Compendium of Heretical Fables 1 part 5/10

His first attempt at innovation was this: that the holy Virgin, who bore the Word of God after he had taken flesh from her, ought not to be confessed as Theotokos (God-bearer), but only as Christotokos (Christ-bearer);

although the heralds of the orthodox faith of old and long before had, according to the apostolic tradition, taught that the Mother of the Lord should be named and believed to be Theotokos.

Come, then, let us now bring forward his blasphemous technical distinction and observation, unknown to anyone before him.

'The appellation "Christ,"' he says, 'is significative of the two natures, both the divinity of the Only-begotten and the humanity;'

'while the term "God," spoken absolutely, presents the simple and incorporeal essence of God the Word;'

'and the term "man" indicates only the human nature.'

But lest I should seem to charge the man with these things by empty slanders, I shall make him himself, by what he said, a witness of his own impiety.

For having banished from his own mind all remembrance of the apostolic teachings and of every saint, he cried out in the church of the orthodox many such utterances as these:

'Mary did not bear God, my good sir, but she bore a man, the instrument of the Godhead.'

And again in other foolish ravings:

'A Greek, who introduces a mother for the gods, is blameless.'

Let these few things, then, out of the many of his sayings, be said by me for the present, since my discourse hastens on to what follows.

Whence, since transgressors of the law perish by an extraordinary death, he was cast out from the high priesthood by the divine vote of the holy men assembled at Ephesus, and, condemned by the emperor's decree to dwell at the Oasis, from that point received the preludes of the punishment of the impious that was to come, having become the ruinous consumption of his own derangement of mind, and having fulfilled in himself that apostolic saying, that 'the sins of certain men are evident beforehand, going before unto judgment.' But these things, since they have been examined by many others as well, must be passed over, and let us proceed to what follows in the history.

Last of all, the envious demon introduced the ill-named heresy of the Eutychians, through which he stirred up confusion in the churches throughout the world;

and, having found in the wretched Eutyches an instrument receptive of his own wickedness, he made the heresy of Valentinus, long since withered, to flourish once again.

...of the body, whereas Apollinaris confessed the assumption of the soul as well;

but this man denied even the assumption of the body.

For he said that God the Word took nothing human from the Virgin, but that he himself, being changed without change, became flesh;

for I have used his own ridiculous words;

[he said that Christ] made only a passage through the Virgin, and that it was the uncircumscribed, unbounded, and uncontainable divinity of the Only-begotten that was nailed and fastened to the cross, and that this same divinity, having been delivered to the tomb, attained the resurrection.

But leaving aside the excess of his madness, let us consider this: that on his premises no benefit has come to us from the Incarnation, and we have no pledge of our own resurrection.

For it does not at all follow that, if God was raised from the dead, man too shall be raised;

for the difference between the natures is very great.

'For if,' he says, 'it is true that Christ rose, then it is also true that we shall rise;'

'but if this is false, then it is also false that Christ rose;'

'for that too was a body, and so are these.'

Having thus strengthened this with several syllogisms, he then added categorically:

'for the firstfruits have the same nature as that of which they are the firstfruits.'

'For since by man came death, by man also comes the resurrection of the dead.' Then he passes from the natures to the persons:

'For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.' But since I have written much on this subject many times already, I have judged it superfluous to dwell on it at present, especially since I intend, God willing, to speak of these matters also in the fifth book.

Having thus brought this fourth book to its close, I shall attempt to display the nobility of the evangelical teaching, so far as it is possible for me.

Concerning the Holy Spirit, and the divine names

Concerning the dispensation of the Savior

That he assumed a soul together with the body

That he assumed the complete human nature

That he raised up the nature which he assumed

That he himself is both good and just

Concerning the second appearing of the Savior

Honey seems sweet to all men, even without comparison;

but it appears sweeter still when some bitter quality is set alongside it;

and health is thought lovable by all, but after sickness it is thought even more lovable;

and calm is more delightful after a storm.

So too, those who are sound of mind know truth to be a thing worth possessing;

yet falsehood, when set alongside it for comparison, reveals it to be even more radiant and more divine.

Since, then, we have exposed the shame of falsehood, and have laid bare the myths of the heretics, and their impiety, their unpleasantness, and their implausibility have been made manifest, come, let us set beside these the evangelical teaching, and show the difference between light and darkness, and between the height of health and the most grievous sickness.

But indeed it is not possible to find an image fitting for the comparison now before us.

For even darkness, although it falls short of light, nevertheless offers to men a necessary service;

for night procures rest for those who labor during the day.

And sickness too has proved beneficial to many;

but from those thoroughly wicked myths and unspeakable blasphemies, only utter ruin appears for those who are persuaded by them.

It is not possible, then, to find a contrary image for the difference between these opposing doctrines;

rather, I have found one that is exceedingly clear.

For as great as the distance between God and the devil, so great is the difference between the teaching of God and that of the devil.

And this will be shown more clearly when the beauty of the divine oracles, sending forth the flashes of the noetic light, is set beside those myths.

But before all else it is necessary to say what we have been taught concerning the origin of all things.

Both the Old and the New Scripture teach that there is one origin of all things: the God of all, and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ — unbegotten, indestructible, eternal, infinite, uncircumscribed, unbounded, uncompounded, incorporeal, invisible, simple, good, just, noetic light, a power known by no measure, but measured only by the divine will.

For whatsoever he wills, he is able to do;

and this the Prophet has taught us clearly:

'For,' he says, 'whatsoever the Lord willed, he has done.' And the divine Scripture is the teacher of what has been said.

For we hear God saying at the beginning of the giving of the Law:

'I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt.'

you shall have no other gods besides me. And again:

Hear, O Israel: the Lord your God is one Lord. And in harmony with these he also teaches through the prophet Isaiah:

For I, he says, am the first God, and I am after these things, and besides me there is no God. — Before me there was no other God, and after me there shall be none, and besides me there is none. And again:

I am God, and after me there shall be none. And again:

I am God, and there is no other besides me;

there is no righteous savior apart from me. And by these words he clearly refutes the follies of Valentinus, Marcus, Basilides, and Marcion,

for he says that there is no other God either before him or after him, but that he himself is both first and last.

And the divine teaching of the holy Gospels agrees with these things.

For our Savior and Lord, in fulfilling all righteousness on our behalf (for he himself said to John:

for thus it is fitting to fulfill all righteousness), accepted, inasmuch as he was indeed man, the need of prayer as well, and undertook to teach the apostles concerning the Father;

and in the guise of prayer he conveyed the teaching of theology to the disciples,

…the only true God. And again:

I confess to you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding, and revealed them to infants. And the divine Apostle likewise says:

Now to the King of the ages, incorruptible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever.

There is one God, one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. And again:

One God the Father, from whom are all things. And one may find very many other testimonies from the Old and the New Testament, showing their harmony and proclaiming the one God.

And that he is invisible, both the Old Testament teaches and the New.

For in the Old Testament he says to Moses:

No man shall see my face and live; and in the holy Gospels the Lord said:

Not that anyone has seen the Father, except he who is from God — he has seen the Father. This indeed the divinely-inspired evangelist also proclaims:

The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known. And the Apostle also proclaims:

To the incorruptible, only wise God be glory and honor forever and ever;

whom no man has seen, nor can see. And again we have been taught his infinity and uncircumscribedness both from the Old and from the New Testament.

And in the Old Testament God says:

Do I not fill heaven and earth? says the Lord. And again:

Heaven is my throne, and earth is the footstool of my feet;

and he showed thereby not that he is circumscribed within all things, but that all things depend upon his providence.

And in another hymn he says to him:

Where shall I go from your Spirit? And where shall I flee from your presence? If I ascend into heaven, you are there;

and if I go down into Hades, you are present;

if I take the wings of the morning, and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea;

even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me. And these words show the uncircumscribedness both of his essence and of his power.

And the prophet Isaiah also proclaims:

He who holds the circle of the earth, and its inhabitants are as grasshoppers. And again, in refuting the weakness of the idols, he brought us this teaching concerning the God of all:

For who, he says, has measured the water in the hollow of his hand, and marked off heaven with a span? Who has weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance? Who has known the mind of the Lord, and who has become his counselor, to instruct him? Or who has shown him judgment, or who has shown him the way of understanding? Then, so far as human thought and a tongue of clay allowed, he shows the infinity of God's power:

For if, he says, all the nations are reckoned, and shall be reckoned, as a drop from a bucket, and as the turn of the scale, and as spittle, to what will you liken the Lord, or with what likeness will you compare him? And if heaven and earth and the nature of the waters comprise every created nature, and the measure of all these is the measure of the divine hand, let those who attempt to measure God with the tongue consider the infinity of that nature —

understanding by 'hand' not a part of the body, but the activity that has fashioned and governs all things.

These things, then, the Old Scripture teaches concerning the God of all;

and one might find other passages similar to those cited, teaching the uncircumscribedness both of the divine essence, and of wisdom, and of power.

And in the holy Gospels the Lord taught the Samaritan woman to think along the same lines.

For since she supposed that the Divine was circumscribed by place, and for this reason had said that here one ought

…to worship, the Lord instructed her in the opposite opinion, and taught the uncircumscribedness of the divine nature:

Truly, truly I say to you, woman, the hour is coming, and now is, when neither in Jerusalem, nor in this place, will they worship the Father. Having thus taught that divine worship is not circumscribed by any places, he added:

God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth. By the same token he also showed the incorporeality of the divine nature, and its unboundedness.

From age to age you are; and again:

The eternal God, who made the ends of the earth;

he shall not hunger, nor grow weary, and there is no searching out of his understanding. And the divine Apostle likewise knows him as the maker of the ages.

And the Lord says not only that the divine nature exists prior to creation, but also that the kingdom was prepared for the saints before the foundation of the world.

These are the things we have been taught, both from the Old and from the New Scripture, concerning the origin of all things —

not according to the myths of Valentinus and Basilides, of pairings and minglings and emissions of male and female Aeons, nor according to the differing and opposing principles of Cerdo, and Marcion, and Mani, but one principle, the same being both good and just, as we shall show later.

And just as we have learned to believe in one God, so also we believe in one Son begotten before the ages,

and we do not say, as in the myths of Valentinus, that the Only-begotten is one, and the Word another, and Christ yet another, and again Jesus another;

nor do we, as in the blasphemy of Arius and Eunomius, call our Lord Jesus Christ a creature.

For the divine Scripture says that he is Only-begotten;

but if he is created, he is not only-begotten;

for then creation, and all the parts of creation, would be his sister.

But if he is only-begotten, as indeed he is, then he has no fellowship whatsoever with created things.

And that he is only-begotten, the Only-begotten himself taught, when he said:

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish, but have eternal life. And a little later:

He who believes in him is not judged;

but he who does not believe is already judged, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God. And the Evangelist likewise said:

And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us;

and we beheld his glory, glory as of the Only-begotten from the Father;

full of grace and truth. For the nature of the flesh did not diminish the dignity of the divinity;

rather, even while clothed in flesh, he displayed the nobility inherited from the Father.

The only-begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known. And the Baptist also proclaims:

He who believes in the Son has eternal life;

but he who disobeys the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him. And all the apostles likewise call him the genuine and true Son of God.

And the Father himself, having spoken twice from heaven, showed the genuineness of his begetting:

This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And why do I speak of the Baptist, and the evangelist, and the other apostles, and the God of all? For not even the devil, the father of lies, has dared to name him otherwise;

But before the contests, wavering, he said:

'If you are the Son of God'; but after the victory, having learned who he was, he cries out without doubt:

And at Philippi he even called him the Most High and God.

For he heard the divine Paul both saying and writing this:

For, he says, 'Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an Apostle'; and, 'Paul and Timothy, servants of Jesus Christ.' But if even the teacher of falsehood himself calls him Son, and Most High, and Son of God, yielding to the flashes of truth, then indeed those who dare to call the Son a creature are contentiously striving to overturn the Father's own designation of him.

And that the divine men also call him Most High, one may hear Zacharias saying to his own son:

'And you, child, will be called a prophet of the Most High;'

'for you will go before the face of the Lord, to prepare his ways.' Now the great John went before, not the God and Father, but the only-begotten Son.

For when he was asked whether he himself was the Christ, this he denied, but said:

'Let them know that your name is the Lord, you alone are the Most High over all the earth.' For if the Son is Lord (for 'there is one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things,' according to the divine Apostle;

and, 'one Lord, one faith'), then the Son is indeed the Most High, since he is also Lord.

But concerning these matters we have already set forth many arguments against Arius and Eunomius in the discourses directed against them.

Let us, then, pass on to the doctrine now before us, and show that we have been taught that the same one is both Lord, and Only-begotten, and God the Word, and Savior, and Jesus.

Let us bring Peter forward, who was the first to confess these titles in harmonious accord.

For, first among the apostles, when asked by the Savior:

'But who do you say that I am?' he answered:

'You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.' And the divine John the Evangelist calls this same one both the Word existing before the ages, and the only-begotten Son, and the Maker of all things, and Christ Jesus.

For, he says, 'In the beginning was the Word'; and this is indicative of his eternity;

for he who was in the beginning, evidently always was.

[He did not say,] 'In the beginning it came to be,' or, 'In the beginning it was created':

'And the Word was with God, and the Word was God.' Then he takes up the preface again, and says:

'This one was in the beginning with God.' And by the shared use of the name he showed the consubstantiality;

and by saying 'God with God,' he made clear the distinction of the persons.

This same one he often also called the only-begotten Son, and Jesus Christ.

And the all-wise Paul likewise speaks thus:

'But when the fullness of time came, God sent forth his Son, born of a woman, born under the law, that he might redeem those under the law, that we might receive adoption as sons.' And again:

'But when it pleased him who set me apart from my mother's womb, and called me through his grace, to reveal his Son in me.' And countless such passages may be found, by which they name him both Christ, and the eternal Son, and co-eternal with the Father.

Teaching this, this same teacher first shows him to be the maker of the ages.

'For at the end of these days,' he says, 'he has spoken to us in a Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the ages.' But since those unwilling to conceive of divine things in a manner befitting God do not think it possible that he who is from God should be co-eternal with God—

for, foolishly supposing that the divine nature too is subject to the law of human nature, they have assumed the Father to be older than the Son—

by means of a certain image the divine Apostle clearly demonstrates that the only-begotten Son is both from God and with God.

For he called him the radiance of glory.

It has its existence from the fire, and coexists with the fire;

for the radiance is naturally conjoined with the fire, and the ray with the sun;

for from whatever source the sun exists, from that same source the rays also exist.

But the sun is the cause of the rays, and the fire the cause of the radiance;

for the sun does not come from the rays, but the rays are generated from the sun, and the radiance issues from the fire.

So too the only-begotten Son has been begotten from the Father, yet coexists with [his] mind, as reason coexists with the one who begot it, and the radiance with the fire, and the ray with the sun.

But each of these does not subsist by itself independently, but has its hypostasis in that from which it sprang.

But God the Word, the radiance of glory, is not some hypostasis-less activity of the Father, but a living hypostasis, subsisting in itself.

For he is not simply named Word, but God the Word;

nor only the radiance of glory, but also the exact representation of [the Father's] hypostasis.

For since it was not possible to teach divine things clearly by a single image, through several images we thus in some measure come to learn these things.

And the radiance of glory teaches the co-eternity;

while the exact representation of the hypostasis both shows the precision of the likeness, and teaches the distinction of the hypostases;

and the [term] 'Word' makes clear the impassibility of the generation.

For lest, hearing 'Son,' we should fall into human suppositions, and think that the Maker of all things was begotten in a manner similar to us, he called him 'Word';

thereby teaching that that generation is free from all passion.

For not even our own mind, when it travails to bring forth a thought, has need of union with a female, nor does it undergo any division or flowing;

but being perfect, it brings forth a perfect thought.

And that he is also equal in power to the one who begot him, and in every respect alike and equal, is easy to learn from the Lord's own teaching.

'For my Father,' he says, 'works until now, and I work.' And:

'As the Father raises the dead and gives life, so also the Son gives life to whom he wills.' And:

'All things that the Father has are mine.' And:

'I am in the Father, and the Father in me.' And:

'He who has seen me has seen the Father.' In these sayings he clearly showed the unvarying exactness of the likeness.

For when Philip asked that the Father be shown to him, the Lord showed himself, thereby teaching that he is the living image of the one who begot him, clearly displaying the very features of the one who begot him.

For he said to Philip:

'Have I been with you so long a time, and you have not known me, Philip? Do you desire,' he says, 'to see the Father, while you are looking at me? Then you have not known me;'

for if you had known me, you would not have longed to see him;

for in me the Father is beheld.

'He who has seen me has seen the Father.' Here he called the vision of faith 'sight.'

'Have I been with you so long a time,' he says, 'and you have not known me, Philip?' He did not say, 'You have not seen,' but 'you have not known'; for Philip saw what was visible, but he did not behold the invisible divinity.

But indeed, if we were to use all our proofs against every heresy, we should fill not merely ten, nor even twenty books of refutation;

and against these we have already previously composed twelve discourses, and in addition to these we have now also set forth the aim of the rest of our theology, both moral teaching and doctrine.

Concerning the Holy Spirit, and the divine names

We have, then, been taught that the Holy Spirit has his existence from God the Father.

But the manner of his existence resembles neither that of creation;

for the all-holy Spirit is uncreated;

…he set forth the existence of the divine Spirit.

That it is from God, and is divine, the sacred words teach.

It is expedient for you that I depart;

for if I do not depart, the Paraclete will not come to you. And again:

But when the Paraclete comes, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will guide you into all truth. And by saying, 'He proceeds from the Father,' he showed that the Father is the source of the Spirit.

And he did not say 'will proceed' but 'proceeds,' showing both the identity of nature and the indivisibility and undifferentiated character of the essence, and the union of the hypostases.

For that which proceeds is inseparable from that from which it proceeds.

The divine Apostle said the following concerning the Spirit:

The Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.

And lest anyone should suppose the searching to imply ignorance, he added:

No one among men knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man that is in him;

so also no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. Having thus attested knowledge to him, he also shows whence he has his existence.

'For we,' he said, 'have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from God.' For this reason he continually ranks him together with the Father and the Son, but has never ranked him with creation.

For he does not know it to be a part of creation, nor does he call it the first creature, as in the blasphemy of Arius, Eunomius, and Macedonius;

but showing the gifts of divine grace, he spoke thus:

'and there are diversities of workings, but the same God who works all things in all.' Then, having shown the giving of the gifts, he added:

'But all these things the one and the same Spirit works, dividing to each individually as he wills.' For, he says, the all-holy Spirit is not of servile ministry, but of sovereign dignity;

nor does he serve as an underling, but works together, and acts as sovereign Lord.

Thus also at the end of the second Epistle to these [Corinthians], he wove together the benediction:

'The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all.'

'Amen.' And in the earlier Epistle he placed the Spirit first, but here last, teaching that the order of the names does not make a difference of dignity.

For this reason he placed the Son before the Father, not overturning the order which the Lord had established, but demonstrating the equal honor of the Trinity.

This also came upon the apostles in a manner befitting God.

For first he shook the house, signifying the divine manifestation.

For concerning the God of all, the Prophet says:

'He who looks upon the earth and makes it tremble.' Then he settled upon them in tongues in the form of fire, just as Moses once said that God appeared long ago in the bush.

And just as that [bush] was not consumed though burning, so the tongues of the apostles did not experience the trial of the burning power.

Having learned these things not by words but by deeds, the most divine Peter called him God, when exposing the theft of Ananias.

'Why has Satan deceived your heart, that you should lie to the all-holy Spirit?' He added:

'You have not lied to men, but to God.' And what was said by the divinely-inspired Paul concerning the Spirit is in accord [with this].

For he called those who had believed temples of God, since they had the grace of the Spirit dwelling within them;

'Do you not know,' he says, 'that you are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?' And again:

'Do you not know that your bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit within you, whom you have from God?' These things plainly teach that the all-holy Spirit is of the divine nature.

For if those who have believed are called the temple of God because they have received the grace of the Spirit, then the Holy Spirit is therefore from God;

for having his grace dwelling within them, they were called the temple of God.

the Lord demonstrates the dignity of the Spirit.

For in teaching the mystery of baptism, he spoke thus to the disciples:

'Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.' But if the Son or the all-holy Spirit had a created nature, they would not have been numbered together with God the Creator;

for the divine words condemn those who have worshiped the creation rather than the Creator.

But having abolished the worship of creation, he would not again have commanded worship of a created nature;

[it would be absurd] to draw men away from gods that do not exist, and then bring them back again to the servitude of created things.

For since the Father did not alone form the first man, but also the Son and the Holy Spirit;

'Let us make man according to our image and likeness' — fittingly, then, when the reformation takes place and the new creation is accomplished, the Son and the all-holy Spirit share with the Father;

and the invocation of the Trinity re-creates each one of those who are baptized.

But indeed, concerning the Holy Spirit, against the heretics devoid of his grace, I have composed three discourses;

and I think it superfluous to prolong the discussion here, since the remaining chapters draw the discourse to themselves.