God! But it is altogether a good thing that God is Father. Ath. He said: Therefore, according to your opinion, God progressed from worse to better. For if, when he was not Father, he later became Father, he therefore turned from lesser to greater things. If, however, you say that before he became Father he was more honorable, he then arrived from the more honorable at the worse. If this is so, how shall we call the Divine immutable, self-perfect, neither progressing to better things nor ceasing from the best toward worse? For it is the property of things subject to corruption to change, now from better to worse, and now from inferior to more honorable. B Ar. He said: Do you not wish to grant even the blink of an eye, in which the Son was not before he was begotten? Ath. He said: I cannot grant what is not. Ar. He said: Why? Ath. He said: Because it is written: “There shall be no new god in you.” For if I should grant the smallest interval of time in which he was not, the one I confess would certainly be "new." Far be it that a Christian man should think so, and confess things contrary to the divine Scriptures! Ar. He said: What is the contradiction, if we say the Son existed for the blink of an eye before he was begotten, so that we might not think him unbegotten? Ath. He said: A great contradiction is shown to me against the piety of the divine Scriptures, which everywhere testify that the Son was always, and there was never a time when he was not. C Or does it not seem to you that, if we say this, we think things contrary to the divinely inspired Scriptures?
25. Ar. He said: Offer your proofs. Ath. He said: Listen to John saying: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God; this was in the beginning with God.” Who of the holy prophets or apostles ever said such things as you? D
DISPUTATIO CONTRA ARIUM.
[A] Tell me, if it be possible even to conceive that there was some time when the Word was not God? For if this be understood as such, there was some time when God the Father was without the Word. Ar. You say, then, that the Son is a prolatitious Word? Ath. Far be it! For I declare the Word to be substantial, and not mere speech which dissipates, nor one that has proceeded from God and again returned into the Father according to Sabellius, but I say the Son is ineffably begotten and co-exists with the Father. For just as it is not possible to conceive of a soul without a word, so neither can one believe in God the Father without the Son. For just as the Father is without beginning, so also is the Word and God the Son of God. Ar. How can the Son be without beginning, who confesses that He is ignorant of the day of consummation? Ath. Tell me, O man, that which I ask you: An architect, having taken a reed, sets down measures; then he draws out upper floors and lower, I mean two-story and three-story B buildings. If he reaches the first floor, he knows that he must be busy with the second; and when he has completed the second floor, he perceives that it is near to the completion of the edifice. When the time comes for the third floor to be piled up, as if two or three buildings prior, he certainly understands that the conclusion of the building is at hand. Is this so, yes or no? Ar. I agree that these things are so. Ath. Therefore, does the Son of God, who made all things from what was not into being, and who assembled this element, and who provides for and manages the world until now—just as the Lord Himself said, "My Father is working until now, and I am working"—not know when He will bring to an end that which He Himself is creating? I pray you, test the matter. Go and ask an ignorant man about the completion of the month, one who does not know that the month consists of thirty days, whether he will give you an answer regarding that about which you are inquiring. But if you address the question to one who has the knowledge, he will immediately say to you, if it is the fifteenth day, that it is the middle of the month; but if it is about the twenty-seventh, he will tell you that the month is nearing its completion. The same principle holds for the moon, and likewise for the year: if C you ask a learned man when it is completed, testing it according to the understanding that is in him, he will tell you, since the eleventh month is completed and the twelfth has begun, that it is about to be finished.
26. Ar. The statement is so. Ath. If, therefore, an architect knows when he will complete the building, and a learned man understands from the number when the month is completed, and from the experience of the cyclic course when the moon is full or when it ceases to be so,
A or at what time the year is completed—how then should we not say that the Lord Jesus, who is the maker of the world and who is to bring it to completion, knows the very day? For if he were ignorant of it, how, when asked about the end of this age and his second coming, could he have been able to answer with the truth? For it is the property of those who have certain knowledge of the things which are here and which are coming to pass, to declare the truth. Hence, the Savior, knowing, indicated the truth when he was asked. For since the disciples asked what the sign of the coming of the Lord Jesus and of the completion of this age would be, he answered thus: “Take heed that no one leads you astray. For many will come in my name, saying, ‘I am the Christ,’ and will lead many astray. And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that you are not troubled, for these things must happen, but the end is not yet. For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines, and pestilences, and earthquakes in various places. But all these are the beginnings of sorrows. Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you, and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. And then B many will be scandalized, and will betray one another, and will hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and will lead many astray. And because iniquity will abound, the love of many will grow cold. But he who endures to the end will be saved. And this Gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all nations, and then the end will come.” And a little later he says: “For there will be great tribulation, such as has not been from the beginning of the world until now, nor ever shall be. And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved. Then if anyone says to you, ‘Lo, here is the Christ, or there,’ do not believe it.” And with other things inserted: “For as the lightning comes from the east and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of man. Wherever the body is, there the eagles will be gathered together. Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light, and the stars of heaven will fall, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken; C and then the sign of the Son of man will appear in heaven.” And a little later he says: “Amen, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. But of that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels of the heavens, but the Father only.” It is therefore for those who are truly wise to discern from these things which the Savior signified beforehand concerning the day and the hour, D and to know most certainly when he himself is to come to restore all things, as it has been determined, according to the secret counsel of him and his Father. For taking the Gospel in your hands, read the passage of Matthew concerning
the matter inquired into, and all things will be clear to you, as the Lord is not ignorant of the day. For if he were ignorant, how could he have predicted things not yet in existence, nor indeed having come to pass, the signs and trials which precede the day? For he has predetermined the signs up to the consummation and his own coming [parousia], and their qualities, so that even the more diligent and industrious are able to recognize the time from what was previously mentioned by the Lord.
27. A Ar. "Has he said, 'Neither does the Son know that day'?" Ath. He said, The Lord did not say, "Neither do I know that day." For it would have been consistent for the Lord to say this, if he had intended to show regarding himself that he did not have knowledge of the matter. And indeed, in Matthew it is not recorded, "Neither does the Son know that day," and the other evangelists have omitted the narration of this; B but Mark alone says, "Neither does the Son know the day." But you, ponder the narrative of Mark in your heart, and see that the Lord is not ignorant of the day. For the Lord Jesus says: "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father." C For knowing himself not to be separate from the Father according to essence, but united in divinity to God his Father, he signified his own foreknowledge in the foreknowledge of the Father, as the Lord says: "I and the Father are one"; and again: "All things that the Father has are mine." The Savior did not say, "All things that the Father has are mine," on account of created things, but the Lord said that those things which pertain to the divinity of the Father are his own, such as immortality, incorruptibility, invincible power, immutability, incomprehensibility, might, foreknowledge, and whatever the Father himself has, these same things are proper to the Son. But he said that the angels and the Son were ignorant, as has been said previously.
28. Ar. "Is there another Son?" Ath. There is indeed one true Son of God, the Word and God. But there is also another, as it were, a son by adoption through the temple of the body of his own, our Lord Jesus Christ, D as the divine Apostle says: "For you have not received the spirit of slavery again to fear, but you have received the spirit of adoption, in which we cry, Abba, Father." But Christ himself says explicitly to the apostles: "My little children, yet a little while I am with you, and I go to him who sent me"; and to the Jews he speaks thus in parables: "A certain man had two sons, and coming to the elder, he said: 'Go, work in my vineyard.' He, answering, said: 'I will, sir,' and did not go. Then coming to the other..."
he said: 'Go, work in my vineyard.' But he said: 'I will not.' Yet afterwards, being moved by repentance, he went." A And the Lord asks: "Who did the will of his father?" The Jews answered: "The latter son." Now it is acknowledged that the father is God of all, and the vineyard is the ways of righteousness, in which he commanded the elder son to work. But he who shortly after gave orders for the commandment to be disregarded and scorned the commander, is the people of the Jews, who, on account of their infidelity, were excluded from adoption. The younger son of the father is the people of the Gentiles, who, at the beginning B of the calling, having refused to obey on account of their infidelity and having been held back by idolatry, afterwards, led by repentance and believing, showed himself obedient to the father’s command. And through this obedience he appeared as a friend and heir, as a son of the Father, having been deemed worthy of every honor and grace from the Father, except for the knowledge of that day and hour—namely, of that consummation. But he received signs alone, so that, if he were unaware that the end was near, that day might not suddenly catch him unprepared. C
29. *Ar.* I acknowledge that what you have explained regarding the day was said correctly. But I deny that it can be correctly said that the Son is united to the Father according to substance. *Ath.* Since you have not a little zeal for disparaging things that are righteous and which the pious rightly acknowledge, give me an account: what, in the end, is substance? *Ar.* Whatever exists in hypostasis, this is substance. *Ath.* Correctly said. But since we are now holding a discussion about God, tell me what the substance of God is, lest the unlearned perhaps think that we are speaking about money. *Ar.* The substance of God is: if there is anything that is God, this is substance. *Ath.* You have spoken correctly; now listen in turn. *Ar.* Say what you wish. *Ath.* You know that God, accommodating Himself benignly to our weakness through the divinely inspired Scriptures, often speaks to us in a human manner, so that human nature, by means of those things which are said in a way similar to those things with which we are conversant and which we know, might be able to understand the celestial divine mysteries. *Ar.* It is so. D *Ath.* When, therefore, God says through the prophet to His own Son: "From the womb before the day-star I have begotten Thee," He signifies the generation of the Son from the Father’s substance. *Ar.* Does God, therefore, have a womb? *Ath.* I have already forewarned you often that, on account of our weakness, God is presented in the divine Scriptures as being similar to man; not that God is such, but so that we might piously understand divine things through bodily examples. For no other reason, then, does He call it a womb than to declare that the Son Himself is begotten from the substance of the Father. Otherwise, if the matter were not so, tell me yourself how those words ought to be understood.
A Ar. The Scripture says from the person of the Father: «My heart has poured forth a good Word.» Does it, therefore, say that the Son is the Word that was poured forth? Ath. The Scripture spoke well, as it did in all other things; but you, taking the passage, have distorted it wickedly. Ar. Then explain to us the truth of the passage yourself, since, as it seems to you, I have distorted it.
30. Ath. Since the Scripture proclaims the Son to be begotten from the womb, it signifies that the Son is truly from the divine hypostasis or substance. Therefore, so that the weak race of men might not believe the generation of Christ to be human, it says: «My heart has poured forth a good Word.» But if anyone should dare to attempt again to call the Son a spoken Word, he will remember the words, «From the womb,» and he will cease from his wicked thought. For the Scripture has encompassed every human mind, so that no one might be driven by heretical insanity against the eternal and incomprehensible generation of the Son of God. For if He is from the womb, how did He come forth from the heart? And if He is from the heart, how is He from the womb? Ar. What, therefore, ought we to say and think? Ath. We learn nothing else from such examples than that the Son is begotten from the substance of God and the Father. Ar. If the Son were consubstantial with the Father, why did He not say so when He was present with His disciples? Ath. Where, I ask, did the Son not confess Himself to be consubstantial with the Father? Ar. Can you show that? That will surely be one of the things that cannot be done. B Ath. We do not attempt to draw conclusions from doubtful matters, but we wish to show the truth from evident facts. Remember that you said that what God is, that is His substance, that is to say, the Son. Is it so, or not? Ar. By no means. C Ath. Why then did the Lord say: «I and the Father are one»? Unless the Son is the same in the paternal divinity, how can He say, «I and the Father are one»? Did He speak falsely or truly? God forbid! Truth could never become a lie. But also these words, «He who has seen me has seen the Father,» indicate nothing other than the holy divinity. For if the Son is of a different substance from the Father, how can the Father be seen in the Son? For if a statue of a man made of wood cannot be recognized in one of stone, because it is not of the same substance; and if a stone cannot be recognized in wood, or wood in stone, as far as the account of substance is concerned, it follows that God, the King of all, must be recognized in His consubstantial Son. For things that are similar, D in that which
is seen, exhibit knowledge of those which are not seen.
31. *Ar.* Why then does the Lord say, "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman"? Can the vine and the husbandman be consubstantial? *Ath.* Do not truncate for me the Lord’s own utterance; but read it as it stands. "I am," says the Lord, "the true vine, you are the branches, my Father is the husbandman." Tell me then: if the Son is not consubstantial with the Father based on the example of the vine and the husbandman, do you therefore say that He is consubstantial with men? *Ar.* Far be it! *Ath.* Calmly listen, and respond to me on these points. The vine and the branches are consubstantial, are they not? *Ar.* It is entirely so. I entreat you, however, to put a brief end to the explanation of this chapter, so that you may make me such as you yourself are. *Ath.* Unless you first answer what I ask, you will not obtain what you request. *Ar.* Say what you wish, and I, if given opportunity, will answer to the best of my strength. *Ath.* For what reason are the right hand and the arm of God mentioned in the Scriptures? *Ar.* We understand things of this kind according to the notions that follow from them. For if He says, "Your hands have made me and fashioned me," here we recognize the creating power of God. But when He says, "To whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?" it is clear that He is speaking about the Son. Furthermore, these words, "The right hand of the Lord has done valiantly," without doubt signify the Son, through whom all things were made. *Ath.* Is the arm consubstantial with Him whose arm it is, or not? *Ar.* That is the case, yes. *Ath.* Is the right hand also consubstantial with Him whose right hand it is, or not? *Ar.* It is so, yes. But what do you mean by suggesting that I believe the Divine to be eternal yet composite? Have you never heard of Clement, the disciple of the apostle Peter, who overturns this type of doctrine? *Ath.* Remember, I beg you, O man, the things that have been said, and do not be led astray. For I worship a Divine which is simple, and which is not composite or circumscribed, having learned this from the holy and divine Scriptures, and from those who have succeeded by continuous succession to the episcopacy. Therefore, for no other reason does Scripture call the Son an arm and a right hand, than so that we may piously understand the Son to be consubstantial with the Father, because it is impossible to conceive in man that the arm, the right hand, and the finger should be of a different substance, just as each of them is naturally different. *Ar.* I agree that the Son is consubstantial with the Father. Now I would like you to explain to me what the vine signifies.
32. *Ath.* The divine Scripture is accustomed to mention two kinds of vine: one that is good, fruitful, and exhilarant, and gladdening to the heart of man, which
A is the Lord Jesus Christ. There is another, the devil, raging and distilling venom, as it is written: "For of the vine of Sodom is their vine, and their branch is of Gomorrah; their grape is a grape of gall, their cluster is of bitterness; their wine is the uncurable fury of asps" (Deut. xxxii, 32, 33). The people also were called a vine, and the righteous are frequently called vineyards, yet simply and absolutely, without the words, "I am the true vine" (Joan. xv, 1). To prevent the Savior, therefore, from being reckoned by this title among the aforementioned vines—not the devil, however, but, for example, that one transferred from Egypt and planted to bring forth the fruit of a grape, but which instead produced thorns—He said with an addition: "I am the true vine," whose fruit is life, joy, peace, love, righteousness, most pure faith, knowledge, piety, chastity, gravity, humanity, meekness, temperance, and the like. For since the branches also happen to be of the same nobility as the true vine, it is fitting that they should produce a fruit similar to the vine of which they are the branches. He therefore pointed to the apostles, at the same time preparing them to remain firm in the faith and not, by leaping away from the truth like Judas, remain fruitless. For those who slip away B from the love and faith of the Lord, being pruned like branches, are cast out of the divine things. He therefore exhorts the disciples to be sober and eager by saying, "My Father is the husbandman," as if He were saying: "I wish you to know that if my Father cultivates anyone, such a one yields my fruit, since He does not allow strange fruit to sprout on the true branches of the vine." For walking in the vineyard, that is, in the storehouse of the soul, He prunes away all that is rotten and frenzied, so that it may not, by overgrowth, corrupt the fruit which the husbandman desires to be produced. But since the account of the sensible vine can contribute to what we are seeking, we must begin from there to set forth the narrative concerning this. C 33. The vine remains flourishing and well-branched, resisting firmly against the onsets of winter; but when it has been reached by the cruelest attack of its cold, it begins to wither some of its leaves, and these, through decay, becoming weak, fall from the heights, being carried from the upper parts to the deeper ones, and then the vine remains, well-branched, holding out against the rush of winter. But if, by the persistence of the intense cold, some of the branches have been damaged, the vine nevertheless, with the healthy branches that remain, finishes out the winter and escapes from the wintry toil. But when spring has been reached, which is the new year, it hopes for rest
seems to rest; but suddenly the farmer stands over it, carrying a blade, and first, having carefully inspected all the branches, he begins to prune those damaged by the winter, and then to remove also the healthy ones as far as the third or fourth bud. The vine, stripped and struck by the blade, stands A suspended, looking up to heaven, and at the same time weeping for three days. But receiving consolation from the providence of God, having ceased its weeping, suddenly having sprouted a great number and multitude of branches, it appears the same as it was before, nay rather, even more glorious. From the things previously set forth, what we are about to say concerning the true vine will be clearer to you.
34. Thus the Lord is like a vine, full of branches, on account of the multitude of the disciples and of the surrounding crowds who were running to him for the sake of obtaining help; so that the number of those who believe in him exceeds all conjecture. They, indeed, through their indissoluble love for him, cling to him like branches, of whom some, for the sake of receiving spiritual benefit, do not wish B to be outside of him, but rather to be with him: others wishing to be healed, others hearing that Christ has come, and having assembled for the same purpose, desiring to see the novel spectacle, namely God appearing in the flesh and dwelling among men. In short, all things were full of joy upon the arrival of the Lord; wherever he walked, like a vine thick with branches, on account of the many thousands of men who were accompanying him, he was conspicuous to all, the burning love of all being toward him, as all were united to him. But when winter winds began to blow from the high places, for the testing of those who were accompanying him, immediately not a few, like withering leaves, fell away from the life-giving vine to which they were clinging. And C others, for fear of the high priests, lest they become excommunicated from the synagogue, denied their own life, just as we see the same things happening even now. For just as they did then, so today do hypocritical men choose the glory of the persecutors of the Church more than the glory of God. Others, however, not understanding the divine and spiritual words of the Lord, went back; and deeming their benefactor to be guilty and worthy of reproach, they dared to say, "Who can listen to him?" These indeed are imitated in our time by those who refuse to follow the truth, because tribulations and temptations follow the faith itself. For they say, "Who can observe the tradition of the commandments of the Lord and of the faith?"
35. Furthermore, the winter's severity revealed the D infidelity of Judas: just as those friends of this world now show themselves, who, although formerly they were disciples, friends, and companions of Christ, have conspired against Jesus.
A He was not ignorant of their rottenness, but he did this so that he might render them—since they were using the Lord’s money—all the more ready to fight bravely for the Lord, rather than to undertake war against their king out of love for the world. Such men, like ignoble and fruitless branches, are pruned by the husbandman and become fodder for eternal fire. Yet frequent storms of winter rushed upon the true vine, namely the Lord Jesus, and when the Scribes and Pharisees wished to stone him, fearing that they might be killed by the crowds who loved the Lord, they desisted; and when, at another time, they wished to seize him, Jesus did not allow them to take him until the hour and day, which the Lord himself had foreordained before the ages, had arrived in which it was necessary for him to suffer. Again, at another time, when some wished to cast him down from a cliff, he himself quietly passed through their midst; and there were countless other trials B that were looming, which, once they attacked and were restrained, came to nothing. Now, it was the beginning of the new year, at which time, according to the Lord’s precept, the Passover was to be sacrificed. But God commanded them, as he had instructed them, to loose every bond of wickedness, and to render God propitious and reconciled to themselves through almsgivings, not to hate one’s neighbor, and not to plot any evil against any human being because of their common humanity, but to offer the worship due to God in peace and the utmost purity of soul.
36. Therefore, at the time of the feast, Jesus comes to Jerusalem with his disciples, not as one ignorant of what was to happen to him, but as one having it most clearly understood. C Indeed, he had even foretold the coming events to his disciples: “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered into the hands of the elders and scribes, and they will deliver him to the Gentiles, and they will condemn him to death.” Therefore, so that the injustice of the lawless gathering of the Jews might be manifest, Peace entered into Jerusalem. But those who were strangers to peace were disturbed when they saw it; for peace is an enemy to foes and murderers. For they are naturally inclined to rejoice in evil deeds rather than in good ones and in the fruitfulness of peace. But they, having watched him, suddenly rushed with swords into the place where Jesus was with his disciples; D and all, looking around, first laid their impure hands upon him while the disciples were still standing with him. But he speaks peacefully to the murderers: “If you seek me, let these go their way.” But the disciples, having seen the grievous trials—for the power of the Holy Spirit was not yet present with them—abandoned him, the Master and Lord, and took to flight. But those household servants of Satan seized Jesus, whom they led away to the place of Calvary, so that him...
they might crucify him there, having fulfilled all that had been written beforehand concerning him; and having suspended him, they fixed him upon the cross, as a vine upon a stake. But he, being left alone upon the cross, having, as it were, two or three branches, stretched his hands out transversely, but his head with his chest and feet straight. And being stripped of the foliage of the rest of the branches, and wounded by the nails and the lance, he began to weep with his holy blood like a fountain. Suddenly, however, he arose on the third day, diminished in nothing of what he was before, but rather appearing with greater glory, and making his own life evident to the hearts of the disciples, confirming them in faith. Afterward, having blossomed into a much greater number, a throng of disciples after the resurrection, no longer in Judea only, but he extended his branches B even unto the sea; his shadow covered the mountains, and his shoots the cedars of God. This interpretation of the true vine has been piously set forth by me, as I was able.
37. It remains for me to inquire concerning the Holy Spirit. For as regards the Son, I too confess him to be equal to the Father in all things, except that he is omnipotent. Ath. You have surely confessed nothing that is consonant with piety. Ar. Why? Ath. Naturally, the Son is equal to his own Father, and is Lord of all things over which his own Father rules. Ar. I am speaking of omnipotence, not of the fact that the Son rules over all things over which his Father rules. Ath. What is omnipotent? Ar. He is one who has all things under his power. Ath. Does the Son, therefore, not have all things under his power, according to you? Ar. You have spoken rightly along with the rest: for the Son does have all things under his power, and he is likewise omnipotent, just as the Father. For since there is C one nature of the divinity of the Father and of the Son, there is also one omnipotence. Now, therefore, let us discuss the Holy Spirit; especially since you defined at the beginning that he is consubstantial with the Father and the Son, which I myself deny, leaning on the authority of the holy Scriptures, from which I have that he is created: and this I prove to you in a few words. For John asserts that all things were made through the Son, in which word he does not at all include the Spirit; and again, that he was sent from heaven by the Father to the aid of the apostles: now, that which passes from place to place is of a transient nature. Hence it is evident that he is of a created nature, and not of an uncreated one, such as that which is called the blessed nature of the Father and the Son, which also contains all things, and is everywhere present by its substance; D just as was conceded by you above: in which I am not with you, but with the truth.
Add that God has spoken thus through the prophet: "I am he that establishes the thunder and creates the spirit," against which I do not think you can contend. 38. A Ath. It is written, "Be ye holy, for I the Lord am holy, who sanctify you." And again, the Savior, for the sanctification of the disciples, addresses the Father thus: "Father, sanctify them in thy truth." And again, the Savior himself says of himself: "I am the truth." From these, therefore, it is clear that the divinity of the Father and the Son is holy and the maker of holiness, which, in fact, sanctifies all those partakers of reason who, by free choice and diligence, are deemed worthy to receive the holy and blessed essence into the communion of holiness. If, therefore, the Holy Spirit is not of the substance of the Father and the Son, why did the Son of God include him in the symbol of sanctification? For the Lord says to the disciples: B "Go, teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." If, therefore, all the nations that believe and are sanctified are sanctified by that thrice-blessed naming, it is evident that the Spirit also belongs to the divinity of the Father and the Son, since he himself is holy by substance, and makes all those holy who come to his communion; just as the Apostle says to those whom he addresses thus: "But ye are washed, but ye are sanctified in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and in his Holy Spirit." But if he is not of the substance of God and the Father and the Son, I ask again, why is he numbered with the Father and the Son, as though, forsooth, C the divinity of the Father and the Son were not sufficient for the sanctification of the faithful, that God should have assumed the Paraclete, the Spirit of truth, for the completion of sanctification, if he be not of his substance? But if this is admitted, how can we say that the Divine is in need of nothing, is perfect in itself, and borrows nothing from anyone, being able to provide for itself what it needs?
39. D Ar. If the Spirit were of the same substance as the eternal divinity, he would certainly be everywhere present according to substance, and would not go by being sent from one place to another. Ath. said: Do the holy angels have the Spirit, or not? Ar. said: Certainly they have it. Ath. said: Does the Holy Spirit happen to be with them always, or was he with the holy powers only for a time? Will you say that the angels are sometimes holy, and sometimes not holy? For they are holy by the presence of the Holy Spirit: but in his absence, it is certain they are not holy, according to this sentence of God: "My Spirit shall not abide with the men of this generation, because they are flesh."
A And the apostle Paul says: "If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." If, therefore, the cause of evil actions is that the Spirit is not with those who sin, because the Holy Spirit is not present and dwelling in some, it is shown that they are not of Christ. Are then the holy angels ministers of sin, if they do not have the Holy Spirit at all times? How then do they unceasingly contemplate the glory of God, unless they are always holy and partakers of the Holy Spirit? Arius said: The holy virtues always possess the Spirit. Athanasius said: Did the holy Fathers who from the beginning of the world pleased God possess the Holy Spirit with them, and do they still possess Him, or no? Arius said: All the saints both possessed and possess the Holy Spirit without any separation. Athanasius said: Was the Holy Spirit with the apostles when they were in the flesh, or no? Arius said: It is impious to say that the Holy Spirit was not with the apostles. Athanasius said: Did they all set out together to preach the kingdom of heaven, or were they dispersed into the twelve parts of the world? Arius said: They were separated from one another in the flesh, so that they might teach all nations the faith of Christ. Athanasius said: Therefore, if the Holy Spirit is with the angels, and if He is likewise with the holy souls of the Fathers who pleased God; if He was also with the apostles when they were separated by long distances from one another to announce the kingdom of heaven; then He fills all things and is present everywhere according to his substance, just as God the Father, and his only-begotten Son. B Therefore, He is present always and unceasingly. Why then did the prophet say in the person of God: "I am the Lord your God, establishing thunder and creating spirit," unless it were a created power? Athanasius said: Is the Holy Spirit always being created according to you, or was He created once? Arius said: Do not propose questions to me that are alien to a sound mind. I say that the Spirit was created before all ages. Athanasius said: The prophet said "creating," which word of the prophet indicates a God who is always creating. Therefore, he does not understand this word "creating" to refer to the Holy Spirit, but to the blowing of the winds, for the refreshing of the entire nature of created things. And this will be most clear to you if you take the prophet and read what follows. For if, as you have conceded, the Spirit was created before all ages, he would surely have said: "I am God, who establish thunder and have created spirit." But he did not speak thus. Arius said: That is well observed by you. But by these words: "All things were made through him," all things whatsoever are comprehended, as if the Spirit were placed with all the rest, even if He were the greatest power created for the work of creation. Athanasius said: Do you therefore think the Lord of all, the Father of the Lord... C D
of our Jesus Christ, is comprehended by a created nature? Arius said: Far be it from me to ever say this! For we are not ignorant of what the Savior said: "No one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son." Athanasius said: Is there any man who is known externally and internally by his own spirit, or not? Arius said: It is the voice of the Apostle that says no one knows the things of another, but each one is known only by his own spirit. And how can one dare to say that it is not so?
41. Athanasius said: What then knows the deep things of God, B a created nature, or an uncreated substance? Or do you say that an uncreated substance is comprehended by a created one? But if you answer that it is comprehended by the Uncreated, it remains for you to confess that the Holy Spirit is consubstantial with the Father and the Son. For the Holy Spirit knows all things that are of God, even His deep things, according to the blessed Paul who says: "No one among men knows the things of a man, except the spirit of the man which is in him; so also no one knows the things of God, except the Spirit of God. For the Spirit searches everything, even the deep things of God." Arius said: The Spirit knows all the things of God that it might please God [for Him] to know, that is to say, His counsels, which God makes manifest to Him. Athanasius said: Therefore you accord nothing special to the Spirit above the human race. For God does nothing unless He reveals it to His servants, the prophets. Arius said: Does it not seem to you that "all things of God" are His counsels? Athanasius said: "All things of God" are said to be both His effects and His visible and invisible works, and also His counsels, and there are many things which are called "of God." Tell me, then, for the present: does a man reveal his own affairs to the spirit of the man, or does the spirit of the man which is in him know all things from itself that are done by the man, namely, as the spirit itself moves the man to do all things? Arius said: The spirit of the man knows from itself the things that are in the man. Athanasius said: You have granted that the spirit of the man knows all things from itself, yet you do not allow the Spirit of God to have such knowledge? Besides this, tell me, what do you understand by "the deep things of God"? Arius said: C First, it must be confessed in truth that the Spirit of God knows all things of God from Himself; then it must be said that by "the deep things of God" is meant that He is infinite and incomprehensible, as God is and as He exists; I say that the Spirit knows these things. Athanasius said: If you say that these things—that He is infinite and incomprehensible, and what He is, and as He exists—are this, then you are saying that God is comprehended by a created nature. But if this is true, then according to you, God will no longer be incomprehensible. For if God is comprehended by any created nature, D whatever it may be, He certainly cannot be called incomprehensible. Arius said: Show me a testimony from the holy Scriptures, whom
A you say to be comprehended by a created nature as God. But if this is so, he is no longer, according to you, incomprehensible. For that which is comprehended by any created nature whatsoever cannot be called incomprehensible. Arius said: Give me a testimony from the holy Scriptures, as concerning the Son, that the Spirit of God happens to be consubstantial.
42. B It is written in the law of God: “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that taketh the name of the Lord his God in vain.” We also find a testimony of the Savior written concerning the Spirit. For He speaks thus to the sons of Beelzebub, who wished to insult Him: “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand. And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? Or how can any one spoil the goods of the strong man, except he first enter into the house, and bind the strong man, and then spoil his house? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out?” And a little later He says: “Wherefore I say unto you, all manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.” C You see that here, too, we recognize the Spirit as equal in honor to God, for the world to come as well? For just as he who blasphemes against God the Father will not be cleansed of being guilty of eternal punishment, so also he who has blasphemed against the Holy Spirit is held liable for an eternal sin, the fault not being forgiven. For if He were a servant, he who offended Him would by no means be punished with eternal torment, as is the one who blasphemes against the uncreated majesty of God. Regarding Him whom the Son of God calls the Spirit of God here, one of the disciples of Christ, speaking of the same, called Him the finger of God. You should wish to reflect upon the examination that traveled along with the Son, and you will find the eternal power of the Holy Spirit to be consubstantial with the Father, from the fact that He was called the finger. Certainly, when the magicians in Egypt had perceived the invincible power of the Holy Spirit, they exclaimed in these words: “This is the finger D of God.” By these words, “the finger of God,” they acknowledged nothing else than the power of the Holy Spirit, which is consubstantial with God the Father, against which there is no one who can contend. Truly, so that no one, wishing to argue captiously, might say that this was not rightly spoken by the magicians, the apostles—or rather the Lord Himself who was in them—confirmed those things said by them as correctly spoken with such words as these: “If I by the finger of God cast out devils.”
A 43. *Ar.* Where is it written that the Spirit is God? *Ath.* Everywhere the divine Scriptures proclaim that the Holy Spirit is God, and that He is not separated from the glory of God and the Father and His Only-Begotten. For Peter says in the Acts to Ananias: "While it remained, did it not remain thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? Why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God." Do you see how He whom he called the Holy Spirit in the former part, he calls God in the latter? Furthermore, when the blessed Paul writes in the second Epistle to the Thessalonians as follows: "And the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God, and into the patient waiting for Christ." Whom do you wish to understand by this in the Epistle? Whom do you think is called Lord? God the Father, the Lord of all things, or the Holy Spirit? For he reckoned Christ in the same passage. If you place the Father first, the Spirit is God; but if you concede the Spirit [is the Lord] in this passage, then He is Lord; and if He is Lord, He also exists as God; for it is written: "I am the Lord thy God." B Inquire further, and you will find it written everywhere that the Holy Spirit possesses the same power, and is not separated from the glory of the Father and the Son. *Ar.* Why then does Scripture nowhere say that the Spirit is honored with the Father and the Son? *Ath.* The Holy Scriptures speak of all things clearly; but as pertains to the present question, all the holy powers which are in the heavens incessantly honor the Holy Spirit, as Isaiah says, with the Father and the Son. *Ar.* It is written nowhere that the Holy Spirit is honored with the Father and the Son.
44. *Ath.* You are mistaken. When Isaiah saw the glory of the Lord, and the hosts of the holy powers, what did he say they were crying out in their divine praises? Was it not, "Holy, holy, holy"? Why do they neither exceed this number in their singing, nor diminish the praise by going below it? Truly, it is for the reason that it is unlawful for anyone outside of the Trinity to be honored with such a tribute, nor to subtract anything C from that hymn, because of the holy and blessed divinity of the Trinity, which is self-sufficient in unity. And for what reason did Moses teach the people to bow their necks and knees three times upon the ground in worship? Was it not for the sake of the adoration of the Trinity in one divinity? And the God-bearer Elias, with a triple breathing, raised the widow’s son from the dead, indicating nothing else than that no one can be judged worthy of eternal life unless he first receives in his soul, through most venerable faith, the co-equal, consubstantial, and life-giving Trinity—which, like fire, consumes all the dead sins that kill the soul, and brings to life the soul that has obtained eternal life. D Moreover, not otherwise could the Christ-bearer Paul have been taken up to the third
A heaven, had he not possessed in his breast the unfailing and consubstantial faith of the Trinity; for God, wishing to demonstrate through such an event that no one [(18)] can enter into the kingdom of heaven who has not been born of the faith that dwelt in Paul. And what shall I say of the vivifying, sanctifying, and remission-of-sins-bestowing bath, without which no one shall see the kingdom of heaven? Is it not given to the faithful in the thrice-blessed [(19)] nomenclature? In addition to all this, John says: "And these three are one."
45. Ar. Truly blessed are all who possess this faith, and confess it even unto death, and live lives worthy of it; for I have now revived, having risen from the dead. For error is dead, and it kills the one who possesses it, and shapes the soul of him who companions with it to wallow in B debaucheries [(20)], so that the signs of eternal life, which stand before one's eyes, are not recognized by the man [(21)]; thus it would have been that I would neither leave behind death and its daughter, error, nor would I have reconciled myself to the life-giving faith. For since man is one, he must have one faith in the eternal and consubstantial Trinity. For in that infidelity from which God rescued me, there is not one faith, but three are preached: one concerning the eternal Father, another concerning a created Son, and a third concerning a made Spirit. From these it is manifest that there is no faith at all there, neither out of many, nor one. Therefore, I give thanks to the holy Trinity; I adore the Father, and the Son, and the holy Spirit. Now, therefore, dearly beloved, let us pray together. For as for me, having laid aside all the garments of error, I have cast them off through the mercy of God. C
46. Ath. You are still wearing the garment [(22)] of error; if you are of a grateful mind, you will cast it aside along with the other matters of apostasy, and then we shall be able to pray together. Ar. said: Unless you explain this to me most clearly, I am not conscious of retaining any part of that maddened heresy. Ath. said: Does it not seem to you that the dignity of the clergy, as they call it, which was given to you by the heresy, is a part of error? And does it not seem to you that it presents on the outside the appearance of piety, while on the inside it is full of impiety [(23)], to the point that a man becomes an instrument of a gigantic spirit, prepared to take up battle against God in sacrilege? Ar. said: I profess to you at present that my soul will not find rest unless I diligently cast out from my soul this tyranny of vainglory [(24)]. Ath. said: If therefore the parts of error cannot agree with virtue, D and much less can the parts of virtue and truth agree with the parts of error. For lying is opposed to truth, and truth to lying.