反亞流神學文集 第 2 章

BOOK ONE. ON THE MYSTERY OF CHRIST THE MEDIATOR, RETAINING TWO NATURES IN ONE PERSON. CHAPTER I. A book sent by the king to Fulgentius. Fulgentius's reply at the king's command. To be unwilling to assert the faith is to deny the faith. The necessity of replying is from the divine precept. To your triumphant judgment, most pious king, I could never believe it has been withdrawn by forgetfulness, that recently you commanded a certain volume to be sent to me by the courier Felix, bidding me reply forthwith.

Since its length was so great that it needed rather more time to be reviewed, and the end of the day was at hand, night drawing near, having barely tasted the very beginnings of that volume by a hurried run through a rapid reading, I had asked that a space of one night be granted us for reading through everything in the order of a full review; which the will of your gentleness altogether decreed should be denied, so that you did not even command us to be allotted time for reading through the remaining portions of the Scripture.

But I, since for the space of some days I awaited the direction of your eminence, and since thereafter, the tenor of that inquiry being withdrawn, only a reply was demanded of us, have destined to be reviewed by your gentleness these few things—for which, with the Lord's help, the smallness of our talent suffices—concerning that same inquiry, which from the beginning I came to know only slightly; lest perhaps I be thought puffed up out of disdain, or be judged bound by the fault of silence, which your loftiness might suspect—either not to render a reply out of pride, or to have been silent out of a distrust of the true faith.

For to your zeal, most clement king, I do not doubt it is well known that among those who have been redeemed by participation in Christian grace, to be unwilling to assert the faith is almost the same as to deny it. Since indeed the only-begotten God himself, the founder and redeemer of the human race, testifies with a wholly certain declaration that, just as he will confess the one confessing, so he will deny the one denying, saying: 'Whoever confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father who is in heaven; but whoever denies me before men, I too will deny him before my Father who is in heaven' (Matt. X, 32, 33). So again, he himself, coming in his majesty, will be ashamed of the one who is ashamed of him and of his words.

The standard of this saying Luke is known to have set down in such a sentence, where he confirms the deadly silence of this shame in such a way that he does not keep silent that the one who is ashamed must be consigned to perdition; recalling among other things that the Lord said this: 'For what does it profit a man, if he gains the whole world, but loses himself and suffers the loss of himself?' (Luke IX, 25). And, indicating the cause of this perdition, he added: 'For whoever is ashamed of me and of my words, of him the Son of man will be ashamed, when he comes in his majesty, and the Father's, and the holy angels'.' And not undeservedly is such a servant both cast out and punished, since by one and the same silence he confirms error, who, possessed by terror or by torpor (al.

tepidity) possessed, does not by his silence build up the truth. And whoever does not confirm the Lord's glory, empties it out, and whoever does not refute the divine reproach, heaps it up. Very often a slothful soldier, weighed down by drowsy torpor, delivers the royal camp to the besiegers, while he does not defend it with fitting watches. These things I have taken care above all to send beforehand, lest your piety should wish in any way to censure me for a proud reply, upon whom the very necessity of replying imposes the duty of a free reply: for when the matter concerns God, it is no light guilt if what pertains to salvation be kept silent. For thus it behooves us to believe in the heart unto righteousness, that confession may likewise be made with the mouth unto salvation (Rom. X, 10);

since the word of God is not bound (2 Tim. II, 9). To this is added that oracle of the divine precept which binds the person of every ecclesiastical preacher by a certain fellowship not only of faith but also of service, the Lord saying: 'Cry out, do not cease, lift up your voice like a trumpet' (Isa. LVIII, 1). What is said to Isaiah in one person is commanded to many; the only-begotten God himself saying to his disciples: 'What I say to one of you, I say to all' (Mark XIII, 37). Therefore blessed Peter also, by the prompting of fatherly love, bids us to be ready to reply: 'Being ready always,' he says, 'to reply to everyone who asks you a reason for the faith and hope that is in you' (1 Pet. III, 15).

Since we are commanded to render a reason for our faith and hope to everyone who asks it, all distinction ceases utterly, whether of rank or of person. For to whom shall it be thought that the disclosure of truth ought to be denied, when the prophet testifies that he spoke without confusion in the presence of kings, saying: 'I spoke of your testimonies in the sight of kings, and was not confounded' (Ps. 118:46)? CHAPTER II. In answering, regard must be had to royal dignity. God is to be feared and honored more than an earthly king. Praise of a barbarian king for his zeal for wisdom. Wherefore, when for our faith we answer freely, so far as we have divinely received the ability, we ought not to be marked by any suspicion of stubbornness or of insolence,

since we are mindful neither of our own lowliness nor of your royal dignity, and know that fear is to be shown to God and honor to kings, the apostolic teaching thus forewarning us: 'Render to all their dues,' and a little after: 'to whom fear, fear; to whom honor, honor' (Rom. 13:7). Blessed Peter opened to us the clear knowledge of this fear and honor by his distinction, saying: 'Honor all men as servants of God, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king' (1 Pet. 2:17). Now no small measure of love and honor does he show to your clemency, whoever answers you, when you inquire, that which pertains to the faith of the truth.

Fittingly, therefore, we offer the homage of honor to your gentleness, upon whom we perceive the summit of the royal crown to have been conferred by divine bounty. Yet it escapes no wise man with how great fear that everlasting King of kings and Lord of lords ought to be reverenced, who commands that even temporal kings be honored. If anyone fears him too little, he greatly despises him; whoever lessens the honor due to him increases his own injury; nor does he escape the guilt of the ungrateful, who supposes that the perpetual immensity of the Creator and the immense perpetuity of things is to be estimated by the qualities of creatures. This your kindly gentleness beyond doubt discerns, this the sagacity of your genius and zeal recognizes;

and whoever knows how to consider it declares it truly to be marveled at — not because it is unusual for a man to apply himself to the study of the Scriptures, but because it is thus far held rare that the mind of a barbarian king, continually occupied with the numerous cares of the realm, should be so kindled with the fervent delight of coming to know wisdom, since such tireless efforts of this kind only a man of leisure or a Roman is wont to have. Through you, most merciful king, through you, I say, the pursuits of learning strive to make their way into the customs of a barbarian people, which is wont to claim ignorance for itself as though by native right.

You have proved yourself to be one who surpassed even yourself, while you so preside over the government of the African realm by your rule that you desire rather to enlarge the spaces of your soul than of your kingdom. You know, venerable king, and (as I do not doubt) you firmly hold as established by settled judgment, with how much better advantages he is joined who desires to know the truth, than he who, having subdued nations, desires to extend more widely the bounds of a temporal kingdom. CHAPTER III. The king's mistaken zeal in the Arian perfidy. The inquiry into truth confers a great good, which nevertheless is not then frustrated of its desired effect, if the mind leans upon right lines toward the knowledge of the true. Then also it will profit to have run with swift genius, if the steps of one tending toward the truth are held by no error of crookedness.

But how is that credulity to be esteemed wholesome, which supposes the worship of divine religion to consist in this — that either the Godhead should be deprived of its natural truth, while there is denied in it what is not denied in man; or the mystery of our redemption should be perverted by uncertain confusion, so that anyone should dare to deny the Lord Christ, the Son of God and of man, to be either truly God of the Father by nature, or perfect man; or if the Godhead should be reckoned to have been subject to the sufferings of the man, or the whole man should be believed not to have existed in the powers of the deity?

And thus the truth is emptied out by an error not unlike, if either in the one person of the true God and true man Christ that which stands to be substantially diverse is confounded, or in the Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, a substantial diversity being believed, that which is one and indivisible of the Trinity is separated: since the divine simplicity neither permits a partial diversity to be ascribed to itself, whereby it would not undeservedly lie subject to composition; nor does rational understanding in any way need any zeal for diversity, which knows the faith of only one simple and everlasting nature to be sufficient for the fullness of its salvation, inasmuch as it is not ignorant that God himself thunders to it by the heavenly oracles:

'Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord' (Deut. 6:4). And 'the Lord your God you shall adore, and him alone shall you serve.' And 'You shall have no gods besides me.' But neither must this be unknown to human minds, with how great a loss of eternal salvation he is fined, whoever does not fear to inflict insult by impious and death-dealing thoughts or words upon the proper and only-begotten Son of the true God — as regards the immense and everlasting substance of his divinity — whether of local motion or of any changeableness; whence he is not undeservedly to be condemned by that saying of the Davidic song: 'The fool has said in his heart, There is no God' (Ps. 13:1). For truly, if he is local, he is not immense;

if he is changeable, he is not God. CHAPTER IV. The errors of the heretics arising from an evil understanding concerning the mystery of the Incarnation. Thence also the blindness of the Jews. Now it is certain that nearly all the errors of heretical depravity have from this point crept in upon certain men in manifold ways, since — while the great sacrament of piety, 'which was manifested in the flesh, justified in the spirit, appeared to angels, preached to the nations, believed in this world, taken up in glory' (1 Tim. 3:16) — some either do not believe it as it is, or do not believe it at all; and that stone, which, rejected by the builders, was made the head of the corner, becomes, for certain men possessed by the blindness of a depraved credulity, a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense (1 Pet.

2:8). Whence not undeservedly, when Simeon, rejoicing, had been counted worthy to bear in his aged arms the infant Christ, the Lord of the temple, brought to his own temple according to the precept of his law (Luke 2:28) — and, bearing the figure of the present age, already wearied with fleshly old age, the old man took up the new man, namely him who alone could, out of sinners (as he says to the aged one: 'You are God my Savior, and for you I have waited all the day' [Ps. 24:5]), not only remove ingrained oldness, but even renew youth like the eagle's (as one to whom the apostolic trumpet also would truly sing: 'As the truth is in Jesus, that you put off, according to

the former manner of life, the old man, which is corrupted according to the desires of error; and be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, him who according to God was created in the justice and holiness of truth' (Eph. 4:22)); that Simeon, therefore, perceiving the effect of worldly salvation and renewal to be present (for God did not send his Son to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through him [John 3:17]), when first he prayed to be released from the anguish of the present life, saying: 'Now you dismiss your servant, Lord, according to your word, in peace: for my eyes have seen your salvation, which you have prepared before the face of all peoples;

a light for the revelation of the nations, and the glory of your people Israel' (Luke 2:29-34); a little after he testifies this concerning the same child: 'Behold, this one is set for the fall and rising again of many' (ibid., 34). There, therefore, perfidy generates a fall for those who believe wrongly, where right credulity exalts the faithful. In one and the same Christ, true Son both of God and of man, the bleared vision of those who see less clearly is thus far darkened, in whom the manifest knowledge of the true light shines to those who are enlightened. Thence it is that the Jew, blind, saw the man Christ and fell, to whom long before Isaiah did not cease to proclaim: 'With your ear you shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing you shall see, and shall not see' (Isa. 6:9).

But what those seeing were not going to see, he showed by what followed, while by an evident prophecy he testifies that God was to be born of a Virgin: 'Behold,' he says, 'a virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel' (Isa. 7:14), which the evangelist interprets, saying: 'God with us' (Matt. 1:23). The Jew, therefore, hearing, remained deaf, and seeing, was made the more blind; by whom neither is the everlasting and only-begotten Son believed to be of the true Father, and the fruitfulness of incorrupt virginity is denied. CHAPTER V. The error of Mani concerning the flesh of Christ. It is refuted from the book of Wisdom. It is convicted from the epistle of John.

Hence also Mani dreads to believe true flesh in the true God, since — believing human flesh to be polluted not by the fault of guilt, but by natural property — he, being blind, attributes to a nature of evil (which he lyingly feigns for himself) so great a power that, if he should believe the true God to have assumed a true nature of flesh, he would not believe the divinity (which by a deceitful profession he calls incapable of defilement) to be exempt from the pollution of the flesh; and therefore in Christ he preferred to believe a phantasm of flesh rather than a nature, and while he did not see the human infirmity assumed by him with medicinal power, he wretchedly excluded himself from the remedy of salvation.

But this madness of impure falsehood, the foreknowledge of the Holy Spirit resisting it, was extinguished before it was begotten, the Instrument of the Old Testament commending the incorruptible state of wisdom in these words in its course: 'Wisdom is more mobile than all mobile things: and she reaches everywhere by reason of her purity. For she is the vapor of the power of God, and a certain pure emanation of the brightness of the almighty God; and therefore no defilement runs into her. For she is the splendor of eternal light, and the spotless mirror of the majesty of God, and the image of his goodness. And though she is one, she can do all things; and remaining in herself, she renews all things' (Wis. 7:24, 27).

Concerning this incorruptibility of wisdom and the truth of the incarnation, that man, who from the very bosom of wisdom was counted worthy to draw enlightened the understanding of the heavenly mysteries, being secure, says with confidence: 'Every spirit that confesses Jesus Christ to have come in the flesh is of God. Every spirit that does not confess Jesus Christ to have come in the flesh is not of God, and this is Antichrist' (1 John 4:2-3): for he felt not the defilements of foul flesh, who came to take up the true substance of flesh and to cleanse that same foulness of flesh. Because for this reason he deigned to take up immaculate flesh, that, saving the flesh, he might be able to remove every stain of flesh, the same John again testifying:

'We know that he appeared to take away sins, and in him there is no sin' (1 John 3:5). Again: 'For this the Son of God appeared, that he might destroy the works of the devil' (ibid., 8). For because the work of God was held bound by the bond of the diabolical work, the Son of God appeared that he might loose the one and save the other. CHAPTER VI. The heresy of Photinus. From the beginning of John many errors are refuted. God was the Word by nature, not by mere designation. Photinus too is ignorant of the great sacrament of piety which the Apostle recalls (1 Tim. 3:16), who confesses Christ's beginning from the Virgin: being ignorant that in the one Christ the truth of the flesh is to be believed as being from time in such a way that the natural truth of the everlasting divinity from the Father is not to be denied.

And therefore he does not believe God without beginning to have been substantially born of God the Father, in whom he confesses the truth of the flesh from the Virgin, not understanding that that Word was substantially born of God the Father — the Word which, in the fullness of times made flesh, dwells among us, which according to the divine substance which it has from the Father, 'in the beginning was, and was with God, and was God' (John 1:1). By these three sentences of the evangelist there is shown both the everlasting nativity of the Word, and the personal unconfused property, and the undivided substantial unity of the Father and the Son, so that in the Word made flesh, and dwelling among us,

the fact that it 'in the beginning was' — the recognition of everlastingness — should take away the suspicion of a begun nativity; the fact that it 'was with God' — the unconfused property of each person — should exclude the union of the Sabellian error; and the fact that it 'was God' — the truth of the essential name — should show the unity of substance of the begetter and the begotten. For John did not say, 'The Word was called God,' but 'God was the Word': so that, while in the God-Word the natural truth of the divine essence is recognized, consequently there should be proved the truth not of a designated name, but of a natural name. For the truth of nature is never deprived of the truth of the name. And thus that true incarnation of the Word, not of an uttered but of a substantial Word, is then

soundly believed, if we believe the eternal Word, which took up flesh from time, to be neither subject in the beginning of its existing, nor confused in person with the Father, nor other in nature than God. CHAPTER VII. Another error, of those who deny in Christ both the true deity and the true humanity together. Another error, of those who refer the works of the humanity to the deity. There are also certain persons, in this most greatly ungrateful to the gracious Savior, that in Christ — namely, in one who is true God and perfect man — they so assert themselves to receive the nature of God and of man, that they do not hesitate to preach in the Son of God one substance as false, the other as half-full.

For they are unwilling to believe the true deity of Christ, whose true nativity from God the Father they deny to have existed substantially, wishing to take from God the Son the nature of a true name, from whom they cannot take away the name of natural truth. For they say that in the name of the only-begotten God there is not a natural substance from the Father's generation, but only a designation granted by the gift of a title. The human nature also they so believe in Christ that they take away what is better of the man; what is inferior, this they leave:

and, considering too little the great sacrament of piety which the Apostle recalls, they strive to separate the rational soul from that marvelous assumption by the Mediator — a soul which they utterly assert not to have been in the Mediator of God and men. Yet another crime is added by these to the aforesaid error, whereby they admit the huckstering of a most foul confusion.

For in the unity of person (in which God and man, the one Christ, commending the inconfusible and inseparable truth of each nature, showed himself to be true God by his divine works and true man by his human sufferings, having the impassible whereby man was created sound, taking up the passible whereby the sick man might be healed) these men are so deceived by I know not what deception, that whatever the Lord — showing the true assumption of the servile form — humbly did or said, they do not fear to divert wholly to the insult of the divinity, which they subject to the suffering of changeableness,

while they distinguish by no consideration the truth of each nature, resplendent by the most clear manifestation both of words and of works: not attending where infirmity is shown to be taken up by the invincible and impassible power, where through infirmity there shine forth the tokens of invincible power: and thus they attempt to frustrate the effect of the divine mystery, because truly man could not be saved, if either he who took up man was not by nature true God, or in the taking-up by the true God something of man was lacking. CHAPTER VIII. The twofold nature of the Mediator to be demonstrated from the Scriptures. From the words of Isaiah three things are proved in Christ: flesh, soul, and divinity.

And that every ambiguity of doubt may be removed, in the one person of the man Christ, the Mediator of God and men, the perfection of the divine and human substance must be demonstrated by prophetic and apostolic testimonies. Isaiah, as we have recalled above, says: 'Behold, a Virgin shall conceive in the womb, and shall bear a son, and his name shall be called Emmanuel. Butter and honey shall he eat, before he knows or utters evil, he shall choose the good; for before the child knows good or evil, he does not believe malice, that he may choose what is good, and the land shall be left desolate; for before the child knows to call father or mother, he shall receive the power of Damascus, and the spoils of Samaria' (Isa. 7:14-16).

In this testimony the whole fullness of the saving mystery is contained: for the truth of the flesh is known in the virginal conception, and the intellectual soul is shown in the choosing of the good, and the true nature of the deity is displayed in the name Emmanuel; and thus in the true God the assumption of man was neither false nor half-full. For it was fitting that in the sacrament of human redemption neither should truth be lacking to perfection, nor perfection to truth. For if true flesh was not in Christ, what did the Virgin conceive in her womb? and if a soul or intellect of human nature is believed to have been lacking in Christ, what is the infant said to have been ignorant of, good and evil?

Or do we subject that divine nature of the Son of God to the ignorance of good and evil, so as to deny in Christ a human soul? Is the man thus assumed by God to be believed to have been able in any measure to know the things of God, in whom wisdom itself is said to have lacked the knowledge of good and evil? The human soul, therefore, which by nature was made capable of reason, is said not to have known good and evil in the infant Christ — the soul which, according to the evangelical truth, in the boy Jesus is narrated to have advanced in wisdom and grace: as Luke sets down and says: 'And the child grew, and was strengthened, full of wisdom, and the grace of God was in him' (Luke 2:40). And a little after: 'Jesus advanced in wisdom, in age, and in grace with God and men' (ibid., 52).

For as it belongs to the flesh to advance in age, so it belongs to the soul to have advanced in wisdom and grace, which nevertheless would in no way advance in wisdom, if it did not have the natural understanding which was granted to men for the sake of reason — not because God the assumer had need of this, but because the effect of the pious assumption required this for the remedy of our salvation, so that, while flesh and rational soul are assumed by God, both alike might be saved: for neither was the flesh itself to be assumed by the Son of God, unless it were to be saved by the divine assumption. But if God had no need of flesh, but took it up that he might save it, so likewise God had no need of a rational soul, but took it up to be saved together with the flesh:

the assumption of which human soul holy David, in prophetic manner, intimates, saying: 'For behold, God helps me, and the Lord is the sustainer of my soul' (Ps. 53:6). He assuredly helped what he took up, which beyond doubt, unless he took it up, he would not have helped. CHAPTER IX. The straying sheep is the sinner wandering from God. The ways of the Lord are faith, justice, mercy, and truth. But I think it necessary that the perfect assumption of man in Christ be shown also by the recounting of the evangelical parable, namely of the straying sheep, which the Lord carried back to the house borne upon his own shoulders; for the seeking of which David long before implored aid with a tearful petition, saying:

'I have gone astray like a sheep that was lost; seek your servant' (Ps. 118:176). When, therefore, the Pharisees and Scribes murmured, saying: 'This man receives sinners, and eats with them' (Luke 15:2), the evangelist reports that the Lord spoke this parable to them: 'What man of you who has a hundred sheep, and if he shall lose one of them, does he not leave the ninety-nine in the desert, and go after that which was lost, until he finds it? And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders rejoicing; and coming home, he calls together his friends and neighbors, saying to them: Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost' (ibid., 4ff.).

This sheep, in which the nature of sinful man is signified, by what error shall we say it went astray? of heart or of body? by error of feet or by error of morals? I do not suppose anyone so devoid of human reflection as to think that a man in any way goes astray from God by remoteness of dwelling and not by perversity of thought. In the way of God one walks not by the step of the body, but by the going of the mind. The way of God is right faith, which is shown to be so entirely a way that the Apostle testifies that we walk in it: 'By faith,' he says, 'we walk, and not by sight' (2 Cor. 5:7). The way of the Lord is justice, by which blessed David records himself to have been led, saying: 'Upon the water of refreshment he brought me up, he converted my soul:

he led me upon the paths of justice for his name's sake' (Ps. 22:2). In turn, the mercy and truth of the Lord (Ps. 24:10), by which assuredly one walks not by the step of the body, but rather by the affection of the soul. This doctrine of walking blessed John intimates to us, saying: 'He who says he abides in Christ ought, just as he walked, himself also to walk' (1 John 2:6). By which way Christ himself commands that he be followed, saying: 'If you would be perfect, go, sell all that you have, and give to the poor; and you shall have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me' (Matt. 19:21). Not therefore by bodily step alone does anyone follow Christ, or stray from Christ.

Indeed, the quality of this error the Lord himself and our Savior showed, while he rebuked the Sadducees, saying: 'You err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God' (Matt. 22:29). For this reason assuredly they miserably erred, because they did not know him who is the power of God. As, therefore, the knowledge of the power of God holds fast to the heavenly journey, so ignorance is the mother of error. Which blessed David also showed, saying of certain men: 'They have not known, neither have they understood; they walk in darkness' (Ps. 81:5). By these and testimonies of this kind it is most evidently demonstrated that the error of that sheep is to be attributed not only to the body, but also to the soul;

namely for this reason, that even if some sin seems to be committed bodily by a man, it takes its beginning from the heart, nor is anything accomplished outwardly, unless this be put forth inwardly by the judgment of thought. The truth of this thing Truth itself showed us, thus speaking to the disciples: 'For from the heart come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false testimonies, blasphemies. These are the things that defile a man' (Matt. 15:19). In this, therefore, does each one err, in which he defiles himself by the assent of evil thought. CHAPTER X. From the parable of the sheep carried back it is proved that the whole man was assumed by Christ. Christ received the Church into marriage through his soul.

Christ is rightly called the head, the Church the body. Wherefore, since that error is understood to be at once of the soul and of the body, if the Son of God, without a rational soul, took only the flesh of man, he carried back to the house the inferior part of that sheep, but the better part (which God forbid) he abandoned to perpetual error: for it is manifest that he called back that which he carried back upon his own shoulders. But if he himself professes to have carried back the whole sheep laid upon his own shoulders, let the whole man be recognized in Christ. For then is the redemption of man to be believed, if in the Son of God the fullness of the human assumption, that is, of that sheep carried back, was not lacking. For God saved in us that which he took for us;

and God the Son of God made that nature partaker of eternal salvation, which he joined to himself in the unity of person: that nature he introduced into the heavenly palace, with which the Bridegroom went forth from the chamber of the virginal womb: for he himself, 'as a bridegroom coming forth from his chamber, rejoiced as a giant to run the way' (Ps. 18:6-7). But who would strive to say that the bride of the Word of God was the flesh, not the soul? to which soul it was long ago said by the Lord himself through the prophet: 'And I will betroth you to me forever; and I will betroth you to me in justice, and in judgment, and in mercy, and in loving-kindness' (Hos. 2:19). Of which mystery Isaiah too stood forth a faithful witness, who from the person of Christ speaking says these things:

'Rejoicing I will rejoice in the Lord, and my soul shall exult in my God, who has clothed me with the garment of salvation, and has surrounded me with the robe of justice, as a bridegroom decked with a crown, and as a bride adorned with her jewels' (Isa. 61:10). Behold, one is the bridegroom, the same is also the bride, who testifies that he also has a soul: which, that he might show it to have been assumed not without understanding, he showed the heart (which is proper to the human soul) to have exulted in God together with the flesh, from the person of the man assumed, saying: 'My heart and my flesh have exulted in the living God' (Ps. 83:2).

But since the Lord, receiving the first-fruits of nature, so received in his own soul the souls of all the faithful — as in his own body the body of all the faithful — through the unity of nature and the grace of justification: through this he took the whole Church into marriage of perpetual incorruptibility for himself; the wondrous sacrament of which betrothal the faithful servant of the Bridegroom so commends to the bride herself, that it may be understood to be more of the mind than of the body, saying: 'For I have betrothed you to one husband, to present you a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve by his cunning, so your senses may be corrupted, and fall away from the simplicity that is in Christ' (2 Cor. 11:2-3).

There, therefore, the spiritual adulterer seeks to corrupt the chastity of the virginal marriage, where he perceives that fidelity of wedlock is owed to be kept to the heavenly Bridegroom. But in vain does the Apostle command the chastity of the soul to be guarded, if the man assumed by God did not have in himself the first-fruits of this conjunction; especially since the same Teacher of the nations does not cease to preach Christ and the Church as head and body, saying: 'According to the working of the might of his power which he wrought in Christ Jesus, raising him from the dead, and setting him at his right hand in the heavenly places above every principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:

and he put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all the Church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all' (Eph. 1:20-22). In another place too it is said: 'The man is the head of the woman, as Christ is the head of the Church, himself the Savior of the body' (Eph. 5:23). How then shall the soul of the Church be able to be saved, if the soul was lacking to the Savior? or what kind of effect of deliverance shall be believed to follow in the body, which did not go before in the head? For as he says to his own faithful: 'If the Son sets you free, then you shall be truly free' (John 8:36), so also concerning himself he declares: 'For he has become like a man without help, free among the dead' (Ps.

(Psalm 87:5). Therefore what the Head made free in itself, this it also freed in the body; for entering into the house of the strong man and binding the strong man (Matthew 12:29), He there freed from bondage that which He had first taken up in Himself on behalf of the servant; nor will anything else reign in the body than what went before (or, proceeded) in the Head to heaven. Paul, bearing the belief of this matter faithfully and confidently, exults and says: But our conversation is in heaven (Philippians 3:20). There, then, he does not doubt that his own soul dwells, where he is confident that the human soul reigns in Christ; wherefore he also urges the Colossians with the utterance of such preaching, saying: If you have risen (or, you have risen)

you have risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. CHAPTER XI. Another argument from Peter. Nor is that in any way to be omitted, that Peter commends in Christ, with a great wonder of preaching, that He did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth. For thus he says: Christ died for us (or, for you), leaving you an example, that you should follow His steps; who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth (1 Peter 2:22).

For if the Son of God did not have a human soul in the assumption of the flesh, and this is believed to have been said by blessed Peter concerning His divinity, what is it that is said as a great thing to the praise of Christ, that His divinity could be free from the stain of sin, since it is proper to God not only not to sin, but even to save from sin? He therefore alone can grant pardon, because He alone cannot admit fault; therefore He alone is the physician of the wounded, because the divine nature never receives a wound in itself. But if this is believed to be referred to the flesh of Christ, how can justice be preserved by our souls, to which the assumption of Christ, cited as apostolic example, gave no pattern?

But that blessed Peter might show that righteousness—which He commands us to imitate—had gone before in both the soul and the flesh of Christ together, he added, following on: Who, when He was reviled, reviled not again; which pertains properly to the patience of the soul. Wherefore in another place also he says: Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing, but contrariwise blessing: because to this you are called, that you should inherit a blessing (1 Peter 3:9). Of this blessing our Savior commends the beginning as coming forth from the heart, saying: A good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth good things (Matthew 12:35).

It is agreed, therefore, that goodwill resides in the soul, whence we can render blessing to those who curse us. But that blessed Peter might show the example both of the soul and of the flesh in Christ, when he had said: Who, when He was reviled, reviled not again, he added, following on: When He suffered, He threatened not; but committed Himself to Him that judges justly; who bore our sins in His own body upon the tree, that we, being separated from our sins, should live with righteousness: by whose stripes you were healed (or, we were). For you were as sheep going astray; but now you are converted to the shepherd and bishop of your souls (1 Peter 2:23-25). CHAPTER XII. Christ is rightly called both shepherd, and sheep, and lamb.

Another argument from Leviticus, because Christ, since He was High Priest, was bound by the law to be a whole man. The Son of God, therefore, is the visitor and shepherd of our souls, because He deigned to become the receiver of a human soul, to whom, in the person of the human nature He was to assume, it is said in the psalm: Receive me according to Your word, and I shall live (Psalm 119:116). Christ, then, is our shepherd, whose sheep apostolic authority testifies we are; yet He, that He might fully deign to show Himself the receiver of our nature, did not disdain to call Himself not only shepherd but also sheep; as indeed of whom, moved (or, touched) by the Holy Spirit, the prophet testifies:

Like a sheep He was led to the slaughter, and like a lamb before its shearer He was dumb, so He opened not His mouth (Isaiah 53:7); and He Himself again through Jeremiah: I was like an innocent lamb led to be sacrificed, and I knew not: they devised a wicked device against me, saying: Come, let us put wood into His bread (Jeremiah 11:19); concerning whom also John the Baptist proclaims: Behold the Lamb of God, behold Him who takes away the sins (or, sin) of the world (John 1:29). Peter the apostle also sets forth things not unlike concerning Christ (or, concerning whom), saying:

Knowing that you were not redeemed with corruptible things, silver or gold, from your vain conversation received from the tradition of your fathers, but with the precious blood, as of a lamb undefiled and immaculate, that is, of Christ (1 Peter 1:18-19). One and the same therefore is the mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, Himself both shepherd and sheep, Himself both bridegroom and bride, Himself both priest and victim, one and the same both the offerer of the gift and made the gift of the offerer, so that neither might the offerer depart from the quality of the gift, nor the gift differ from the merit of the offerer. For if He had anything less of human nature, He could neither take the person of a high priest, nor be offered for sins: for in the law he could not exercise the priesthood, if any man (or,

of men) had something less in himself, he could not exercise the priesthood; nor was it lawful for anyone to offer for sacrifice a beast that was diseased or imperfect: but who would doubt that our high priest is Jesus Christ, whom Paul evidently commends under this title: But having (he says) a great High Priest, who has passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but one tempted in all things according to the likeness, without sin. Let us therefore come with confidence to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace in seasonable help (Hebrews 4:14-16). And that he might show this office of the priesthood to belong to human nature, he added:

For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in the things that pertain to God, that he may offer gifts and sacrifices for sins; who can have compassion on those who are ignorant and err, since he himself also is compassed with infirmity. And by reason thereof he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins. And no man takes this honor to himself, but he that is called by God, as Aaron was. So also Christ did not glorify Himself to be made a high priest, but He that said to Him: You are my Son, this day have I begotten You (Hebrews 5:1-5). Yet He calls this high priest tempted in all things according to the likeness, without sin. But in what things He was tempted, he clearly showed above, saying:

For nowhere does He take hold of angels, but He takes hold of the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things He ought to be made like unto His brethren, that He might become merciful, and a faithful high priest toward God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that in which He Himself suffered and was tempted, He is able to help those who are tempted (Hebrews 2:16-18). CHAPTER XIII. Another argument from Paul, because Christ was tempted both in flesh and in soul. If then in that in which He was tempted He gives help to the tempted, surely in that in which He was not tempted He ministers no help to the tempted; whence it follows that those who assign to Christ only human flesh, and deny the soul, seek the help of Christ in the flesh alone, but in the soul remain destitute:

For the Son of God helps in man that which He assumed for man. But if they delight to merit the help of Christ both in soul and in flesh, they must of necessity confess (as the truth holds) that He was tempted alike both in soul and in flesh. Both the human soul, therefore, and the flesh together were tempted in Christ. But if both the soul and the flesh were tempted together in Christ, both were together assumed by Him; and if He deigned to assume both, He deigned without doubt to save both.

For it was fitting, and agreeable to our salvation, that the true God, alone substantially born of the true Father, should assume a true human soul and flesh, which He Himself made; that in both He might fight with the tempter, in both conquer, and thereafter in both minister help to the tempted, since in both He offered to the weak and to those about to die the example of victory. That saying also, which the Truth itself uttered, demonstrates the mystery of the Mediator by manifest token, saying: For the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost (Luke 19:10). Let us attend, therefore, to what perished by the fall of the earthly man, and let us acknowledge what was sought by the coming of the heavenly man.

Let us consider what the servant sold by sinning (or, by sin), and it will appear what the Lord redeemed by assuming. Let us attend to what the robber wounded in the seduction of man, that it may be clear what the physician healed in the assumption of man. Did not the first man, composed of flesh and soul together, receive the commandment of God? But if he is known to have received God's commandment in both, in both he ought to have kept the obedience of the commandment. But if the commandment was to be obeyed in both, by both the transgression was committed: for as sin was begun by the desire of the soul, so it was completed by the carnal eating: and therefore, because the whole man incurred the guilt of transgression, the devil took the whole man captive to himself.

But if the whole was held by the bond of captivity, the whole had need of the help of a deliverer. And if piety ought to free the whole, the divine majesty ought to assume the whole. The whole nature of man, therefore, was to be assumed by God, since the captivity to be captured was in the whole, so that in the whole together victory might be won over the captured captivity: and (or, that), according to the sentence of apostolic preaching, leading captivity captive (Ephesians 4:8), He might confidently lead forth principalities and powers, openly triumphing over them in Himself (Colossians 2:15). CHAPTER XIV. Another argument from the division into four members. Finally, let it be said why the nature of the soul was not assumed together with the flesh by that ineffable divinity?

Was it not made by God? Or was it not corrupted by sin? Or did the universal medicine despise it as viler than the flesh? Or was the Almighty unable to cure it, wounded by the wound of sin? But those who hold the first and last of these are rebels both against the power of the Creator and against the might of the Savior, if either they think any creature was not made by God, or they say that the power of the Almighty is too weak to confer salvation upon the soul. But as for the two middle ones, they consider neither the sin of the rational creature, nor its merit;

not understanding that that which grants life to the flesh cannot be viler than its own flesh, and that that which by intelligence could better resist the tempter was the more grievously wounded. That almighty power, therefore, and holy wisdom, neither despised as foreign that which it knew to have been made by itself, nor scorned to heal that which it knew to have been more grievously wounded, nor excluded from the remedy of salvation that which it had made superior to the flesh: but as the devil struck down the whole man by deceiving, so God saved the whole by assuming: that the same might be acknowledged as the Creator and Redeemer of the whole creature, who was able both to make what was not, and to repair what had fallen away. CHAPTER XV. Another argument, from the name of the Mediator, that He may have in Himself the whole nature.

Moreover, all who desire to be partakers of eternal salvation ought to acknowledge alike and to hold that the man Christ Jesus is not called in vain the Mediator of God and men, save because the same God assumed into Himself the whole nature of man, and the same man has in Himself the whole substance of the deity (or, divinity). For because through sin man was separated from God, between the wrathful God and the sinning man there ought indeed to intervene such a person of a Mediator, who, for the propitiating of God to man, might have in Himself the whole and true God born of God, and, for the reconciling of man to God, might contain in Himself the whole and true man born of man, and thus from both and in both there might be one Christ, so that the fullness of the deity

might not consume the man it assumed, but advance him; and the fullness of humanity might neither diminish the immense, nor change the impassible deity: and so the nature of man, which had been changed for the worse, might through Him be wholly restored, than whom nothing is better. Therefore the Mediator of God and men deigned to show Himself full God and full man. CHAPTER XVI. Other arguments also from various places of Scripture. But if anyone doubts, or does not at all believe, let him choose whether he wishes what we assert to be demonstrated to him by name or by deed: for Holy Scripture, in one and the same Christ, has passed over neither the appellation of God nor of man, the evangelist saying:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God: the same was in the beginning with God; all things were made by Him, and without Him was made nothing (John 1:1-2). And a little after: The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us (ibid., 14). He surely asserts that Word to have been made flesh which he had mentioned above to be God, so that he might show the same to be true God from the Father, who is true man from man. He shows besides in what respect we should believe Him to be naturally eternal from God the Father, and in what respect we ought to accept Him as made man in time from man, showing one thing in the opening, another in what follows. The eternity of the Son of God, therefore, is asserted, while the Word is proclaimed to be God in the beginning.

There he does not say the Word was made, since he knew it to be begotten of the Father; there is no name of time, where there is eternity, which can have neither beginning nor end. But when he comes to the appellation of flesh, then the Word is said to be made flesh, that we might acknowledge that He who had not been made, but was always born of the Father, then willed to be made, when He deigned—being made His own work—to repair what He had made. In this deed blessed Paul too took care to profess, as the truth of the manhood, so the truth of the time, saying: But when the fullness of time came, God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, that He might redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons (Galatians 4:4-5).

This very thing, agreeing everywhere with the prophets (or, the prophetic writings), the apostolic authority preserves, so that, proclaiming Christ made, it may clearly show both what He was made, and whence He was made: that it may be acknowledged that the Lord of all things so took the form of a servant, that He took true flesh not from elsewhere, but from man. David, therefore, says: Mother Sion shall say: A man, and a man was made in her, and the Most High Himself founded her (Psalm 87:5). Behold, in one Christ, as one person is asserted without doubt, so the truth of God and man is shown unconfused: for He who was made man in her, the Most High Himself founded her. To this saying that apostolic word is altogether to be compared:

Whose are the fathers, of whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever (Romans 9:5). What David says: And a man was made in her, this Paul confirms, saying: Whose are the fathers, of whom is Christ according to the flesh; and what David asserts: The Most High Himself founded her, this Paul follows, saying: Who is over all, God blessed forever. The Old Testament chimes with the New; David agrees with John and Paul. Whom David calls true man, because Mother Sion shall say: A man, and a man was made in her, the same he believes and proclaims to be true God, because the Most High Himself founded her. Whom John knew to be true man, hearing Him say:

You seek to kill me, a man, who have told you the truth (John 8:40); the same he shows to be true God, saying: This is the true God, and eternal life. He recognizes Christ as true man, because the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us; and shows the same to be true God, because in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Whom Paul knew to be true man, because by voluntary love the Lord of man was made of a woman, and the Lord of the law was made under the law (Galatians 4:4) (as he himself testifies: Because God sent His Son, made of a woman, made under the law; and because He was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; and: Whose are the fathers, of whom is Christ

is according to the flesh); the same he ceases not to confess as true God, saying: Who is over all, God blessed forever. CHAPTER XVII. An objection, that Christ was made flesh, therefore He lacked a soul. Flesh for the whole man. Soul for the whole man. Nor indeed are we unaware that this is objected on the other side: that when the Word is said to be made flesh, and He was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and Whose are the fathers, of whom is Christ according to the flesh, in the aforesaid places the carnal understanding of certain men is so held by the name of the flesh, that, the flesh having been assumed, Christ is not believed to have assumed also a rational soul. But those who so think give less heed to the fact that it is a feature of human speech, whereby not seldom the whole is signified by a part.

Let them know, therefore, that in the Holy Scriptures the whole man is sometimes shown by the name of flesh only, and sometimes by the appellation of soul alone; the truth of which matter I shall easily teach thoroughly, not only from the Old Testament, but also from the New. David signifies the whole man by the name of flesh, saying: Hear, O God, my prayer, to You shall all flesh come (Psalm 65:2). But what is all flesh, if not every man? Similarly by the same in another psalm it is said: In God I will hope, I will not fear what flesh can do to me (Psalm 56:5). And that he might show that by the name of flesh he designated the whole man, a little after he says again identically: In God I will praise the word, in God (or,

in the Lord) I will praise His word; in God I will hope, I will not fear what man can do to me (ibid., 11). With these sayings the sayings of Isaiah also agree, when, announcing the coming of our Savior in the flesh, he says: The crooked things shall be made straight, and the rough ways plain, and all flesh shall see the salvation of God (Isaiah 40:4-5). But what is all flesh, if not every man? Or shall we perhaps so raise up lifeless flesh, that we do not hesitate to attribute to it divine vision? In the New Testament also the very Creator and Lord of the human race is found to have named the whole man by the name of flesh, when, foretelling the quality of the extreme tribulation, He speaks these words to His disciples:

For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not from the beginning of the world until now, nor shall be: and unless those days had been shortened, no flesh should be saved; but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened (Matthew 24:21-22). That the whole man is also signified by the appellation of soul, the series of the Old Testament thus demonstrates, when it is said: And all the souls of Jacob were seventy-five (Genesis 46:27). Again in the same Testament: Whatever soul shall sin before the Lord unwillingly, in any of the commandments of the Lord which ought not to be done, and shall do one of these: if indeed the anointed priest who is prince shall sin, that so the people may not do, let him offer (or,

he shall offer) for his sin, in which he has sinned, an unblemished bullock of the herd to the Lord (Leviticus 4:1-3). Behold, a soul is spoken of, and next the anointed priest is named, so that when we hear 'soul' we may recognize the whole man at the same time. Nor in the New Testament could the expression of this signification be lacking: since indeed when the disciples, strengthened by the coming of the Holy Spirit, having cast off dread, entered upon the office of public preaching, the sermon of Peter being completed, the book of the Acts of the Apostles, as Luke narrates, thus reads: Those therefore who received his word were baptized; and there were added in that day about three thousand souls (Acts 2:41).

Whoever strives to deny that men are signified here by the name of souls, must of necessity show how souls without bodies could be believed to have received the sacrament of baptism from the apostles. Something similar to this place blessed Peter also sets down in his Epistle: In the days of Noah, he says, while the ark was being built, in which few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water (1 Peter 3:20). Since therefore it is manifest that by the custom of the Scriptures the whole man is designated sometimes by the appellation of flesh, sometimes of soul alone, surely it is shown that when the evangelist says: The Word was made flesh, nothing else ought to be understood than the Word was made man. CHAPTER XVIII. The Mediator Christ therefore assumed the whole man.

On account of the two natures in Christ, both the man is called the Son of God and God the Son of man. In Christ there is true flesh and a true soul. Therefore indeed the man Christ Jesus is proclaimed by the Apostle the Mediator of God and men; for because the Word was God, in that God assumed the whole man for us, the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us. The Word indeed was made flesh in that there is one person of God and man in Christ: But He dwelt among us, because in Christ the true and whole divine and human substance remains. For the Word dwelling in the man was not changed into man.

But where could the Word dwell most of all, than in that substance which He made after His own image, that is, in the soul of that man whom He assumed? Which we perceive to be prophetically (or, by prophecy) intimated by spiritual grace through Solomon, when it is said: The soul of the just is the seat of wisdom (Wisdom 7:27). For that it may be shown that Christ dwells especially in the substance of the soul, let Paul offer us the support of his attestation in truth, who says: For this cause I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom all fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named:

that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might by His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell by faith in your hearts (Ephesians 3:16-17). Behold, he both names the soul, and calls it the heart, where he affirms Christ to dwell. Whence it is clearly known that the Word, God, assumed the whole man, since it is proved that the indwelling of the Son of God is shown in the soul rather than in the flesh. The truth of this inseparable sacrament, whereby God deigned to assume the whole man, and the whole man is shown to remain assumed in God, made both that which is naturally of man to be called the Son of God, and that which is naturally of God the Father to be called the Son of man, the angel saying to Mary: