This page copyright © 2002 Blackmask Online.
http://www.blackmask.com
I. Although all the discussions in the preceding book have had
reference to the world and its arrangements, it now seems to follow mat
we should specially re-discuss a few points respecting the world
itself, i.e., its beginning and end, or those dispensations of Divine
Providence which have taken place between the beginning and the end, or
those events which are supposed to have occurred before the creation of
the world, or are to take place after the end.
In this investigation, the first point which clearly appears is,
that the world in all its diversified and varying conditions is
composed not only of rational and diviner natures, and of a diversity
of bodies, but of dumb animals, wild and tame beasts, of birds, and of
all things which live in the waters ;[1] then, secondly, of places,
i.e., of the heaven or heavens, and of the earth or water, as well as
of the air, which is intermediate, and which they term aether, and of
everything which proceeds from the earth or is born in it. Seeing,
then,[2] there is so great a variety in the world, and so great a
diversity among rational beings themselves, on account of which every
other variety and diversity also is supposed to have come into
existence, what other cause than this ought to be assigned for the
existence of the world, especially if we have regard to that end by
means of which it was shown in the preceding book that all things are
to be restored to their original condition? And if this should seem to
be logically stated, what other cause, as we have already said, are we
to imagine for so great a diversity in the world, save the diversity
and variety in the movements and declensions of those who fell from
that primeval unity and harmony in which they were at first created by
God, and who, being driven from that state of goodness, and drawn in
various directions by the harassing influence of different motives and
desires, have changed, according to their different tendencies, the
single and undivided goodness of their nature into minds of various
sorts?[3]
2. But God, by the ineffable skill of His wisdom, transforming
and restoring all things, in whatever manner they are made, to some
useful aim, and to the common advantage of all, recalls those very
creatures which differed so much from each other in mental conformation
to one agreement of labour and purpose; so that, although they are
under the influence of different motives, they nevertheless complete
the fulness and perfection of one world, and the very variety of minds
tends to one end of perfection. For it is one power which grasps and
holds together all the diversity of the world, and leads the different
movements towards one work, lest so immense an undertaking as that of
the world should be dissolved by the dissensions of souls. And for this
reason we think that God, the Father of all things, in order to ensure
the salvation of all His creatures through the ineffable plan of His
word and wisdom, so arranged each of these, that every spirit, whether
soul or rational existence, however called, should not be compelled by
force, against the liberty of his own will, to any other course than
that to which the motives of his own mind led him (lest by so doing the
power of exercising free-will should seem to be taken away, which
certainly would produce a change in the nature of the being itself);
and that the varying purposes of these would be suitably and usefully
adapted to the harmony of one world, by some of them requiring help,
and others being able to give it, and others again being the cause of
struggle and contest to those who are making progress, amongst whom
their diligence would be deemed more worthy of approval, and the place
of rank obtained after victory be held with greater certainty, which
should be established by the difficulties of the contest.[1]
3. Although the whole world is arranged into offices of different
kinds, its condition, nevertheless, is not to be supposed as one of
internal discrepancies and discordances; but as our one body is
provided with many members, and is held together by one soul, so I am
of opinion that the whole world also ought to be regarded as some huge
and immense animal, which is kept together by the power and reason of
God as by one soul. This also, I think, is indicated in sacred
Scripture by the declaration of the prophet, "Do not I fill heaven and
earth? saith the Lord;"[2] and again, "The heaven is My throne, and the
earth is My footstool;"[3] and by the Saviour's words, when He says
that we are to swear "neither by heaven, for it is God's throne; nor by
the earth, for it is His footstool:"[4] To the same effect also are the
words of Paul, in his address to the Athenians, when he says, "In Him
we live, and move, and have our being."[5] For how do we live, and
move, and have our being in God, except by His comprehending and
holding together the whole world by His power? And how is heaven the
throne of God, and the earth His footstool, as the Saviour Himself
declares, save by His power filling all things both in heaven and
earth, according to the Lord's own words? And that God, the Father of
all things, fills and holds together the world with the fulness of His
power, according to those passages which we have quoted, no one, I
think, will have any difficulty in admitting. And now, since the course
of the preceding discussion has shown that the different movements of
rational beings, and their varying opinions, have brought about the
diversity that is in the world, we must see whether it may not be
appropriate that this world should have a termination like its
beginning. For there is no doubt that its end must be sought amid much
diversity and variety; which variety, being found to exist in the
termination of the world, will again furnish ground and occasion for
the diversities of the other world which is to succeed the present.
4. If now, in the course of our discussion, it has been
ascertained that these things are so, it seems to follow that we next
consider the nature of corporeal being, seeing the diversity in the
world cannot exist without bodies. It is evident from the nature of
things themselves, that bodily nature admits of diversity and variety
of change, so that it is capable of undergoing all possible
transformations, as, e.g., the conversion of wood into fire, of fire
into smoke, of smoke into air, of oil into fire. Does not food itself,
whether of man or of animals, exhibit the same ground of change? For
whatever we take as food, is converted into the substance of our body.
But how water is changed into earth or into air, and air again into
fire, or fire into air, or air into water, although not difficult to
explain, yet on the present occasion it is enough merely to mention
them, as our object is to discuss the nature of bodily matter. By
matter, therefore, we understand that which is placed under bodies,
viz., that by which, through the bestowing and implanting of qualities,
bodies exist; and we mention four qualities—heat, cold, dryness,
humidity. These four qualities being implanted in the ulh , or matter
(for matter is found to exist in its own nature without those qualities
before mentioned), produce the different kinds of bodies. Although this
matter is, as we have said above, according to its own proper nature
without qualities, it is never found to exist without a quality. And I
cannot understand how so many distinguished men have been of opinion
that this matter, which is so great, and possesses such properties as
to enable it to be sufficient for all the bodies in the world which God
willed to exist, and to be the attendant and slave of the Creator for
whatever forms and species He wished in all things, receiving into
itself whatever qualities He desired to bestow upon it, was uncreated,
i.e., not formed by God Himself, who is the Creator of all things, but
that its nature and power were the result of chance. And I am
astonished that they should find fault with those who deny either God's
creative power or His providential administration of the world, and
accuse them of impiety for thinking that so great a work as the world
could exist without an architect or overseer; while they themselves
incur a similar charge of impiety in saying that matter is uncreated,
and co-eternal with the uncreated God. According to this view, then, if
we suppose for the sake of argument that matter did not exist, as these
maintain, saying that God could not create anything when nothing
existed, without doubt He would have been idle, not having matter on
which to operate, which matter they say was furnished Him not by His
own arrangement, but by accident; and they think that this, which was
discovered by chance, was able to suffice Him for an undertaking of so
vast an extent, and for the manifestation of the power of His might,
and by admitting the plan of all His wisdom, might be distinguished and
formed into a world. Now this appears to me to be very absurd, and to
be the opinion of those men who are altogether ignorant of the power
and intelligence of un-crested nature. But that we may see the nature
of things a little more clearly, let it be granted that for a little
time matter did not exist, and that God, when nothing formerly existed,
caused those things to come into existence which He desired, why are we
to suppose that God would create matter either better or greater, or of
another kind, than that which He did produce from His own power and
wisdom, in order that that might exist which formerly did not? Would He
cream a worse and inferior matter, or one the same as that which they
call uncreated? Now I think it will very easily appear to any one, that
neither a better nor inferior matter could have assumed the forms and
species of the world, if it had not been such as that which actually
did assume them. And does it not then seem impious to call that
uncreated, which, if believed to be formed by God, would doubtless be
found to be such as that which they call uncreated?
5. But that we may believe on the authority of holy Scripture
that such is the case, hear how in the book of Maccabees, where the
mother of seven martyrs exhorts her son to endure torture, this truth
is confirmed; for she says, "I ask of thee, my son, to look at the
heaven and the earth, and at all things which are in them, and
beholding these, to know that God made all these things when they did
not exist."[1] In the book of the Shepherd also, in the first
commandment, he speaks as follows: "First of all believe that there is
one God who created and arranged all things, and made all things to
come into existence, and out of a state of nothingness."[2] Perhaps
also the expression in the Psalms has reference to this: "He spake, and
they were made; He commanded, and they were created."[3] For the words,
"He spake, and they were made," appear to show that the substance of
those things which exist is meant; while the others, "He commanded, and
they were created," seem spoken of the qualities by which the substance
itself has been moulded.
I. On this topic some are wont to inquire whether, as the Father
generates an uncreated Son, and brings forth a Holy Spirit, not as if
He had no previous existence, but because the Father is the origin and
source of the Son or Holy Spirit, and no anteriority or posteriority
can be understood as existing in them; so also a similar kind of union
or relationship can be understood as subsisting between rational
natures and bodily matter. And that this point may be more fully and
thoroughly examined, the commencement of the discussion is generally
directed to the inquiry whether this very bodily nature, which bears
the lives and contains the movements of spiritual and rational minds,
will be equally eternal with them, or will altogether perish and be
destroyed. And that the question may be determined with greater
precision, we have, in the first place, to inquire if it is possible
for rational natures to remain altogether incorporeal after they have
reached the summit of holiness and happiness (which seems to me a most
difficult and almost impossible attainment), or whether they must
always of necessity be united to bodies. If, then, any one could show a
reason why it was possible for them to dispense wholly with bodies, it
will appear to follow,: hat as a bodily nature, created out of nothing
after intervals of time, was produced when it did not exist, so also it
must cease to be when the purposes which it served had no longer an
existence.
2. If, however, it is impossible for this point to be at all
maintained, viz., that any other nature than the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit can live without a body, the necessity of logical reasoning
compels us to understand that rational natures were indeed created at
the beginning, but that material substance was separated from them only
in thought and understanding, and appears to have been formed for them,
or after them, and that they never have lived nor do live without it;
for an incorporeal life will rightly be considered a prerogative of the
Trinity alone. As we have remarked above, therefore, that material
substance of this world, possessing a nature admitting of all possible
transformations, is, when dragged down to beings of a lower order,
moulded into the crasser and more solid condition of a body, so as to
distinguish those visible and varying forms of the world; but when it
becomes the servant of more perfect and more blessed beings, it shines
in the splendour of celestial bodies, and adorns either the angels of
God or the sons of the resurrection with the clothing of a spiritual
body, out of all which will be filled up the diverse and varying state
of the one world. But if any one should desire to discuss these matters
more fully, it will be necessary, with all reverence and fear of God,
to examine the sacred Scriptures with greater attention and diligence,
to ascertain whether the secret and hidden sense within them may
perhaps reveal anything regarding these matters; and something may be
discovered in their abstruse and mysterious language, through the
demonstration of the Holy Spirit to those who are worthy, after many
testimonies have been collected on this very point.
I. The next subject of inquiry is, whether there was any other
world before the one which now exists; and if so, whether it was such
as the present, or somewhat different, or inferior; or whether there
was no world at all, but something like that which we understand will
be after the end of all things, when the kingdom shall be delivered up
to God, even the Father; which nevertheless may have been the end of
another world,—of that, namely, after which this world took its
beginning; and whether the various lapses of intellectual natures
provoked God to produce this diverse and varying condition of the
world. This point also, I think, must be investigated in a similar way,
viz., whether after this world there will be any (system of)
preservation and amendment, severe indeed, and attended with much pain
to those who were unwilling to obey the word of God, but a process
through which, by means of instruction and rational training, those may
arrive at a fuller understanding of the truth who have devoted
themselves in the present life to these pursuits, and who, after having
had their minds purified, have advanced onwards so as to become capable
of attaining divine wisdom; and after this the end of all things will
immediately follow, and there will be again, for the correction and
improvement of those who stand in need of it, another world, either
resembling that which now exists, or better than it, or greatly
inferior; and how long that world, whatever it be that is to come after
this, shall continue; and if there will be a time when no world shall
anywhere exist, or if there has been a time when there was no world at
all; or if there have been, or will be several; or if it shall ever
come to pass that there will be one resembling another, like it in
every respect, and indistinguishable from it.
2. That it may appear more clearly, then, whether bodily matter
can exist during intervals of time, and whether, as it did not exist
before it was made, so it may again be resolved into non-existence, let
us see, first of all, whether it is possible for any one to live
without a body. For if one person can live without a body, all things
also may dispense with them; seeing our former treatise has shown that
all things tend towards one end. Now, if all things may exist without
bodies, there will undoubtedly be no bodily substance, seeing there
will be no use for it. But how shall we understand the words of the
apostle in those passages, in which, discussing the resurrection of the
dead, he says, "This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this
mortal must put on immortality. When this corruptible shall have put on
incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall
be brought to pass the saying which is written, Death is swallowed up
in victory ! Where, O death, is thy victory? O death, thy sting has
been swallowed up: the sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin
is the law."[1] Some such meaning, then, as this, seems to be suggested
by the apostle. For can the expression which he employs, "this
corruptible," and "this mortal," with the gesture, as it were, of one
who touches or points out, apply to anything else than to bodily
matter? This matter of the body, then, which is now corruptible shall
put on incorruption when a perfect soul, and one furnished with the
marks[2] of incorruption, shall have begun to inhabit it. And do not be
surprised if we speak of a perfect soul as the clothing of the body
(which, on account of the Word of God and His wisdom, is now named
incorruption), when Jesus Christ Himself, who is the Lord and Creator
of the soul, is said to be the clothing of the saints, according to the
language of the apostle, "Put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ."[3] As
Christ, then, is the clothing of the soul, so for a kind of reason
sufficiently intelligible is the soul said to be the clothing of the
body, seeing it is an ornament to it, covering and concealing its
mortal nature. The expression, then, "This corruptible must put on
incorruption," is as if the apostle had said, "This corruptible nature
of the body must receive the clothing of incorruption—a soul
possessing in itself incorruptibitity," because it has been clothed
with Christ, who is the Wisdom and Word of God. But when this body,
which at some future period we shall possess in a more glorious state,
shall have become a partaker of life, it will then, in addition to
being immortal, become also incorruptible. For whatever is mortal is
necessarily also corruptible; but whatever is corruptible cannot also
be said to be mortal. We say of a stone or a piece of wood that it is
corruptible, but we do not say that it follows that it is also mortal.
But as the body partakes of life, then because life may be, and is,
separated from it, we consequently name it mortal, and according to
another sense also we speak of it as corruptible. The holy apostle
therefore, with remarkable insight, referring to the general first
cause of bodily matter, of which (matter), whatever be the qualities
with which it is endowed (now indeed carnal, but by and by more refined
and pure, which are termed spiritual), the soul makes constant use,
says, "This corruptible must put on incorruption." And in the second
place, looking to the special cause of the body, he says, "This mortal
must put on immortality." Now, what else will in-corruption and
immortality be, save the wisdom, and the word, and the righteousness of
God, which mould; and clothe, and adorn the soul? And hence it happens
that it is said, "The corruptible will put on incorruption, and the
mortal immortality." For although we may now make great proficiency,
yet as we only know in part, and prophesy in part, and see through a
glass, darkly, those very things which we seem to understand, this
corruptible does not yet put on incorruption, nor is this mortal yet
clothed with immorality; and as this training of ours in the body is
protracted doubtless to a longer period, up to the time, viz., when
those very bodies of ours with which we are enveloped may, on account
of the word of God, and His wisdom and perfect righteousness, earn
incorruptibility and immortality, therefore is it said, "This
corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on
immortality."
3. But, nevertheless, those who think that rational creatures can
at any time lead an existence out of the body, may here raise such
questions as the following. If it is true that this corruptible shall
put on incorruption, and this mortal put on immortality, and that death
is swallowed up at the end; this shows that nothing else than a
material nature is to be destroyed, on which death could operate, while
the mental acumen of those who are in the body seems to be blunted by
the nature of corporeal matter. If, however, they are out of the body,
then they will altogether escape the annoyance arising from a
disturbance of that kind. But as they will not be able immediately to
escape all bodily clothing, they are just to be considered as
inhabiting more refined and purer bodies, which possess the property of
being no longer overcome by death, or of being wounded by its sting; so
that at last, by the gradual disappearance of the material nature,
death is both swallowed up, and even at the end exterminated, and all
its sting completely blunted by the divine grace which the soul has
been rendered capable of receiving, and has thus deserved to obtain
incorruptibility and immortality. And then it will be deservedly said
by all, "O death, where is thy victory? O death, where is thy sting?
The sting of death is sin." If these conclusions, then, seem to hold
good, it follows that we must believe our condition at some future time
to be incorporeal; and if this is admitted, and all are said to be
subjected to Christ, this (incorporeity) also must necessarily be
bestowed on all to whom the subjection to Christ extends; since all who
are subject to Christ will be in the end subject to God the Father, to
whom Christ is said to deliver up the kingdom; and thus it appears that
then also the need of bodies will cease.[1] And if it ceases, bodily
matter returns to nothing, as formerly also it did not exist.
Now let us see what can be said in answer to those who make these
assertions. For it will appear to be a necessary consequence that, if
bodily nature be annihilated, it must be again restored and created;
since it seems a possible thing that rational natures, from whom the
faculty of free-will is never taken away, may be again subjected to
movements of some kind, through the special act of the Lord Himself,
lest perhaps, if they were always to occupy a condition that was
unchangeable, they should be ignorant that it is by the grace of God
and not by their own merit that they have been placed in that final
state of happiness; and these movements will undoubtedly again be
attended by variety and diversity of bodies, by which the world is
always adorned; nor will it ever be composed (of anything) save of
variety and diversity,—an effect which cannot be produced without a
bodily matter.
4. And now I do not understand by what proofs they can maintain
their position, who assert that worlds sometimes come into existence
which are not dissimilar to each other, but in all respects equal. For
if there is said to be a world similar in all respects (to the
present), then it will come to pass that Adam and Eve will do the same
things which they did before: there will be a second time the same
deluge, and the same Moses will again lead a nation numbering nearly
six hundred thousand out of Egypt; Judas will also a second time betray
the Lord; Paul will a second time keep the garments of those who stoned
Stephen; and everything which has been done in this life will be said
to be repeated,—a state of things which I think cannot be established
by any reasoning, if souls are actuated by freedom of will, and
maintain either their advance or retrogression according to the power
of their will. For souls are not driven on in a cycle which returns
after many ages to the same round, so as either to do or desire this or
that; but at whatever point the freedom of their own will aims, thither
do they direct the course of their actions. For what these persons say
is much the same as if one were to assert that if a medimnus of grain
were to be poured out on the ground, the fall of the grain would be on
the second occasion identically the same as on the first, so that every
individual grain would lie for the second time close beside that grain
where it had been thrown before, and so the medimnus would be scattered
in the same order, and with the same marks as formerly; which certainly
is an impossible result with the countless grains of a medimnus, even
if they were to be poured out without ceasing for many ages. So
therefore it seems to me impossible for a world to be restored for the
second time, with the same order and with the same amount of births,
and deaths, and actions; but that a diversity of worlds may exist with
changes of no unimportant kind, so that the state of another world may
be for some unmistakeable reasons better (than this), and for others
worse, and for others again intermediate. But what may be the number or
measure of this I confess myself ignorant, although, if any one can
tell it, I would gladly learn.
5. But this world, which is itself called an age, is said to be
the conclusion of many ages. Now the holy apostle teaches that in that
age which preceded this, Christ did not suffer, nor even in the age
which preceded that again; and I know not that I am able to enumerate
the number of anterior ages in which He did not suffer. I will show,
however, from what statements of Paul I have arrived at this
understanding. He says, "But now once in the consummation of ages, He
was manifested to take away sin by the sacrifice of Himself."[1] For He
says that He was once made a victim, and in the consummation of ages
was manifested to take away sin. Now that after this age, which is said
to be formed for the consummation of other ages, there will he other
ages again to follow, we have clearly learned from Paul himself, who
says, "That in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of
His grace in His kindness towards us."[2] He has not said, "in the age
to come," nor "in the two ages to come," whence I infer that by his
language many ages are indicated. Now if there is something greater
than ages, so that among created beings certain ages may be understood,
but among other beings which exceed and surpass visible creatures,
(ages still greater) (which perhaps will be the case at the restitution
of all things, when the whole universe will come to a perfect
termination), perhaps that period in which the consummation of all
things will take place is to be understood as something more than an
age. But here the authority of holy Scripture moves me, which says,
"For an age and more."[3] Now this word "more" undoubtedly means
something greater than an age; and see if that expression of the
Saviour, "I will that where I am, these also may be with Me; and as I
and Thou are one, these also may be one in Us,"[4] may not seem to
convey something more than an age and ages, perhaps even more than ages
of ages, — that period, viz., when all things are now no longer in an
age, but when God is in all.
6. Having discussed these points regarding the nature of the
world to the best of our ability, it does not seem out of place to
inquire what is the meaning of the term world, which in holy Scripture
is shown frequently to have different significations. For what we call
in Latin mundus, is termed in Greek kosmos , and kosmos signifies
not only a world, but also an ornament. Finally, in Isaiah, where the
language of reproof is directed to the chief daughters of Sion, and
where he says, "Instead of an ornament of a golden head, thou wilt have
baldness on account of thy works,"[5] he employs the same term to
denote ornament as to denote the world, viz., kosmos . For the plan
of the world is said to be contained in the clothing of the high
priest, as we find in the Wisdom of Solomon, where he says, "For in the
long garment was the whole world."[6] That earth of ours, with its
inhabitants, is also termed the world, as when Scripture says, "The
whole world lieth in wickedness."[7] Clement indeed, a disciple of the
apostles, makes mention of those whom the Greeks called 'A ntikqones ,
and other parts of the earth, to which no one of our people can
approach, nor can any one of those who are there cross over to us,
which he also termed worlds, saying, "The ocean is impassable to men;
and those are words which are on the other side of it, which are
governed by these same arrangements of the ruling God."[8] That
universe which is bounded by heaven and earth is also called a world,
as Paul declares: "For the fashion of this world will pass away."[9]
Our Lord and Saviour also points out a certain other world besides this
visible one, which it would indeed be difficult to describe and make
known. He says, "I am not of this world."[10] For, as if He were of a
certain other world, He says, "I am not of this world." Now, of this
world we have said beforehand, that the explanation was difficult; and
for this reason, that there might not be afforded to any an occasion of
entertaining the supposition that we maintain the existence of certain
images which the Greeks call "ideas:" for it is certainly alien to our
(writers) to speak of an incorporeal world existing in the imagination
alone, or in the fleeting. world of thoughts; and how they can assert
either that the Saviour comes from thence, or that the saints will go
thither, I do not see. There is no doubt, however, that something more
illustrious and excellent than this present world is pointed out by the
Saviour, at which He incites and encourages believers to aim. But
whether that world to which He desires to allude be far separated and
divided from this either by situation, or nature, or glory; or whether
it be superior in glory and quality, but confined within the limits of
this world (which seems to me more probable), is nevertheless
uncertain, and in my opinion an unsuitable subject for human thought.
But from what Clement seems to indicate when he says, "The ocean is
impassable to men, and those worlds which are behind it," speaking in
the plural number of the worlds which are behind it, which he intimates
are administered and governed by the same providence of the Most High
God, he appears to throw out to us some germs of that view by which the
whole universe of existing things, celestial and super-celestial,
earthly and infernal, is generally called one perfect world, within
which, or by which, other worlds, if any there are, must be supposed to
be contained. For which reason he wished the globe of the sun or moon,
and of the other bodies called planets, to be each termed worlds. Nay,
even that pre-eminent globe itself which they call the non-wandering (
aplanh ), they nevertheless desire to have properly called world.
Finally, they summon the book of Baruch the prophet to bear witness to
this assertion, because in it the seven worlds or heavens are more
clearly pointed out. Nevertheless, above that sphere which they call
non-wandering ( aplanh ), they will have another sphere to exist, which
they say, exactly as our heaven contains all things which are under it,
comprehends by its immense size and indescribable extent the spaces of
all the spheres together within its more magnificent circumference; so
that all things are within it, as this earth of ours is under heaven.
And this also is believed to be called in the holy Scriptures the good
land, and the land of the living, having its own heaven, which is
higher, and in which the names of the saints are said to be written, or
to have been written, by the Saviour; by which heaven that earth is
confined and shut in, which the Saviour in the Gospel promises to the
meek and merciful. For they would have this earth of ours, which
formerly was named "Dry," to have derived its appellation from the name
of that earth, as this heaven also was named firmament from the title
of that heaven. But we have treated at greater length of such opinions
in the place where we had to inquire into the meaning of the
declaration, that in the beginning "God made the heavens and the
earth." For another heaven and another earth are shown to exist besides
that "firmanent" which is said to have been made after the second day,
or that "dry land" which was afterwards called "earth." Certainly, what
some say of this world, that it is corruptible because it was made, and
yet is not corrupted, because the will of God, who made it and holds it
together lest corruption should rule over it, is stronger and more
powerful than corruption, may more correctly be supposed of that world
which we have called above a "non-wandering "sphere, since by the will
of God it is not at all subject to corruption, for the reason that it
has not admired any causes of corruption, seeing it is the world of the
saints and of the thoroughly purified, and not of the wicked, like that
world of ours. We must see, moreover, lest perhaps it is with reference
to this that the apostle says, "While we look not at the things which
are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which
are seen are temporal, but the things which are unseen are eternal. For
we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we
have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the
heavens."[1] And when he says elsewhere, "Because I shall see the
heavens, the works of Thy fingers,"[2] and when God said, regarding all
things visible, by the mouth of His prophet, "My hand has formed all
these things,"[3] He declares that that eternal house in the heavens
which He promises to His saints was not made with hands, pointing out,
doubtless, the difference of creation in things which are seen and in
those which are not seen. For the same thing is not to be understood by
the expressions, "those things which are not seen," and "those things
which are invisible." For those things which are invisible are not only
not seen, but do not even possess the property of visibility, being
what the Greeks call aswmata , i.e., incorporeal; whereas those of
which Paul says, "They are not seen," possess indeed the property of
being seen, but, as he explains, are not yet beheld by those to whom
they are promised.
7. Having sketched, then, so far as we could understand, these
three opinions regarding the end of all things, and the supreme
blessedness, let each one of our readers determine for himself, with
care and diligence, whether any one of them can be approved and
adopted.[1] For it has been said that we must suppose either that an
incorporeal existence is possible, after all things have become subject
to Christ, and through Christ to God the Father, when God, will be all
and in all; or that when, notwithstanding all things have been made
subject to Christ, and through Christ to God (with whom they formed
also one spirit, in respect of spirits being rational natures), then
the bodily substance itself also being united to most pure and
excellent spirits, and being changed into an ethereal condition in
proportion to the quality or merits of those who assume it (according
to the apostle's words, "We also shall be changed"), will shine forth
in splendour; or at least that when the fashion of those things which
are seen passes away, and all corruption has been shaken off and
cleansed away, and when the whole of the space occupied by this world,
in which the spheres of the planets are said to be, has been left
behind and beneath,[2] then is reached the fixed abode of the pious and
the good situated above that sphere, which is called non-wandering (
aplanhs ), as in a good land, in a land of the living, which will be
inherited by the meek and gentle; to which land belongs that heaven
(which, with its more magnificent extent, surrounds and contains that
land itself) which is called truly and chiefly heaven, in which heaven
and earth, the end and perfection of all things, may be safely and most
confidently placed,—where, viz., these, after their apprehension and
their chastisement for the offences which they have undergone by way of
purgation, may, after having fulfilled and discharged every obligation,
deserve a habitation in that land; while those who have been obedient
to the word of God, and have henceforth by their obedience shown
themselves capable of wisdom, are said to deserve the kingdom of that
heaven or heavens; and thus the prediction is more worthily fulfilled,
"Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth;"[3] and,
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for they shall inherit the kingdom of
heaven;"[4] and the declaration in the Psalm, "He shall exalt thee, and
thou shalt inherit the land."[5] For it is called a descent to this
earth, but an exaltation to that which is on high. In this way,
therefore, does a sort of road seem to be opened up by the departure of
the saints from that earth to those heavens; so that they do not so
much appear to abide in that land, as to inhabit it with an intention,
viz., to pass on to the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven, when they
have reached that degree of perfection also.
I. Having now briefly arranged these points in order as we best
could, it follows that, agreeably to our intention from the first, we
refute those who think that the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is a
different God from Him who gave the answers of the law to Moses, or
commissioned the prophets, who is the God of our fathers, Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob. For in this article of faith, first of all, we must
be firmly grounded. We have to consider, then, the expression of
frequent recurrence in the Gospels, and subjoined to all the acts of
our Lord and Saviour, "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by
this or that prophet," it being manifest that the prophets are the
prophets of that God who made the world. From this therefore we draw
the conclusion, that He who sent the prophets, Himself predicted what
was to be foretold of Christ. And there is no doubt that the Father
Himself, and not another different from Him, uttered these predictions.
The practice, moreover, of the Saviour or His apostles, frequently
quoting illustrations from the Old Testament, shows that they attribute
authority to the ancients. The injunction also of the Saviour, when
exhorting His disciples to the exercise of kindness, "Be ye perfect,
even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect; for He commands His
sun to rise upon the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just
and on the unjust,"[6] most evidently suggests even to a person of
feeble understanding, that He is proposing to the imitation of His
disciples no other God than the maker of heaven and the bestower of the
rain. Again, what else does the expression, which ought to be used by
those who pray, "Our Father who art in heaven,"[7] appear to indicate,
save that God is to be sought in the better parts of the world, i.e.,
of His creation? Further, do not those admirable principles which He
lays down respecting oaths, saying that we ought not to "swear either
by heaven, because it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, because
it is His footstool,"[1] harmonize most clearly with the words of the
prophet, "Heaven is My throne, and the earth is My footstool?"[2] And
also when casting out of the temple those who sold sheep, and oxen, and
doves, and pouring out the tables of the money-changers, and saying,
"Take these things, hence, and do not make My Father's house a house of
merchandise,"[3] He undoubtedly called Him His Father, to whose name
Solomon had raised a magnificent temple. The words, moreover, "Have you
not read what was spoken by God to Moses: I am the God of Abraham, and
the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; He is not a God of the dead,
but of the living,"[4] most clearly teach us, that He called the God of
the patriarchs (because they were holy, and were alive) the God of the
living, the same, viz., who had said in the prophets, "I am God, and
besides Me there is no God."[5] For if the Saviour, knowing that He who
is written in the law is the God of Abraham, and that it is the same
who says, "I am God, and besides Me there is no God, acknowledges that
very one to be His Father who is ignorant of the existence of any other
God above Himself, as the heretics suppose, He absurdly declares Him to
be His Father who does not know of a greater God. But if it is not from
ignorance, but from deceit, that He says there is no other God than
Himself, then it is a much greater absurdity to confess that His Father
is guilty of falsehood. From all which this conclusion is arrived at,
that He knows of no other Father than God, the Founder and Creator of
all things.
2. It would be tedious to collect out of all the passages in the
Gospels the proofs by which the God of the law and of the Gospels is
shown to be one and the same. Let us touch briefly upon the Acts of the
Apostles,[6] where Stephen and the other apostles address their prayers
to that God who made heaven and earth, and who spoke by the mouth of
His holy prophets, calling Him the "God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of
Jacob;" the God who "brought forth His people out of the land of
Egypt." Which expressions undoubtedly clearly direct our understandings
to faith in the Creator, and implant an affection for Him in those who
have learned piously and faithfully thus to think of Him; according to
the words of the Saviour Himself, who, when He was asked which was the
greatest commandment in the law, replied, "Thou shalt love the Lord thy
God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself." And to these He added: "On these two commandments hang all
the law and the prophets."[7] How is it, then, that He commends to him
whom He was instructing, and was leading to enter on the office of a
disciple, this commandment above all others, by which undoubtedly love
was to be kindled in him towards the God of that law, inasmuch as such
had been declared by the law in these very words? But let it be
granted, notwithstanding all these most evident proofs, that it is of
some other unknown God that the Saviour says, "Thou shalt love the Lord
thy God with all thy heart," etc., etc. How, in that case, if the law
and the prophets are, as they say, from the Creator, i.e., from another
God than He whom He calls good, shall that appear to be logically said
which He subjoins, viz., that "on these two commandments hang the law
and the prophets?" For how shall that which is strange and foreign to
God depend upon Him? And when Paul says, "I thank my God, whom I serve
my spirit from my forefathers with pure conscience,"[8] he clearly
shows that he came not to some new God, but to Christ. For what other
forefathers of Paul can be intended, except those of whom he says, "Are
they Hebrews? so am I: are they Israelites? so am I."[9] Nay, will not
the very preface of his Epistle to the Romans clearly show the same
thing to those who know how to understand the letters of Paul, viz.,
what God he preaches? For his words are: "Paul, the servant of Jesus
Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart to the Gospel of God, which
He had promised afore by His prophets in the holy Scriptures concerning
His Son, who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and
who was declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the
spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead of Christ Jesus
our Lord,"[10]etc. Moreover, also the following, "Thou shalt not muzzle
the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for
oxen? or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt,
this is written, that he that plougheth should plough in hope, and he
that thresheth in hope of partaking of the fruits."[11] By which he
manifestly shows that God, who gave the law on our account, i.e., on
account of the apostles, says, "Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the
ox that treadeth out the corn;" whose care was not for oxen, but for
the apostles, who were preaching the Gospel of Christ. In other
passages also, Paul, embracing the promises of the law, says, "Honour
thy father and thy mother, which is the first commandment with promise;
that it may be well with thee, and that thy days may be long upon the
land, the good land, which the Lord thy God will give thee."[1] By
which he undoubtedly makes known that the law, and the God of the law,
and His promises, are pleasing to him.
3. But as those who uphold this heresy are sometimes accustomed
to mislead the hearts of the simple by certain deceptive sophisms, I do
not consider it improper to bring forward the assertions which they
are in the habit of making, and to refute their deceit and falsehood.
The following, then, are their declarations. It is written, that "no
man hath seen God at any time."[2] But that God whom Moses preaches was
both seen by Moses himself, and by his fathers before him; whereas He
who is announced by the Saviour has never been seen at all by any one.
Let us therefore ask them and ourselves whether they maintain that He
whom they acknowledge to be God, and allege to be a different God from
the Creator, is visible or invisible. And if they shall say that He is
visible, besides being proved to go against the declaration of
Scripture, which says of the Saviour, "He is the image of the invisible
God, the first-born of every creature,"[3] they will fall also into the
absurdity of asserting that God is corporeal. For nothing can be seen
except by help of form, and size, and colour, which are special
properties of bodies. And if God is declared to be a body, then He will
also be found to be material, since every body is composed of matter.
But if He be composed of matter, and matter is undoubtedly corruptible,
then, according to them, God is liable to corruption! We shall put to
them a second question. Is matter made, or is it uncreated, i.e., not
made? And if they shall answer that it is not made, i.e., uncreated, we
shall ask them if one portion of matter is God, and the other part the
world? But if they shall say of matter that it is made, it will
undoubtedly follow that they confess Him whom they declare to be God to
have been made!—a result which certainly neither their reason nor ours
can admit. But they will say, God is invisible. And what will you do?
If you say that He is invisible by nature, then neither ought He to be
visible to the Saviour. Whereas, on the contrary, God, the Father of
Christ, is said to be seen, because "he who sees the Son," he says,
"sees also the Father."[4] This certainly would press us very hard,
were the expression not understood by us more correctly of
understanding, and not of seeing. For he who has understood the Son
will understand the Father also. In this way, then, Moses too must be
supposed to have seen God, not beholding Him with the bodily eye, but
understanding Him with the vision of the heart and the perception of
the mind, and that only in some degree. For it is manifest that He,
viz., who gave answers to Moses, said, "You shall not see My face, but
My hinder parts."[5] These words are, of course, to be understood in
that mystical sense which is befitting divine words, those old wives'
fables being rejected and despised which are invented by ignorant
persons respecting the anterior and posterior parts of God. Let no one
indeed suppose that we have indulged any feeling of impiety in saying
that even to the Saviour the Father is not visible. Let him consider
the distinction which we employ in dealing with heretics. For we have
explained that it is one thing to see and to be seen, and another to
know and to be known, or to understand and to be understood.[6] To see,
then, and to be seen, is a property of bodies, which certainly will not
be appropriately applied either to the Father, or to the Son, or to the
Holy Spirit, in their mutual relations with one another. For the nature
of the Trinity surpasses the measure of vision, granting to those who
are in the body, i.e., to all other creatures, the property of vision
in reference to one another. But to a nature that is incorporeal and
for the most part intellectual, no other attribute is appropriate save
that of knowing or being known, as the Saviour Himself declares when He
says, "No man knoweth the Son, save the Father; nor does any one know
the Father, save the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal Him."[7]
It is clear, then, that He has not said, "No one has seen the Father,
save the Son;" but, "No one knoweth the Father, save the Son."
4. And now, if, on account of those expressions which occur in
the Old Testament, as when God is said to be angry or to repent, or
when any other human affection or passion is described, (our opponents)
think that they are furnished with grounds for refuting us, who
maintain that God is altogether impassible, and is to be regarded as
wholly free from all affections of that kind, we have to show them that
similar statements are found even in the parables of the Gospel; as
when it is said, that he who planted a vineyard, and let it out to
husbandmen, who slew the servants that were sent to them, and at last
put to death even the son, is said in anger to have taken away the
vineyard from them, and to have delivered over the wicked husbandmen to
destruction, and to have handed over the vineyard to others, who would
yield him the fruit in its season. And so also with regard to those
citizens who, when the head of the household had set out to receive for
himself a kingdom, sent messengers after him, saying, "We will not have
this man to reign over us;''[1] for the head of the household having
obtained the kingdom, returned, and in anger commanded them to be put
to death before him, and burned their city with fire. But when we read
either in the Old Testament or in the New of the anger of God, we do
not take such expressions literally, but seek in them a spiritual
meaning, that we may think of God as He deserves to be thought of. And
on these points, when expounding the verse in the second Psalm, "Then
shall He speak to them in His anger, and trouble them in His fury,''[2]
we showed, to the best of our poor ability, how such an expression
ought to be understood.
I. Now, since this consideration has weight with some, that the
leaders of that heresy (of which we have been speaking) think they have
established a kind of division, according to which they have declared
that justice is one thing and goodness another, and have applied this
division even to divine things, maintaining that the Father of our Lord
Jesus Christ is indeed a good God, but not a just one, whereas the God
of the law and the prophets is just, but not good; I think it necessary
to return, with as much brevity as possible, an answer to these
statements. These persons, then, consider goodness to be some such
affection as would have benefits conferred on all, although the
recipient of them be unworthy and undeserving of any kindness; but
here, in my opinion, they have not rightly applied their definition,
inasmuch as they think that no benefit is conferred on him who is
visited with any suffering or calamity. Justice, on the other hand,
they view as .that quality which rewards every one according to his
deserts. But here, again, they do not rightly interpret the meaning
of their own definition. For they think that it is just to send evils
upon the wicked and benefits upon the good; i.e., so that, according to
their view, the just God does not appear to wish well to the bad, but
to be animated by a kind of hatred against them. And they gather
together instances of this, Wherever they find a history in the
Scriptures of the Old Testament, relating, e.g., the punishment of the
deluge, or the fate of those who are described as perishing in it, or
the, destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah by a shower of fire and
brimstone, or the falling of all the people in the wilderness on
account of their sins, so that none of those who had left Egypt were
found to have entered the promised land, with the exception of Joshua
and Caleb. Whereas from the New Testament they gather together words of
compassion and piety, through which the disciples are trained by the
Saviour, and by which it seems to be declared that no one is good save
God the Father only; and by this means they have ventured to style the
Father of the Saviour Jesus Christ a good God, but to say that the God
of the world is a different one, whom they are pleased to term just,
but not also good.
2. Now I think they must, in the first place, be required to
show, if they can, agreeably to their own definition, that the Creator
is just in punishing according to their deserts, either those who
perished at the time of the deluge, or the inhabitants of Sodom, or
those who had quitted Egypt, seeing we sometimes behold committed
crimes more wicked and detestable than those for which the
above-mentioned persons were destroyed, while we do not yet sere every
sinner paying the penalty of his misdeeds. Will they say that He who at
one time was just has been made good? Or will they rather be of opinion
that He is even now just, but is patiently enduring human offences,
while that then He was not even just, inasmuch as He exterminated
innocent and sucking children along with cruel and ungodly giants? Now,
such are their opinions, because they know not how to understand
anything beyond the letter; otherwise they would show how it is literal
justice for sins to be visited upon the heads of children to the third
and fourth generation, and on children's children after them. By us,
however, such things are not understood literally; but, as Ezekiel
taught[3] when relating the parable, we inquire what is the inner
meaning contained in the parable itself. Moreover, they ought to
explain this also, how He is just, and rewards every one according to
his merits, who punishes earthly-minded persons and the devil, seeing
they have done nothing worthy of punishment.[4] For they could not do
any good if, according to them, they were of a wicked and ruined
nature. For as they style Him a judge, He appears to be a judge not so
much of actions as of natures; and if a bad nature cannot do good,
neither can a good nature do evil. Then, in the next place, if He whom
the), call good is good to all, He is undoubtedly good also to those
who are destined to perish. And why does He not save them? If He does
not desire to do so, He will be no longer good; if He does desire it,
and cannot effect it, He will not be omnipotent. Why do they not rather
hear the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ in the Gospels, preparing fire
for the devil and his angels? And how shall that proceeding, as penal
as it is sad, appear to be, according to their view, the work of the
good God? Even the Saviour Himself, the Son of the good God, protests
in the Gospels, and declares that "if signs and wonders had been done
in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented[1] long ago, sitting in
sackcloth and ashes." And when He had come near to those very cities,
and had entered their territory, why, pray, does He avoid entering
those cities, and exhibiting to them abundance of signs and wonders, if
it were certain that they would have repented, after they had been
performed, in sackcloth and ashes? But as He does not do this, He
undoubtedly abandons to destruction those whom the language of the
Gospel shows not to have been of a wicked or mined nature, inasmuch as
it declares they were capable of repentance. Again, in a certain
parable of the Gospel, where the king enters in to see the guests
reclining at the banquet, he beheld a certain individual not clothed
with wedding raiment, and said. to him, "Friend, how camest thou in
hither, not having a wedding garment?" and then ordered his servants,
"Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness; there will
be weeping and gnashing of teeth."[2] Let them tell us who is that king
who entered in to see the guests, and finding one amongst them with
unclean garments, commanded him to be bound by his servants, and thrust
out into outer darkness. Is he the same whom they call just? How then
had he commanded good and bad alike to be invited, without directing
their merits to be inquired into by his servants? By such procedure
would be indicated, not the character of a just God who rewards
according to men's deserts, as they assert, but of one who displays
undiscriminating goodness towards all. Now, if this must necessarily be
understood of the good God, i.e., either of Christ or of the Father of
Christ, what other objection can they bring against the justice of
God's judgment? Nay, what else is there so unjust charged by them
against the God of the law as to order him who had been invited by His
servants, whom He had sent to call good and bad alike, to be bound hand
and foot, and to be thrown into outer darkness, because he had on
unclean garments?
3. And now, what we have drawn from the authority of Scripture
ought to be sufficient to refute the arguments of the heretics. It will
not, however, appear improper if we discuss the matter with them
shortly, on the grounds of reason itself. We ask them, then, if they
know what is regarded among men as the ground of virtue and wickedness,
and if it appears to follow that we can speak of virtues in God, or, as
they think, in these two Gods. Let them give an answer also to the
question, whether they consider goodness to be a virtue; and as they
will undoubtedly admit it to be so, what will they say of injustice?
They will never certainly, in my opinion, be so foolish as to deny that
justice is a virtue. Accordingly, if virtue is a blessing, and justice
is a virtue, then without doubt justice is goodness. But if they say
that justice is not a blessing, it must either be an evil or an
indifferent thing. Now I think it folly to return any answer to those
who say that justice is an evil, for I shall have the appearance of
replying either to senseless words, or to men out of their minds. How
can that appear an evil which is able to reward the good with
blessings, as they themselves also admit? But if they say that it is a
thing of indifference, it follows that since justice is so, sobriety
also, and prudence, and all the other virtues, are things of
indifference. And what answer shall we make to Paul, when he says, "If
there be any virtue, and, if there be any praise, think on these
things, which ye have learned, and received, and heard, and seen in
me?"[3] Let them learn, therefore, by searching the holy Scriptures,
what are the individual virtues, and not deceive themselves by saying
that that God who rewards every one according to his merits, does,
through hatred of evil, recompense the wicked with evil, and not
because those who have sinned need to be treated with severer remedies,
and because He applies to them those measures which, with the prospect
of improvement, seem nevertheless, for the present, to produce a
feeling of pain. They do not read what is written respecting the hope
of those who were destroyed in the deluge; of which hope Peter himself
thus speaks in his first Epistle: "That Christ, indeed, was put to
death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit, by which He went and
preached to the spirits who were kept in prison, who once were
unbelievers, when they awaited the long-suffering of God in the days of
Noah, when the ark was preparing, in which a few, i.e., eight souls,
were saved by water. Whereunto also baptism by a like figure now saves
you."[4] And with regard to Sodom and Gomorrah, let them tell us
whether they believe the prophetic words to be those of the Creator
God—of Him, viz., who is related to have rained upon them a shower of
fire and brimstone. What does Ezekiel the prophet say of them? "Sodom,"
he says, "shall be restored to her former condition."[1] But why, in
afflicting those who are deserving of punishment, does He not afflict
them for their good?—who also says to Chaldea, "Thou hast coals of
fire, sit upon them; they will be a help to thee."[2] And of those also
who fell in the desert, let them hear what is related in the
seventy-eighth Psalm, which bears the superscription of Asaph; for he
says, "When He slew them, then they sought Him."[3] He does not say
that some sought Him after others had been slain, but he says that the
destruction of those who were killed was of such a nature that, when
put to death, they sought God. By all which it is established, that the
God of the law and the Gospels is one and the same, a just and good
God, and that He confers benefits justly, and punishes with kindness;
since neither goodness without justice, nor justice without goodness,
can display the (real) dignity of the divine nature.
We shall add the following remarks, to which we are driven by
their subtleties. If justice is a different thing from goodness, then,
since evil is the opposite of good, and injustice of justice, injustice
will doubtless be something else than an evil; and as, in your opinion,
the just man is not good, so neither will the unjust man be wicked; and
again, as the good man is not just, so the wicked man also will not be
unjust. But who does not see the absurdity, that to a good God one
should be opposed that is evil; while to a just God, whom they allege
to be inferior to the good, no one should be opposed! For there is none
who can be called unjust, as there is a Satan who is called wicked.
What, then, are we to do? Let us give up the position which we defend,
for they will not be able to maintain that a bad man is not also
unjust, and an unjust man wicked. And if these qualities be
indissolubly inherent in these opposites, viz., injustice in
wickedness, or wickedness in injustice, then unquestionably the good
man will be inseparable from the just man, and the just from the good;
so that, as we speak of one and the same wickedness in malice and
injustice, we may also hold the virtue of goodness and justice to be
one and the same.
4. They again recall us, however, to the words of Scripture, by
bringing forward that celebrated question of theirs, affirming that it
is written, "A bad tree cannot produce good fruits; for a tree is known
by its fruit."[4] What, then, is their position? What sort of tree the
law is, is shown by its fruits, i.e., by the language of its precepts.
For if the law be found to be good, then undoubtedly He who gave it is
believed to be a good God. But if it be just rather than good, then God
also will be considered a just legislator. The Apostle Paul makes use
of no circumlocution, when he says, "The law is good; and the
commandment is holy, and just, and good."[5] From which it is clear
that Paul had not learned the language of those who separate justice
from goodness, but had been instructed by that God, and illuminated by
His Spirit, who is at the same time both holy, and good, and just; and
speaking by whose Spirit he declared that the commandment of the law
was holy, and just, and good. And that he might show more clearly that
goodness was in the commandment to a greater degree than justice and
holiness, repeating his words, he used, instead of these three
epithets, that of goodness alone, saying, "Was then that which is good
made death unto me? God forbid."[6] As he knew that goodness was the
genus of the virtues, and that justice and holiness were species
belonging to the genus, and having in the former verses named genus and
species together, he fell back, when repeating his words, on the genus
alone. But in those which follow he says, "Sin wrought death in me by
that which is good,"[6] where he sums up generically what he had
beforehand explained specifically. And in this way also is to be
understood the declaration, "A good man, out of the good treasure of
his heart, bringeth forth good things; and an evil man, out of the evil
treasure, bringeth forth evil things."[7] For here also he assumed that
there was a genus in good or evil, pointing out unquestionably that in
a good man there were both justice, and temperance, and prudence, and
piety, and everything that can be either called or understood to be
good. In like manner also he said that a man was wicked who should
without any doubt be unjust, and impure, and unholy, and everything
which singly makes a bad man. For as no one considers a man to be
wicked without these marks of wickedness (nor indeed can he be so), so
also it is certain that without these virtues no one will be deemed to
be good. There still remains to them, however, that saying of the Lord
in the Gospel, which they think is given them in a special manner as a
shield, viz., "There is none good but one, God the Father."[8] This
word they declare is peculiar to the Father of Christ, who, however, is
different from the God who is Creator of all things, to which Creator
he gave no appellation of goodness. Let us see now if, in the Old
Testament, the God of the prophets and the Creator and Legislator of
the word is not called good. What are the expressions which occur in
the Psalms? "How good is God to Israel, to the upright in heart!"[1]
and, "Let Israel now say that He is good, that His mercy endureth for
ever;"[2] the language in the Lamentations of Jeremiah, "The Lord is
good to them that wait for Him, to the soul that seeketh Him."[3] As
therefore God is frequently called good in the Old Testament, so also
the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is styled just in the Gospels.
Finally, in the Gospel according to John, our Lord Himself, when
praying to the Father, says, "O just Father, the world hath not known
Thee."[4] And lest perhaps they should say that it was owing to His
having assumed human flesh that He called the Creator of the world
"Father," and styled Him "Just," they are excluded from such a refuge
by the words that immediately follow, "The world hath not known Thee."
But, according to them, the world is ignorant of the good God alone.
For the word unquestionably recognises its Creator, the Lord Himself
saying that the world loveth what is its own. Clearly, then, He whom
they consider to be the good God, is called just in the Gospels. Any
one may at leisure gather together a greater number of proofs,
consisting of those passages, where in the New Testament the Father of
our Lord Jesus Christ is called just, and in the Old also, where the
Creator of heaven and earth is called good; so that the heretics, being
convicted by numerous testimonies, may perhaps some time be put to the
blush.
1. It is now time, after this cursory notice of these points, to
resume our investigation of the incarnation of our Lord and Saviour,
viz., how or why He became man. Having therefore, to the best of our
feeble ability, considered His divine nature from the contemplation of
His own works rather than from our own feelings, and having
nevertheless beheld (with the eye) His visible creation while the
invisible creation is seen by faith, because human frailty can neither
see all things with the bodily eye nor comprehend them by reason,
seeing we men are weaker and frailer than any other rational beings
(for those which are in heaven, or are supposed to exist above the
heaven, are superior), it remains that we seek a being intermediate
between all created things and God, i.e., a Mediator, whom the Apostle
Paul styles the "first-born of every creature."[5] Seeing, moreover,
those declarations regarding His majesty which are contained in holy
Scripture, that He is called the "image of the invisible God, and the
first-born of every creature," and that "in Him were all things
created, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions,
or principalities, or powers, all things were created by Him, and in
Him: and He is before all things, and by Him all things consist,"[6]
who is the head of all things, alone having as head God the Father; for
it is written, "The head of Christ is God; "[7] seeing clearly also
that it is written, "No one knoweth the Father, save the Son, nor doth
any one know the Son, save the Father"[8] (for who can know what wisdom
is, save He who called it into being? or, who can understand clearly
what truth is, save the Father of truth? who can investigate with
certainty the universal nature of His Word, and of God Himself, which
nature proceeds from God, except God alone, with whom the Word was), we
ought to regard it as certain that this Word, or Reason (if it is to be
so termed), this Wisdom, this Truth, is known to no other than the
Father only; and of Him it is written, that "I do not think that the
world itself could contain the books which might be written,"[9]
regarding, viz., the glory and majesty of the Son of God. For it is
impossible to commit to writing (all) those particulars which belong to
the glory of the Saviour. After the consideration of questions of such
importance concerning the being of the Son of God, we are lost in the
deepest amazement that such a nature, pre-eminent above all others,
should have divested itself of its condition of majesty and become man,
and tabernacled amongst men, as the grace that was poured upon His lips
testifies, and as His heavenly Father bore Him witness, and as is
confessed by the various signs and wonders and miracles[10] that were
performed by Him; who also, before that appearance of His which He
manifested in the body, sent the prophets as His forerunners, and the
messengers of His advent; and after His ascension into heaven, made His
holy apostles, men ignorant and unlearned, taken from the ranks of
tax-gatherers or fishermen, but who were filled with the power of His
divinity, to itinerate throughout the world, that they might gather
together out of every race and every nation a multitude of devout
believers in Himself.
2. But of all the marvellous and mighty acts related of Him, this
altogether surpasses human admiration, and is beyond the power of
mortal frailness to understand or feel, how that mighty power of divine
majesty, that very Word of the Father, and that very wisdom of God, in
which were created all things, visible and invisible, can be believed
to have existed within the limits of that man who appeared in Judea;
nay, that the Wisdom of God can have entered the womb of a woman, and
have been born an infant, and have uttered wailings like the cries of
little children! And that afterwards it should be related that He was
greatly troubled in death, saying, as He Himself; declared, "My soul is
sorrowful even unto death; "[1] and that at the last He was brought to
that death which is accounted the most shameful among men, although He
rose again on the third day. Since, then, we see in Him some things so
human that they appear to differ in no respect from the common frailty
of mortals, and some things so divine that they can appropriately
belong to nothing else than to the primal and ineffable nature of
Deity, the narrowness Of human understanding can find no outlet; but,
overcome with the amazement of a mighty admiration, knows not whither
to withdraw, or what to take hold of, or whither to turn. If it think
of a God, it goes a mortal; if it think of a man; it beholds Him
returning from the grave, after overthrowing the empire of death, laden
with its spoils. And therefore the spectacle is to be contemplated with
all fear and reverence, that the truth of both natures may be clearly
shown to exist in one and the same Being; so that nothing unworthy or
unbecoming may be perceived in that divine and ineffable substance nor
yet those things which were done be supposed to be the illusions of
imaginary appearances. To utter these things in human ears, and to
explain them in words, far surpasses the powers either of our rank, or
of our intellect and language. I think that it surpasses the power even
of the holy apostles; nay, the explanation of that mystery may perhaps
be beyond the grasp of the entire creation of celestial powers.
Regarding Him, then, we shall state, in the fewest possible words, the
contents of our creed rather than the assertions which human reason is
wont to advance; and this from no spirit of rashness, but as called for
by the nature of our arrangement, laying before you rather (what may be
termed) our suspicions than any clear affirmations.
3. The Only-begotten of God, therefore, through whom, as the
previous course of the discussion has shown, all things were made,
visible and invisible, according to the view of Scripture, both made
all things, and loves what He made. For since He is Himself the
invisible image of the invisible God, He conveyed invisibly a share in
Himself to all His rational creatures, so that each one obtained a part
of Him exactly proportioned to the amount of affection with which he
regarded Him. But since, agreeably to the faculty of free-will, variety
and diversity characterized the individual souls, so that one was
attached with a warmer love to the Author of its being, and another
with a feebler and weaker regard, that soul (anima) regarding which
Jesus said, "No one shall take my life (animam) from me,"[2] inhering,
from the beginning of the creation, and afterwards, inseparably and
indissolubly in Him, as being the Wisdom and Word of God, and the Truth
and the true Light, and receiving Him wholly, and passing into His
light and splendour, was made with Him in a pre-eminent degree[3] one
spirit, according to the promise of the apostle to those who ought to
imitate it, that "he who is joined in the Lord is one spirit."[4] This
substance of a soul, then, being intermediate between God and the
flesh—it being impossible for the nature of God to intermingle with a
body without an intermediate instrument—the God-man is born, as we
have said, that substance being the intermediary to whose nature it was
not contrary to assume a body. But neither, on the other hand, was it
opposed to the nature of that soul, as a rational existence, to receive
God, into whom, as stated above, as into the Word, and the Wisdom, and
the Truth, it had already wholly entered. And therefore deservedly is
it also called, along with the flesh which it had assumed, the Son of
God, and the Power of God, the Christ, and the Wisdom of God, either
because it was wholly in the Son of God, or because it received the Son
of God wholly into itself. And again, the Son of God, through whom all
things were created, is named Jesus Christ and the Son of man. For the
Son of God also is said to have died—in reference, viz., to that
nature which could admit of death; and He is called the Son of man, who
is announced as about to come in the glory of God the Father, with the
holy angels. And for this reason, throughout the whole of Scripture,
not only is the divine nature spoken of in human words, but the human
nature is adorned by appellations of divine dignity. More truly indeed
of this than of any other can the statement be affirmed, "They shall
both be in one flesh, and are no longer two, but one flesh."[5] For the
Word of God is to be considered as being more in one flesh with the
soul than a man with his wife. But to whom is it more becoming to be
also one spirit with God, than to this soul which has so joined itself
to God by love as that it may justly be said to be one spirit with Him?
4. That the perfection of his love and the sincerity of his deserved
affection[1] formed for it this inseparable union with God, so that the
assumption of that soul was not accidental, or the result of a personal
preference, but was conferred as the reward of its virtues, listen to
the prophet addressing it thus: "Thou hast loved righteousness, and
hated wickedness: therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the
oil of gladness above thy fellows."[2] As a reward for its love, then,
it is anointed with the oil of gladness; i.e., the soul of Christ along
with the Word of God is made Christ. Because to be anointed with the
oil of gladness means nothing else than to be filled with the Holy
Spirit. And when it is said "above thy fellows," it is meant that the
grace of the Spirit was not given to it as to the prophets, but that
the essential fulness of the Word of God Himself was in it, according
to the saying of the apostle, "In whom dwelt all the fulness of the
Godhead bodily."[3] Finally, on this account he has not only said,
"Thou hast loved righteousness;" but he adds, "and Thou hast hated
wickedness." For to have hated wickedness is what the Scripture says of
Him, that "He did no sin, neither was any guile found in His mouth,"[4]
and that "He was tempted in all things like as we are, without sin."[5]
Nay, the Lord Himself also said, "Which of you will convince Me of
sin?"[6] And again He says with reference to Himself, " Behold, the
prince of this world cometh, and findeth nothing in Me."[7] All which
(passages) show that in Him there was no sense of sin; and that the
prophet might show more clearly that no sense of sin had ever entered
into Him, he says, "Before the boy could have knowledge to call upon
father or mother, He turned away from wickedness."[8]
5. Now, if our having shown above that Christ possessed a
rational soul should cause a difficulty to any one, seeing we have
frequently proved throughout all our discussions that the nature of
souls is capable both of good and evil, the difficulty will be
explained in the following way. That the nature, indeed, of His soul
was the same as that of all others cannot be doubted otherwise it could
not be called a soul were it not truly one. But since the power of
choosing good and evil is within the reach of all, this soul which
belonged to Christ elected to love righteousness, so that in proportion
to the immensity of its love it clung to it unchangeably and
inseparably, so that firmness of purpose, and immensity of affection,
and an inextinguishable warmth of love, destroyed all susceptibility
(sensum) for alteration and change; and that which formerly depended
upon the will was changed by the power of long custom into nature; and
so we must believe that there existed in Christ a human and rational
soul, without supposing that it had any feeling or possibility of sin.
6. To explain the matter more fully, it will not appear absurd to
make use of an illustration, although on a subject of so much
difficulty it is not easy to obtain suitable illustrations. However, if
we may speak without offence, the metal iron is capable of cold and
heat. If, then, a mass of iron be kept constantly in the fire,
receiving the heat through all its pores and veins, and the fire being
continuous and the iron never removed from it, it become wholly
converted into the latter; could we at all say of this, which is by
nature a mass of iron, that when placed in the fire, and incessantly
burning, it was at any time capable of admitting cold? On the contrary,
because it is more consistent with truth, do we not rather say, what we
often see happening in furnaces, that it has become wholly fire, seeing
nothing but fire is visible in it? And if any one were to attempt to
touch or handle it, he would experience the action not of iron, but of
fire. In this way, then, that soul which, like an iron in the fire, has
been perpetually placed in the Word, and perpetually in the Wisdom, and
perpetually in God,[9] is God in all that it does, feels, and
understands, and therefore can be called neither convertible nor
mutable, inasmuch as, being incessantly heated, it possessed
immutability from its union with the Word of God. To all the saints,
finally, some warmth from the Word of God must be supposed to have
passed; and in this soul the divine fire itself must be believed to
have rested, from which some warmth may have passed to others. Lastly,
the expression, "God, thy God, anointed thee with the oil of gladness
above thy fellows,"[10] shows that that soul is anointed m one way with
the oil of gladness, i.e., with the word of God and wisdom; and his
fellows, i.e., the holy prophets and apostles, in another. For they are
said to have "run in the odour of his ointments;"[11] and that soul was
the vessel which contained that very ointment of whose fragrance all
the worthy prophets and apostles were made partakers. As, then, the
substance of an ointment is one thing and its odour another, so also
Christ is one thing and His fellows another. And as the vessel itself,
which contains the substance of the ointment, can by no means admit any
foul smell; whereas it is possible that those who enjoy its odour may,
if they remove a little way from its fragrance, receive any foul odour
which comes upon them: so, in the same way, was it impossible that
Christ, being as it were the vessel itself, in which was the substance
of the ointment, should receive an odour of an opposite kind, while
they who are His "fellows" will be partakers and receivers of His
odour, in proportion to their nearness to the vessel.
7. I think, indeed, that Jeremiah the prophet, also,
understanding what was the nature of the wisdom of God in him, which
was the same also which he had assumed for the salvation of the world,
said, "The breath of our countenance is Christ the Lord, to whom we
said, that under His shadow we shall live among the nations."[1] And
inasmuch as the shadow of our body is inseparable from the body, and
unavoidably performs and repeats its movements and gestures, I think
that he, wishing to point out the work of Christ's soul, and the
movements inseparably belonging to it, and which accomplished
everything according to His movements and will, called this the shadow
of Christ the Lord, under which shadow we were to live among the
nations. For in the mystery of this assumption the nations live, who,
imitating it through faith, come to salvation. David also, when saying,
"Be mindful of my reproach, O Lord, with which they reproached me in
exchange for Thy Christ,''[2] seems to me to indicate the same. And
what else does Paul mean when he says, "Your life is hid with Christ in
God;"[3] and again in another passage, "Do you seek a proof of Christ,
who speaketh in me?''[4] And now he says that Christ was hid in God.
The meaning of which expression, unless it be shown to be something
such as we have pointed out above as intended by the prophet in the
words "shadow of Christ," exceeds, perhaps, the apprehension of the
human mind. But we see also very many other statements in holy
Scripture respecting the meaning of the word "shadow," as that
well-known one in the Gospel according to Luke, where Gabriel says to
Mary, "The Spirit of the Lord shall come upon thee, and the power of
the Highest shall overshadow thee."[5] And the apostle says with
reference to the law, that they who have circumcision in the flesh,
"serve for the similitude and shadow of heavenly things."[6] And
elsewhere, "Is not our life upon the earth a shadow?"[7] If, then, not
only the law which is upon the earth is a shadow, but also all our life
which is upon the earth is the same, and we live among the nations
under the shadow of Christ, we must see whether the truth of all these
shadows may not come to be known in that revelation, when no longer
through a glass, and darkly, but face to face, all the saints shall
deserve to behold the glory of God, and the causes and truth of things.
And the pledge of this truth being already received through the Holy
Spirit, the apostle said, "Yea, though we have known Christ after the
flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more.''[8]
The above, meanwhile, are the thoughts which have occurred to us,
when treating of subjects of such difficulty as the incarnation and
deity of Christ. If there be any one, indeed, who can discover
something better, and who can establish his assertions by clearer
proofs from holy Scriptures, let his opinion be received in preference
to mine.
I. As, then, after those first discussions which, according to
the requirements of the case, we held at the beginning regarding the
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, it seemed right that we should retrace
our steps, and show that the same God was the creator and founder of
the world, and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, i.e., that the God
of the law and of the prophets and of the Gospel was one and the same;
and that, in the next place, it ought to be shown, with respect to
Christ, in what manner He who had formerly been demonstrated to be the
Word and Wisdom of God became man; it remains that we now return with
all possible brevity to the subject of the Holy Spirit.
It is time, then, that we say a few words to the best of our
ability regarding the Holy Spirit, whom our Lord and Saviour in the
Gospel according to John has named the Paraclete. For as it is the same
God Himself, and the same Christ, so also is it the same Holy Spirit
who was in the prophets and apostles, i.e., either in those who
believed in God before the advent of Christ, or in those who by means
of Christ have sought refuge in God. We have heard, indeed, that
certain heretics have dared to say that there are two Gods and two
Christs, but we have never known of the doctrine of two Holy Spirits
being preached by any one.[9] For how could they maintain this out of
Scripture, or what distinction could they lay down between Holy Spirit
and Holy Spirit, if indeed any definition or description of Holy Spirit
can be discovered? For although we should concede to Marcion or to
Valentinus that it is possible to draw distinctions in the question of
Deity, and to describe the nature of the good God as one, and that of
the just God as another, what will he devise, or what will he discover,
to enable him to introduce a distinction in the Holy Spirit? I
consider, then, that they are able to discover nothing which may
indicate a distinction of any kind whatever.
2. Now we are of opinion that every rational creature, without
any distinction, receives a share of Him in the same way as of the
Wisdom and of the Word of God. I observe, however, that the chief
advent of the Holy Spirit is declared to men, after the ascension of
Christ to heaven, rather than before His coming into the world. For,
before that, it was upon the prophets alone, and upon a few
individuals—if there happened to be any among the people deserving of
it—that the gift of the Holy Spirit was conferred; but after the
advent of the Saviour, it is written that the prediction of the prophet
Joel was fulfilled, "In the last days it shall come to pass, and I will
pour out my Spirit upon all flesh, and they shall prophesy,"[1] which
is similar to the well-known statement, "All nations shall serve
Him."[2] By the grace, then, of the Holy Spirit, along with numerous
other results, this most glorious consequence is clearly demonstrated,
that with regard to those things which were written in the prophets or
in the law of Moses, it was only a few persons at that time, viz., the
prophets themselves, and scarcely another individual out of the whole
nation, who were able to look beyond the mere corporeal meaning and
discover something greater, i.e., something spiritual, in the law or in
the prophets; but now there are countless multitudes of believers who,
although unable to unfold methodically and clearly the results of their
spiritual understanding,[3] are nevertheless most firmly persuaded that
neither ought circumcision to be understood literally, nor the rest of
the Sabbath, nor the pouring out of the blood of an animal, nor that
answers were given by God to Moses on these points. And this method of
apprehension is undoubtedly suggested to the minds of all by the power
of the Holy Spirit.
3. And as there are many ways of apprehending Christ, who,
although He is wisdom, does not act the part or possess the power of
wisdom in all men, but only in those who give themselves to the study
of wisdom in Him; and who, although called a physician, does not act as
one towards all, but only towards those who understand their feeble and
sickly condition, and flee to His compassion that they may obtain
health; so also I think is it with the Holy Spirit, in whom is
contained every kind of gifts, For on some is bestowed by the Spirit
the word of wisdom, on others the word of knowledge, on others faith;
and so to each individual of those who are capable of receiving Him, is
the Spirit Himself made to be that quality, or understood to be that
which is needed by the individual who has deserved to participate.[4]
These divisions and differences not being perceived by those who hear
Him called Paraclete in the Gospel, and not duly considering in
consequence of what work or act He is named the Paraclete, they have
compared Him to some common spirits or other, and by this means have
tried to disturb the Churches of Christ, and so excite dissensions of
no small extent among brethren; whereas the Gospel shows Him to be of
such power and majesty, that it says the apostles could not yet receive
those things which the Saviour wished to teach them until the advent of
the Holy Spirit, who, pouring Himself into their souls, might enlighten
them regarding the nature and faith of the Trinity. But these persons,
because of the ignorance of their understandings, are not only unable
themselves logically to state the truth, but cannot even give their
attention to what is advanced by us; and entertaining Unworthy ideas of
His divinity, have delivered themselves over to errors and deceits,
being depraved by a spirit of error, rather than instructed by the
teaching of the Holy Spirit, according to the declaration of the
apostle, "Following the doctrine of devils, forbidding to marry, to the
destruction and ruin of many, and to abstain from meats, that by an
ostentatious exhibition of stricter observance they may seduce the
souls of the innocent."[5]
4. We must therefore know that the Paraclete is the Holy Spirit,
who teaches truths which cannot be uttered in words, and which are, so
to speak, unutterable, and "which it is not lawful for a man to
utter,"[6] i.e., which cannot be indicated by human language. The
phrase "it is not lawful" is, we think, used by the apostle instead of
"it is not possible;" as also is the case in the passage where he says,
"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all
things are lawful for me; but all things edify not."[7] For those
things which are in our power because we may have them, he says are
lawful for us. But the Paraclete, who is called the Holy Spirit, is so
called from His work of consolation, para- clesis being termed in Latin
consolatio. For if any one has deserved to participate in the Holy
Spirit by the knowledge of His ineffable mysteries, he undoubtedly
obtains comfort and joy of heart. For since he comes by the teaching of
the Spirit to the knowledge of the reasons of all things which
happen—how or why they occur—his soul can in no respect be troubled,
or admit any feeling of sorrow; nor is he alarmed by anything, since,
clinging to the Word of God and His wisdom, he through the Holy Spirit
calls Jesus Lord. And since we have made mention of the Paraclete, and
have explained as we were able what sentiments ought to be entertained
regarding Him; and since our Saviour also is called the Paraclete in
the Epistle of John, when he says, "If any of us sin, we have a
Paraclete with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, and He is the
propitiation for our sins;"[1] let us consider whether this term
Paraclete should happen to have one meaning when applied to the
Saviour, and another when applied to the Holy Spirit. Now Paraclete,
when spoken of the Saviour, seems to mean intercessor. For in Greek,
Paraclete has both significations—that of intercessor and comforter.
On account, then, of the phrase which follows, when he says, "And He is
the propitiation for our sins," the name Paraclete seems to be
understood in the case of our Saviour as meaning intercessor; for He
is said to intercede with the Father because of our sins. In the case
of the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete must be understood in the sense of
comforter, inasmuch as He bestows consolation upon the souls to whom He
openly reveals the apprehension of spiritual knowledge.
1. The order of our arrangement now requires us, after the
discussion of the preceding subjects, to institute a general inquiry
regarding the soul;[2] and, beginning with points of inferior
importance, to ascend to those that are of greater. Now, that there are
souls[3] in all living things, even in those which live in the waters,
is, I suppose, doubted by no one. For the general opinion of all men
maintains this; and confirmation from the authority of holy Scripture
is added, when it is said that "God made great whales, and every living
creature[4] that moveth which the waters brought forth after their
kind."[5] It is confirmed also from the common intelligence of reason,
by those who lay down in certain words a definition of soul. For soul
is defined as follows: a substance fantastikh and ormhtikh , which
may be rendered into Latin, although not so appropriately, sensibilis
et mobilis.[6] This certainly may be said appropriately of all living
beings, even of those which abide in the waters; and of winged
creatures too, this same definition of anima may be shown to hold good.
Scripture also has added its authority to a second opinion, when it
says, "Ye shall not eat the blood, because the life[7] of all flesh is
its blood; and ye shall not eat the life with the flesh; "[8] in which
it intimates most clearly that the blood of every animal is its life.
And if any one now were to ask how it can be said with respect to bees,
wasps, and ants, and those other things which are in the waters,
oysters and cockles, and all others which are without blood, and are
most clearly shown to be living things, that the "life of all flesh is
the blood," we must answer, that in living things of that sort the
force which is exerted in other animals by the power of red blood is
exerted in them by that liquid which is within them, although it be of
a different colour; for colour is a thing of no importance, provided
the substance be endowed with life.[9] That beasts of burden or cattle
of smaller size are endowed with souls,[10] there is, by general
assent, no doubt whatever. The opinion of holy Scripture, however, is
manifest, when God says, "Let the earth bring forth the living creature
after its kind, four-footed beasts, and creeping things, and beasts of
the earth after their kind."[11] And now with respect to man, although
no one entertains any doubt, or needs to inquire, yet holy Scripture
declares that "God breathed into his countenance the breath of life,
and man became a living soul."[12] It remains that we inquire
respecting the angelic order whether they also have souls, or are
souls; and also respecting the other divine and celestial powers, as
well as those of an opposite kind. We nowhere, indeed, find any
authority in holy Scripture for asserting that either the angels, or
any other divine spirits that are ministers of God, either possess
souls or are called souls, and yet they are felt by very many persons
to be endowed with life. But with regard to God, we find it written as
follows: "And I will put My soul upon that soul which has eaten blood,
and I will root him out from among his people;"[13] and also in another
passage, "Your new moons, and sabbaths, and great days, I will not
accept; your fasts, and holidays, and festal days, My soul hateth."[1]
And in the twenty-second Psalm, regarding Christ—for it is certain, as
the Gospel bears witness, that this Psalm is spoken of Him—the
following words occur: "O Lord, be not far from helping me; look to my
defence: O God, deliver my soul from the sword, and my beloved one from
the hand of the dog; "[2] although there are also many other
testimonies respecting the soul of Christ when He tabernacled in the
flesh.
2. But the nature of the incarnation will render unnecessary any
inquiry into the soul of Christ. For as He truly possessed flesh, so
also He truly possessed a soul. It is difficult indeed both to feel and
to state how that which is called in Scripture the soul of God is to be
understood; for we acknowledge that nature to be simple, and without
any intermixture or addition. In whatever way, however, it is to be
understood, it seems, meanwhile, to be named the soul of God; whereas
regarding Christ there is no doubt. And therefore there seems to me no
absurdity in either understanding or asserting some such thing
regarding the holy angels and the other heavenly powers, since that
definition of soul appears applicable also to them. For who can
rationally deny that they are "sensible and moveable?" But if that
definition appear to be correct, according to which a soul is said to
be a substance rationally "sensible and moveable," the same definition
would seem also to apply to angels. For what else is in them than
rational feeling and motion? Now those beings who are comprehended
under the same definition have undoubtedly the same substance. Paul
indeed intimates that there is a kind of animal-man[3] who, he says,
cannot receive the things of the Spirit of God, but declares that the
doctrine of the Holy Spirit seems to him foolish, and that he cannot
understand what is to be spiritually discerned. In another passage he
says it is sown an animal body, and arises a spiritual body, pointing
out that in the resurrection of the just there will be nothing of an
animal nature. And therefore we inquire whether there happen to be any
substance which, in respect of its being anima, is imperfect. But
whether it be imperfect because it falls away from perfection, or
because it was so created by God, will form the subject of inquiry when
each individual topic shall begin to be discussed in order. For if the
animal man receive not the things of the Spirit of God, and because he
is animal, is unable to admit the understanding of a better, i.e., of
a divine nature, it is for this reason perhaps that Paul, wishing to
teach us more plainly what that is by means of which we are able to
comprehend those things which are of the Spirit, i.e., spiritual
things, conjoins and associates with the Holy Spirit an
understanding[4] rather than a soul.[5] For this, I think, he indicates
when he says, "I will pray with the spirit, I will pray with the
understanding also; I will sing with the spirit, I will sing with the
understanding also.'[6] And he does not say that "I will pray with the
soul," but with the spirit and the understanding. Nor does he say, "I
will sing with the soul," but with the spirit and the understanding.
3. But perhaps this question is asked, If it be the understanding
which prays and sings with the spirit, and if it be the same which
receives both perfection and salvation, how is it that Peter says,
"Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls?"[7]
If the soul neither prays nor sings with the spirit, how shall it hope
for salvation? or when it attains to blessedness, shall it be no longer
called a soul?s Let us see if perhaps an answer may be given in this
way, that as the Saviour came to save what was lost, that which
formerly was said to be lost is not lost when it is saved; so also,
perhaps, this which is saved is called a soul, and when it has been
placed in a state of salvation will receive a name from the Word that
denotes its more perfect condition. But it appears to some that this
also may be added, that as the thing which was lost undoubtedly existed
before it was lost, at which time it was something else than destroyed,
so also will be the case when it is no longer in a ruined condition. In
like manner also, the soul which is said to have perished will appear
to have been something at one time, when as yet it had not perished,
and on that account would be termed soul, and being again freed from
destruction, it may become a second time what it was before it
perished, and be called a soul. But from the very signification of the
name soul which the Greek word conveys, it has appeared to a few
curious inquirers that a meaning of no small importance may be
suggested. For in sacred language God is called a fire, as when
Scripture says," Our God is a consuming fire."[9] Respecting the
substance of the angels also it speaks as follows: "Who maketh His
angels spirits, and His ministers a burning fire;"[1] and in another
place, "The angel of the Lord appeared in a flame of fire in the
bush."[2] We have, moreover, received a commandment to be "fervent in
spirit; "[3] by which expression undoubtedly the Word of God is shown
to be hot and fiery. The prophet Jeremiah also hears from Him, who gave
him his answers, "Behold, I have given My words into thy mouth a
fire."[4] As God, then, is a fire, and the angels a flame of fire, and
all the saints are fervent in spirit, so, on the contrary, those who
have fallen away from the love of God are undoubtedly said to have
cooled in their affection for Him, and to have become cold. For the
Lord also says, that, "because iniquity has abounded, the love of many
will grow cold."[5] Nay, all things, whatever they are, which in holy
Scripture are compared with the hostile power, the devil is said to be
perpetually finding cold; and what is found to be colder than he? In
the sea also the dragon is said to reign. For the prophet[6] intimates
that the serpent and dragon, which certainly is referred to one of the
wicked spirits, is also in the sea. And elsewhere the prophet says, "I
will draw out my holy sword upon the dragon the flying serpent, upon
the dragon the crooked serpent, and will slay him."[7] And again he
says: "Even though they hide from my eyes, and descend into the depths
of the sea, there will I command the serpent, and it shall bite
them."[8] In the book of Job also, he is said to be the king of all
things in the waters.[9] The prophet[10] threatens that evils will be
kindled by the north wind upon all who inhabit the earth. Now the north
wind is described in holy Scripture as cold, according to the statement
in the book of Wisdom, "That cold north wind;"[11] which same thing
also must undoubtedly be understood of the devil. If, then, those
things which are holy are named fire, and light, and fervent, while
those which are of an opposite nature are said to be cold; and if the
love of many is said to wax cold; we have to inquire whether perhaps
the name soul, which in Greek is termed yukh , be so termed from
growing cold[12] out of a better and more divine condition, and be
thence derived, because it seems to have cooled from that natural and
divine warmth, and therefore has been placed in its present position,
and called by its present name. Finally, see if you can easily find a
place in holy Scripture where the soul is properly mentioned in terms
of praise: it frequently occurs, on the contrary, accompanied with
expressions of censure, as in the passage, "An evil soul ruins him who
possesses it;"[13] and, "The soul which sinneth, it shall die."[14] For
after it has been said, "All souls are Mine; as the soul of the father,
so also the soul of the son is Mine,"[15] it seemed to follow that He
would say, "The soul that doeth righteousness, it shall be saved," and
"The soul which sinneth, it shall die." But now we see that He has
associated with the soul what is censurable, and has been silent as to
that which was deserving of praise. We have therefore to see if,
perchance, as we have said is declared by the name itself, it was
called yukh , i.e., anima, because it has waxed cold from the fervour
of just things,[16] and from participation in the divine fire, and yet
has not lost the power of restoring itself to that condition of fervour
in which it was at the beginning. Whence the prophet also appears to
point out some such state of things by the words, "Return, O my soul,
unto thy rest."[17] From all which this appears to be made out, that
the understanding, falling away from its status and dignity, was made
or named soul; and that, if repaired and corrected, it returns to the
condition of the understanding.[18]
4. Now, if this be the case, it seems to me that this very decay
and falling away of the understanding is not the same in all, but that
this conversion into a soul is carried to a greater or less degree in
different instances, and that certain understandings retain something
even of their former vigour, and others again either nothing or a very
small amount. Whence some are found from the very commencement of their
lives to be of more active intellect, others again of a slower habit of
mind, and some are born wholly obtuse, and altogether incapable of
instruction. Our statement, however, that the understanding is
converted into a soul, or whatever else seems to have such a meaning,
the reader must carefully consider and settle for himself, as these
views are not be regarded as advanced by us in a dogmatic manner, but
simply as opinions, treated in the style of investigation and
discussion. Let the reader take this also into consideration, that it
is observed with regard to the soul of the Saviour, that of those
things which are written in the Gospel, some are ascribed to it under
the name of soul, and others under that of spirit. For when it wishes
to indicate any suffering or perturbation affecting Him, it indicates
it under the name of soul; as when it says, "Now is My soul troubled;
"[1] and, "My soul is sorrowful, even unto death; "[2] and, "No man
taketh My soul[3] from Me, but I lay it down of Myself."[4] Into the
hands of His Father He commends not His soul, but His spirit; and when
He says that the flesh is weak, He does not say that the soul is
willing, but the spirit: whence it appears that the soul is something
intermediate between the weak flesh and the willing spirit.
5. But perhaps some one may meet us with one of those objections
which we have ourselves warned you of in our statements, and say, "How
then is there said to be also a soul of God?" To which we answer as
follows: That as with respect to everything corporeal which is spoken
of God, such as fingers, or hands, or arms, or eyes, or feet, or mouth,
we say that these are not to be understood as human members, but that
certain of His powers are indicated by these names of members of the
body; so also we are to suppose that it is something else which is
pointed out by this title—soul of God. And if it is allowable for us
to venture to say anything more on such a subject, the soul of God may
perhaps be understood to mean the only-begotten Son of God. For as the
soul, when implanted in the body, moves all things in it, and exerts
its force over everything on which it operates; so also the
only-begotten Son of God, who is His Word and Wisdom, stretches and
extends to every power of God, being implanted in it; and perhaps to
indicate this mystery is God either called Or described in Scripture as
a body. We must, indeed, take into consideration whether it is not
perhaps on this account that the soul of God may be understood to mean
His only-begotten Son, because He Himself came into this world of
affliction, and descended into this valley of tears, and into this
place of our humiliation; as He says in the Psalm, "Because Thou hast
humiliated us in the place of affliction."[5] Finally, I am aware that
certain critics, in explaining the words used in the Gospel by the
Saviour, "My soul is sorrowful, even unto death," have interpreted them
of the apostles, whom He termed His soul, as being better than the rest
of His body. For as the multitude of believers is called His body, they
say that the apostles, as being better than the rest of the body, ought
to be understood to mean His soul.
We have brought forward as we best could these points regarding
the rational soul, as topics of discussion for our readers, rather than
as dogmatic and well-defined propositions. And with respect to the
souls of animals and other dumb creatures, let that suffice which we
have stated above in general terms.
1. But let us now return to the order of our proposed discussion,
and behold the commencement of creation, so far as the understanding
can behold the beginning of the creation of God. In that
commencement,[6] then, we are to suppose that God created so great a
number of rational or intellectual creatures (or by whatever name they
are to be called), which we have formerly termed understandings, as He
foresaw would be sufficient. It is certain that He made them according
to some definite number, predetermined by Himself: for it is not to be
imagined, as some would have it, that creatures have not a limit,
because where there is no limit there can neither be any comprehension
nor any limitation. Now if this were the case, then certainly created
things could neither be restrained nor administered by God. For,
naturally, whatever is infinite will also be incomprehensible.
Moreover, as Scripture says, "God has arranged all things in number and
measure; "[7] and therefore number will be correctly applied to
rational creatures or understandings, that they may be so numerous as
to admit of being arranged, governed, and controlled by God. But
measure will be appropriately applied to a material body; and this
measure, we are to believe, was created by God such as He knew would be
sufficient for the adorning of the world. These, then, are the things
which we are to believe were created by God in the beginning, i.e.,
before all things. And this, we think, is indicated even in that
beginning which Moses has introduced in terms somewhat ambiguous, when
he says, "In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth."[1] For
it is certain that the firmament is not spoken of, nor the dry land,
but that heaven and earth from which this present heaven and earth
which we now see afterwards borrowed their names.
2. But since those rational natures, which we have said above
were made in the beginning, were created when they did not previously
exist, in consequence of this very fact of their nonexistence and
commencement of being, are they necessarily changeable and mutable;
since whatever power was in their substance was not in it by nature,
but was the result of the goodness of their Maker. What they are,
therefore, is neither their own nor endures for ever, but is bestowed
by God. For it did not always exist; and everything which is a gift may
also be taken away, and disappear. And a reason for removal will
consist in the movements of souls not being conducted according to
right and propriety. For the Creator gave, as an indulgence to the
understandings created by Him, the power of free and voluntary action,
by which the good that was in them might become their own, being
preserved by the exertion of their own will; but slothfulness, and a
dislike of labour in preserving what is good, and an aversion to and a
neglect of better things, furnished the beginning of a departure from
goodness. But to depart from good is nothing else than to be made bad.
For it is certain that to want goodness is to be wicked. Whence it
happens that, in proportion as one falls away from goodness, in the
same proportion does he become involved in wickedness. In which
condition, according to its actions, each understanding, neglecting
goodness either to a greater or more limited extent, was dragged into
the opposite of good, which undoubtedly is evil. From which it appears
that the Creator of all things admitted certain seeds and causes of
variety and diversity, that He might create variety and diversity in
proportion to the diversity of understandings, i.e., of rational
creatures, which diversity they must be supposed to have conceived from
that cause which we have mentioned above. And what we mean by variety
and diversity is what we now wish to explain.
3. Now we term world everything which is above the heavens, or in
the heavens, or upon the earth, or in those places which are called the
lower regions, or all places whatever that anywhere exist, together
with their inhabitants. This whole, then, is called world. In which
world certain beings are said to be super-celestial, i.e., placed in
happier abodes, and clothed with heavenly and resplendent bodies; and
among these many distinctions are shown to exist, the apostle, e.g.,
saying, " That one is the glory of the sun, another the glory of the
moon, another the glory of the stars; for one star differeth from
another star in glory."[2] Certain beings are called earthly, and among
them, i.e., among men, there is no small difference; for some of them
are Barbarians, others Greeks; and of the Barbarians some are savage
and fierce, and others of a milder disposition. And certain of them
live under laws that have been thoroughly approved; others, again,
under laws of a more common or severe kind;[3] while some, again,
possess customs of an inhuman and savage character, rather than laws.
And certain of them, from the hour of their birth, are reduced to
humiliation and subjection, and brought up as slaves, being placed
under the dominion either of masters, or princes, or tyrants. Others,
again, are brought up in a manner more consonant with freedom and
reason: some with sound bodies, some with bodies diseased from their
early years; some defective in vision, others in hearing and speech;
some born in that condition, others deprived of the use of their senses
immediately after birth, or at least undergoing such misfortune on
reaching manhood. And why should I repeat and enumerate all the horrors
of human misery, from which some have been free, and in which others
have been involved, when each one can weigh and consider them for
himself? There are also certain invisible powers to which earthly
things have been entrusted for administration; and amongst them no
small difference must be believed to exist, as is also found to be the
case among men. The Apostle Paul indeed intimates that there are
certain lower powers,[4] and that among them, in like manner, must
undoubtedly be sought a ground of diversity. Regarding dumb animals,
and birds, and those creatures which live in the waters, it seems
superfluous to require; since it is certain that these ought to be
regarded not as of primary, but of subordinate rank.
4. Seeing, then, that all things which have been created are said
to have been made through Christ, and in Christ, as the Apostle Paul
most clearly indicates, when he says, "For in Him and by Him were all
things created, whether things in heaven or things on earth, visible
and invisible, whether they be thrones, or powers, or principalities,
or dominions; all things were created by Him, and in Him;"[5] and as in
his Gospel John indicates the same thing, 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 not anything made;"[1] and as in the Psalm also it is written," In
wisdom hast Thou made them all;"[2]—seeing, then, Christ is, as it
were, the Word and Wisdom, and so also the Righteousness, it will
undoubtedly follow that those things which were created in the Word and
Wisdom are said to be created also in that righteousness which is
Christ; that in created things there may appear to be nothing
unrighteous or accidental, but that all things may be shown to be in
conformity with the law of equity and righteousness. How, then, so
great a variety of things, and so great a diversity, can be understood
to be altogether just and righteous, I am sure no human power or
language can explain, unless as prostrate suppliants we pray to the
Word, and Wisdom, and Righteousness Himself, who is the only-begotten
Son of God, and who, pouring Himself by His graces into our senses,
may deign to illuminate what is dark, to lay open what is concealed,
and to reveal what is secret; if, indeed, we should be found either to
seek, or ask, or knock so worthily as to deserve to receive when we
ask, or to find when we seek, or to have it opened to us when we knock.
Not relying, then, on our own powers, but on the help of that Wisdom
which made all things, and of that Righteousness which we believe to be
in all His creatures, although we are in the meantime unable to declare
it, yet, trusting in His mercy, we shall endeavour to examine and
inquire how that great variety and diversity in the world may appear to
be consistent with all righteousness and reason. I mean, of course,
merely reason in general; for it would be a mark of ignorance either to
seek, or of folly to give, a special reason for each individual case.
5. Now, when we say that this world was established in the
variety in which we have above explained that it was created by God,
and when we say that this God is good, and righteous, and most just,
there are numerous individuals, especially those who, coming from the
school of Marcion, and Valentinus, and Basilides, have heard that there
are souls of different natures, who object to us, that it cannot
consist with the justice of God in creating the word to assign to some
of His creatures an abode in the heavens, and not only to give such a
better habitation, but also to grant them a higher and more honourable
position ; to favour others with the grant of principalities; to bestow
powers upon some, dominions on others; to confer upon some the most
honourable seats in the celestial tribunals; to enable some to shine
with more resplendent glory, and to glitter with a starry splendour; to
give to some the glory of the sun, to others the glory of the moon, to
others the glory of the stars; to cause one star to differ from another
star in glory. And, to speak once for all, and briefly, if the Creator
God wants neither the will to undertake nor the power to complete a
good and perfect work, what reason can there be that, in the creation
of rational natures, i.e., of beings of whose existence He Himself is
the cause, He should make some of higher rank, and others of second, or
third, or of many lower and inferior degrees? In the next place, they
object to us, with regard to terrestrial beings, that a happier lot by
birth is the case with some rather than with others; as one man, e.g.,
is begotten of Abraham, and born of the promise; another, too, of Isaac
and Rebekah, and who, while still in the womb, supplants his brother,
and is said to be loved by God before he is born. Nay, this very
circumstance,—especially that one man is born among the Hebrews, with
whom he finds instruction in the divine law; another among the Greeks,
themselves also wise, and men of no small learning; and then another
amongst the Ethiopians, who are accustomed to feed on human flesh; or
amongst the Scythians, with whom parricide is an act sanctioned by law;
or amongst the people of Taurus, where strangers are offered in
sacrifice,—is a ground of strong objection. Their argument accordingly
is this: If there be this great diversity of circumstances, and this
diverse and varying condition by birth, in which the faculty of
free-will has no scope (for no one chooses for himself either where, or
with whom, or in what condition he is born); if, then, this is not
caused by the difference in the nature of souls, i.e., that a soul of
an evil nature is destined for a wicked nation, and a good soul for a
righteous nation, what other conclusion remains than that these things
must be supposed to be regulated by accident and chance? And if that be
admitted, then it will be no longer believed that the world was made by
God, or administered by His providence; and as a consequence, a
judgment of God upon the deeds of each individual will appear a thing
not to be looked for. In which matter, indeed, what is dearly the truth
of things is the privilege of Him alone to know who searches all
things, even the deep things of God.
6. We, however, although but men, not to nourish the insolence of
the heretics by our silence, will return to their objections such
answers as occur to us, so far as our abilities enable us. We have
frequently shown, by those declarations which we were able to produce
from the holy Scriptures, that God, the Creator of all things, is good,
and just, and all-powerful. When He in the beginning created those
beings which He desired to create, i.e., rational natures, He had no
other reason for creating them than on account of Himself, i.e., His
own goodness. As He Himself, then, was the cause of the existence of
those things which were to be created, in whom there was neither any
variation nor change, nor want of power, He created all whom He made
equal and alike, because there was in Himself no reason for producing
variety and diversity. But since those rational creatures themselves,
as we have frequently shown, and will yet show in the proper place,
were endowed with the power of free-will, this freedom of will incited
each one either to progress by imitation of God, or reduced him to
failure through negligence. And this, as we have already stated, is the
cause of the diversity among rational creatures, deriving its origin
not from the will or judgment of the Creator, but from the freedom of
the individual will. Now God, who deemed it just to arrange His
creatures according to their merit, brought down these different
understandings into the harmony of one world, that He might adorn, as
it were, one dwelling, in which there ought to be not only vessels of
gold and silver, but also of wood and clay (and some indeed to honour,
and others to dishonour), with those different vessels, or souls, or
understandings. And these are the causes, in my opinion, why that world
presents the aspect of diversity, while Divine Providence continues to
regulate each individual according to the variety of his movements, or
of his feelings and purpose. On which account the Creator will neither
appear to be unjust in distributing (for the causes already mentioned)
to every one according to his merits; nor will the happiness or
unhappiness of each one's birth, or whatever be the condition that
falls to his lot, be deemed accidental; nor will different creators, or
souls of different natures, be believed to exist.
7. But even holy Scripture does not appear to me to be altogether
silent on the nature of this secret, as when the Apostle Paul, in
discussing the case of Jacob and Esau, says: "For the children being
not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of
God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him who
calleth, it was said, The elder shall serve the younger, as it is
written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."[1] And after
that, he answers himself, and says, "What shall we say then? Is there
unrighteousness with God?" And that he might furnish us with an
opportunity of inquiring into these matters, and of ascertaining how
these things do not happen without a reason, he answers himself, and
says, "God forbid."[2] For the same question, as it seems to me, which
is raised concerning Jacob and Esau, may be raised regarding all
celestial and terrestrial creatures, and even those of the lower world
as well. And in like manner it seems to me, that as he there says,
"The children being not yet born, neither having done any good or
evil," so it might also be said of all other things, "When they were
not yet" created, "neither had yet done any good or evil, that the
decree of God according to election may stand," that (as certain think)
some things on the one hand were created heavenly, some on the other
earthly, and others, again, beneath the earth, "not of works" (as they
think), "but of Him who calleth," what shall we say then, if these
things are so? "Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid." As,
therefore, when the Scriptures are carefully examined regarding Jacob
and Esau, it is not found to be unrighteousness with God that it should
be said, before they were born, or had done anything in this life, "the
elder shall serve the younger;" and as it is found not to be
unrighteousness that even in the womb Jacob supplanted his brother, if
we feel that he was worthily beloved by God, according to the deserts
of his previous life, so as to deserve to be preferred before his
brother; so also is it with regard to heavenly creatures, if we notice
that diversity was not the original condition of the creature, but
that, owing to causes that have previously existed, a different office
is prepared by the Creator for each one in proportion to the degree of
his merit, on this ground, indeed, that each one, in respect of having
been created by God an understanding, or a rational spirit, has,
according to the movements of his mind and the feelings of his soul,
gained for himself a greater or less amount of merit, and has become
either an object of love to God, or else one of dislike to Him; while,
nevertheless, some of those who are possessed of greater merit are
ordained to suffer with others for the adorning of the state of the
world, and for the discharge of duty to creatures of a lower grade, in
order that by this means they themselves may be participators in the
endurance of the Creator, according to the words of the apostle: "For
the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason
of him who hath subjected the same in hope."[3] Keeping in view, then,
the sentiment expressed by the apostle, when, speaking of the birth of
Esau and Jacob, he says, "Is there unrighteousness with God? God
forbid," I think it fight that this same sentiment should be carefully
applied to the case of all other creatures, because, as we formerly
remarked, the righteousness of the Creator ought to appear in
everything. And this, it appears to me, will be seen more clearly at
last, if each one, whether of celestial or terrestrial or infernal
beings, be said to have the causes of his diversity in himself, and
antecedent to his bodily birth. For all things were created by the Word
of God, and by His Wisdom, and were set in order by His Justice. And by
the grace of His compassion He provides for all men, and encourages all
to the use of whatever remedies may lead to their cure, and incites
them to salvation.
8. As, then, there is no doubt that at the day of judgment the
good will be separated from the bad, and the just from the unjust, and
all by the sentence of God will be distributed according to their
deserts throughout those places of which they are worthy, so I am of
opinion some such state of things was formerly the case, as, God
willing, we shall show in what follows. For God must be believed to do
and order all things and at all times according to His judgment. For
the words which the apostle uses when he says, "In a great house there
are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and of earth,
and some to honour and some to dishonour;"[1] and those which he adds,
saying, "If a man purge himself, he will be a vessel unto honour,
sanctified and meet for the Master's use, unto every good work,"[2]
undoubtedly point out this, that he who shall purge himself when he is
in this life, will be prepared for every good work in that which is to
come; while he who does not purge himself will be, according to the
amount of his impurity, a vessel unto dishonour, i.e., unworthy. It
is therefore possible to understand that there have been also formerly
rational vessels, whether purged or not, i.e., which either purged
themselves or did not do so, and that consequently every vessel,
according to the measure of its purity or impurity, received a place,
or region, or condition by birth, or an office to discharge, in this
world. All of which, down to the humblest, God providing for and
distinguishing by the power of His wisdom, arranges all things by His
controlling judgment, according to a most impartial retribution, so far
as each one ought to be assisted or cared for in conformity with his
deserts. In which certainly every principle of equity is shown, while
the inequality of circumstances preserves the justice of a retribution
according to merit. But the grounds of the merits in each individual
case are only recognised truly and clearly by God Himself, along with
His only-begotten Word, and His Wisdom, and the Holy Spirit.
1. But since the discourse has reminded us of the subjects of a
future judgment and of retribution, and of the punishments of sinners,
according to the threatenings of holy Scripture and the contents of the
Church's teaching—viz., that when the time of judgment comes,
everlasting fire, and outer darkness, and a prison, and a furnace, and
other punishments of like. nature, have been prepared for sinners—let
us see what our opinions on these points ought to be.[3] But that these
subjects may be arrived at in proper order, it seems to me that we
ought first to consider the nature of the resurrection, that we may
know what that (body) is which shall come either to punishment, or to
rest, or to happiness; which question in other treatises which we have
composed regarding the resurrection we have discussed at greater
length, and have shown what our opinions were regarding it. But now,
also, for the sake of logical order in our treatise, there will be no
absurdity in restating a few points from such works, especially since
some take offence at the creed of the Church, as if our belief in the
resurrection were foolish, and altogether devoid of sense; and these
are principally heretics, who, I think, are to be answered in the
following manner. If they also admit that there is a resurrection of
the dead, let them answer us this, What is that which died? Was it not
a body? It is of the body, then, that there will be a resurrection. Let
them next tell us if they think that we are to make use of bodies or
not. I think that when the Apostle Paul says, that "it is sown a
natural body, it will arise a spiritual body,"[4] they cannot deny that
it is a body which arises, or that in the resurrection we are to make
use of bodies. What then? If it is certain that we are to make use of
bodies, and if the bodies which have fallen are declared to rise again
(for only that which before has fallen can be properly said to rise
again), it can be a matter of doubt to no one that they rise again, in
order that we may be clothed with them a second time at the
resurrection. The one thing is closely connected with the other. For if
bodies rise again, they undoubtedly rise to be coverings for us; and if
it is necessary for us to be invested with bodies, as it is certainly
necessary, we ought to be invested with no other than our own. But if
it is true that these rise again, and that they arise "spiritual"
bodies, there can be no doubt that they are said to rise from the dead,
after casting away corruption and laying aside mortality; otherwise it
will appear vain and superfluous for any one to arise from the dead in
order to die a second time. And this, finally, may be more distinctly
comprehended thus, if one carefully consider what are the qualities of
an animal body, which, when sown into the earth, recovers the qualities
of a spiritual body. For it is out of the animal body that the very
power and grace of the resurrection educe the spiritual body, when it
transmutes it from a condition of indignity to one of glory.
2. Since the heretics, however, think themselves persons of great
learning and wisdom, we shall ask them if every body has a form of some
kind, i.e., is fashioned according to some shape. And if they shall say
that a body is that which is fashioned according to no shape, they will
show themselves to be the most ignorant and foolish of mankind. For no
one will deny this, save him who is altogether without any learning.
But if, as a matter of course, they say that every body is certainly
fashioned according to some definite shape, we shall ask them if they
can point out and describe to us the shape of a spiritual body; a thing
which they can by no means do. We shall ask them, moreover, about the
differences of those who rise again. How will they show that statement
to be true, that there is "one flesh of birds, another of fishes;
bodies celestial, and bodies terrestrial; that the glory of the
celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial another; that one is
the glory of the sun, another the glory of the moon, another the glory
of the stars; that one star differeth from another star in glory; and
that so is the resurrection of the dead?"[1] According to that
gradation, then, which exists among heavenly bodies, let them show to
us the differences in the glory of those who rise again; and if they
have endeavoured by any means to devise a principle that may be in
accordance with the differences in heavenly bodies, we shall ask them
to assign the differences in the resurrection by a comparison of
earthly bodies. Our understanding of the passage indeed is, that the
apostle, wishing to describe the great difference among those who rise
again in glory, i.e., of the saints, borrowed a comparison from the
heavenly bodies, saying, "One is the glory of the sun, another the
glory of the moon, another the glory of the stars." And wishing again
to teach us the differences among those who shall come to the
resurrection, without having purged themselves in this life, i.e.,
sinners, he borrowed an illustration from earthly things, saying,
"There is one flesh of birds, another of fishes." For heavenly things
are worthily compared to the saints, and earthly things to sinners.
These statements are made in reply to those who deny the resurrection
of the dead, i.e., the resurrection of bodies.
3. We now turn our attention to some of our own (believers), who,
either from feebleness of intellect or want of proper instruction,
adopt a very low and abject view of the resurrection of the body. We
ask these persons in what manner they understand that an animal body is
to be changed by the grace of the resurrection, and to become a
spiritual one; and how that which is sown in weakness will arise in
power; how that which is planted in dishonour will arise in glory; and
that which was sown in corruption, will be changed to a state of
incorruption. Because if they believe the apostle, that a body which
arises in glory, and power, and incorruptibility, has already become
spiritual, it appears absurd and contrary to his meaning to say that it
can again be entangled with the passions of flesh and blood, seeing the
apostle manifestly declares that "flesh and blood shall not inherit the
kingdom of God, nor shall corruption inherit incorruption." But how do
they understand the declaration of the apostle, "We shall all be
changed?" This transformation certainly is to be looked for, according
to the order which we have taught above; and in it, undoubtedly, it
becomes us to hope for something worthy of divine grace; and this we
believe will take place in the order in which the apostle describes the
sowing in the ground of a "bare grain of corn, or of any other fruit,"
to which "God gives a body as it pleases Him," as soon as the grain of
corn is dead. For in the same way also our bodies are to be supposed to
fall into the earth like a grain; and (that germ being implanted in
them which contains the bodily substance) although the bodies die, and
become corrupted, and are scattered abroad, yet by the word of God,
that very germ which is always safe in the substance of the body,
raises them from the earth, and restores and repairs them, as the power
which is in the grain of wheat, after its corruption and death, repairs
and restores the grain into a body having stalk and ear. And so also to
those who shall deserve to obtain an inheritance in the kingdom of
heaven, that germ of the body's restoration, which we have before
mentioned, by God's command restores out of the earthly and animal body
a spiritual one, capable of inhabiting the heavens; while to each one
of those who may be of inferior merit, or of more abject condition, or
even the lowest in the scale, and altogether thrust aside, there is yet
given, in proportion to the dignity of his life and soul, a glory and
dignity of body,—nevertheless in such a way, that even the body which
rises again of those who are to be destined to everlasting fire or to
severe punishments, is by the very change of the resurrection so
incorruptible, that it cannot be corrupted and dissolved even by severe
punishments. If, then, such be the qualities of that body which will
arise from the dead, let us now see what is the meaning of the
threatening of eternal fire.
4. We find in the prophet Isaiah, that the fire with which each
one is punished is described as his own; for he says, "Walk in the
light of your own fire, and in the flame which ye have kindled.''[1] By
these words it seems to be indicated that every sinner kindles for
himself the flame of his own fire, and is not plunged into some fire
which has been already kindled by another, or was in existence before
himself. Of this fire the fuel and food are our sins, which are called
by the Apostle Paul wood, and hay, and stubble.''[2] And I think that,
as abundance of food, and provisions of a contrary kind and amount,
breed fevers in the body, and fevers, too, of different sorts and
duration, according to the proportion in which the collected poison
supplies material and fuel for disease (the quality of this material,
gathered together from different poisons, proving the causes either of
a more acute or more lingering disease); so, when the soul has gathered
together a multitude of evil works, and an abundance of sins against
itself, at a suitable time all that assembly of evils boils up to
punishment, and is set on fire to chastisements; when the mind itself,
or conscience, receiving by divine power into the memory all those
things of which it had stamped on itself certain signs and forms at the
moment of sinning, will see a kind of history, as it were, of all the
foul, and shameful, and unholy deeds which it has done, exposed before
its eyes: then is the conscience itself harassed, and, pierced by its
own goads, becomes an accuser and a witness against itself. And this, I
think, was the opinion of the Apostle Paul himself, when he said,
"Their thoughts mutually accusing or excusing them in the day when God
will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my
Gospel."[4] From which it is understood that around the substance of
the soul certain tortures are produced by the hurtful affections of
sins themselves.
5. And that the understanding of this matter may not appear very
difficult, we may draw some considerations from the evil effects of
those passions which are wont to befall some souls, as when a soul is
consumed by the fire of love, or wasted away by zeal or envy, or when
the passion of anger is kindled, or one is consumed by the greatness of
his madness or his sorrow ; on which occasions some, finding the excess
of these evils unbearable, have deemed it more tolerable to submit to
death than to endure perpetually torture of such a kind. You will ask
indeed whether, in the case of those who have been entangled in the
evils arising from those vices above enumerated, and who, while
existing in this life, have been unable to procure any amelioration for
themselves, and have in this condition departed from the world, it be
sufficient in the way of punishment that they be tortured by the
remaining in them of these hurtful affections, i.e., of the anger, or
of the fury, or of the madness, or of the sorrow, whose fatal poison
was in this life lessened by no healing medicine; or whether, these
affections being changed, they will be subjected to the pains of a
general punishment. Now I am of opinion that another species of
punishment may be understood to exist; because, as we feel that when
the limbs of the body are loosened and torn away from their mutual
supports, there is produced pain of a most excruciating kind, so, when
the soul shall be found to be beyond the order, and connection, and
harmony in which it was created by God for the purposes of good and
useful action and observation, and not to harmonize with itself in the
connection of its rational movements, it must be deemed to bear the
chastisement and torture of its own dissension, and to feel the
punishments of its own disordered condition. And when this dissolution
and rending asunder of soul shall have been tested by the application
of fire, a solidification undoubtedly into a firmer structure will take
place, and a restoration be effected.
6. There are also many other things which escape our notice, and
are known to Him alone who is the physician of our souls. For if, on
account of those bad effects which we bring upon ourselves by eating
and drinking, we deem it necessary for the health of the body to make
use of some unpleasant and painful drug, sometimes even, if the nature
of the disease demand, requiring the severe process of the amputating
knife; and if the virulence of the disease shall transcend even these
remedies, the evil has at last to be burned out by fire; how much more
is it to be understood that God our Physician, desiring to remove the
defects of our souls, which they had contracted from their different
sins and crimes, should employ penal measures of this sort, and should
apply even, in addition, the punishment of fire to those who have lost
their soundness of mind! Pictures of this method of procedure are found
also in the holy Scriptures. In the book of Deuteronomy, the divine
word threatens sinners with the punishments of fevers, and colds, and
jaundice,[5] and with the pains of feebleness of vision, and alienation
of mind and paralysis, and blindness, and weakness of the reins. If any
one, then, at his leisure gather together out of the whole of Scripture
all the enumerations of diseases which in the threatenings addressed to
sinners are called by the names of bodily maladies, he will find that
either the vices of souls, or their punishments, are figuratively
indicated by them. To understand now, that in the same way in which
physicians apply remedies to the sick, in order that by careful
treatment they may recover their health, God so deals towards those who
have lapsed and fallen into sin, is proved by this, that the cup of
God's fury is ordered, through the agency of the prophet Jeremiah,[1]
to be offered to all nations, that they may drink it, and be in a state
of madness, and vomit it forth. In doing which, He threatens them,
saying, That if any one refuse to drink, he shall not be cleansed.[2]
By which certainly it is understood that the fury of God's vengeance is
profitable for the purgation of souls. That the punishment, also, which
is said to be applied by fire, is understood to be applied with the
object of healing, is taught by Isaiah, who speaks thus of Israel: "The
Lord will wash away the filth of the sons or daughters of Zion, and
shall purge away the blood from the midst of them by the spirit of
judgment, and the spirit of burning."[3] Of the Chaldeans he thus
speaks: "Thou hast the coals of fire; sit upon them: they will be to
thee a help."[4] And in other passages he says, "The Lord will sanctify
in a burning fire"[5] and in the prophecies of Malachi he says, "The
Lord sitting will blow, and purify, and will pour forth the cleansed
sons of Judah."[6]
7. But that fate also which is mentioned in the Gospels as
overtaking unfaithful stewards who, it is said, are to be divided, and
a portion of them placed along with unbelievers, as if that portion
which is not their own were to be sent elsewhere, undoubtedly indicates
some kind of punishment on those whose spirit, as it seems to me, is
shown to be separated from the soul. For if this Spirit is of divine
nature, i.e., is understood to be a Holy Spirit, we shall understand
this to be said of the gift of the Holy Spirit: that when, whether by
baptism, or by the grace of the Spirit, the word of wisdom, or the word
of knowledge, or of any other gift, has been bestowed upon a man, and
not rightly administered, i.e., either buried in the earth or tied up
in a napkin, the gift of the Spirit will certainly be withdrawn from
his soul, and the other portion which remains, that is, the substance
of the soul, will be assigned its place with unbelievers, being divided
and separated from that Spirit with whom, by joining itself to the
Lord, it ought to have been one spirit. Now, if this is not to be
understood of the Spirit of God, but of the nature of the soul itself,
that will be called its better part which was made in the image and
likeness of God; whereas the other part, that which afterwards, through
its fall by the exercise of free-will, was assumed contrary to the
nature of its original condition of purity,—this part, as being the
friend and beloved of matter, is punished with the fate of unbelievers.
There is also a third sense in which that separation may be understood,
this viz., that as each believer, although the humblest in the Church,
is said to be attended by an angel, who is declared by the Saviour
always to behold the face of God the Father, and as this angel was
certainly one with the object of his guardianship; so, if the latter is
rendered unworthy by his want of obedience, the angel of God is said to
be taken from him, and then that part of him—the part, viz., which
belongs to his human nature—being rent away from the divine part, is
assigned a place along with unbelievers, because it has not faithfully
observed the admonitions of the angel allotted it by God.
8. But the outer darkness, in nay judgment, is to be understood
not so much of some dark atmosphere without any light, as of those
persons who, being plunged in the darkness of profound ignorance, have
been placed beyond the reach of any light of the understanding. We must
see, also, lest this perhaps should be the meaning of the expression,
that as the saints will receive those bodies in which they have lived
in holiness and purity in the habitations of this life, bright and
glorious after the resurrection, so the wicked also, who in this life
have loved the darkness of error and the night of ignorance, may be
clothed with dark and black bodies after the resurrection, that the
very mist of ignorance which had in this life taken possession of their
minds within them, may appear in the future as the external covering of
the body. Similar is the view to be entertained regarding the prison.
Let these remarks, which have been made as brief as possible, that the
order of our discourse in the meantime might be preserved, suffice for
the present occasion.
1. Let us now briefly see what views we are to form regarding
promises.
It is certain that there is no living thing which can be
altogether inactive and immoveable, but delights in motion of every
kind, and in perpetual activity and volition; and this nature, I think
it evident, is in all living things. Much more, then, must a rational
animal, i.e., the nature of man, be in perpetual movement and activity.
If, indeed, he is forgetful of himself, and ignorant of what becomes
him, all his efforts are directed to serve the uses of the body, and in
all his movements he is occupied with his own pleasures and bodily
lusts; but if he be one who studies to care or provide for the general
good, then, either by consulting for the benefit of the state or by
obeying the magistrates, he exerts himself for that, whatever it is,
which may seem certainly to promote the public advantage. And if now
any one be of such a nature as to understand that there is something
better than those things which seem to be corporeal, and so bestow his
labour upon wisdom and science, then he will undoubtedly direct all his
attention towards pursuits of that kind, that he may, by inquiring into
the truth, ascertain the causes and reason of things. As therefore, in
this life, one man deems it the highest good to enjoy bodily pleasures,
another to consult for the benefit of the community, a third to devote
attention to study and learning; so let us inquire whether in that life
which is the true one (which is said to be hidden with Christ in God,
i.e., in that eternal life), there will be for us some such order and
condition of existence.
2. Certain persons, then, refusing the labour of thinking, and
adopting a superficial view of the letter of the law, and yielding
rather in some measure to the indulgence of their own desires and
lusts, being disciples of the letter alone, are of opinion that the
fulfilment of the promises of the future are to be looked for in bodily
pleasure and luxury; and therefore they especially desire to have
again, after the resurrection, such bodily structures[1] as may never
be without the power of eating, and drinking, and performing all the
functions of flesh and blood, not following the opinion of the Apostle
Paul regarding the resurrection of a spiritual body. And consequently
they say, that after the resurrection there will be marriages, and the
begetting of children, imagining to themselves that the earthly city of
Jerusalem is to be rebuilt, its foundations laid in precious stones,
and its walls constructed of jasper, and its battlements of crystal;
that it is to have a wall composed of many precious stones, as jasper,
and sapphire, and chalcedony, and emerald, and sardonyx, and onyx, and
chrysolite, and chrysoprase, and jacinth, and amethyst. Moreover, they
think that the natives of other countries are to be given them as the
ministers of their pleasures, whom they are to employ either as tillers
of the field or builders of walls, and by whom their ruined and fallen
city is again to be raised up; and they think that they are to receive
the wealth of the nations to live on, and that they will have control
over their riches; that even the camels of Midian and Kedar will come,
and bring to them gold, and incense, and precious stones. And these
views they think to establish on the authority of the prophets by those
promises which are written regarding Jerusalem; and by those passages
also where it is said, that they who serve the Lord shall eat and
drink, but that sinners shall hunger and thirst; that the righteous
shall be joyful, but that sorrow shall possess the wicked. And from the
New Testament also they quote the saying of the Saviour, in which He
makes a promise to His disciples concerning the joy of wine, saying,
"Henceforth I shall not drink of this cup, until I drink it with you
new in My Father's kingdom."[2] They add, moreover, that declaration,
in which the Saviour calls those blessed who now hunger and thirst,[3]
promising them that they shall be satisfied; and many other scriptural
illustrations are adduced by them, the meaning of which they do not
perceive is to be taken figuratively. Then, again, agreeably to the
form of things in this life, and according to the gradations of the
dignities or ranks in this world, or the greatness of their powers,
they think they are to be kings and princes, like those earthly
monarchs who now exist; chiefly, as it appears, on account of that
expression in the Gospel: "Have thou power over five cities."[4] And to
speak shortly, according to the manner of things in this life in all
similar matters, do they desire the fulfilment of all things looked for
in the promises, viz., that what now is should exist again. Such are
the views of those who, while believing in Christ, understand the
divine Scriptures in a sort of Jewish sense, drawing from them nothing
worthy of the divine promises.
3. Those, however, who receive the representations of Scripture
according to the understanding of the apostles, entertain the hope that
the saints will eat indeed, but that it will be the bread of life,
which may nourish the soul with the food of truth and wisdom, and
enlighten the mind, and cause it to drink from the cup of divine
wisdom, according to the declaration of holy Scripture: "Wisdom has
prepared her table, she has killed her beasts, she has mingled her wine
in her cup, and she cries with a loud voice, Come to me, eat the bread
which I have prepared for you, and drink the wine which I have
mingled."[5] By this food of wisdom, the understanding, being nourished
to an entire and perfect condition like that in which man was made at
the beginning, is restored to the image and likeness of God; so that,
although an individual may depart from this life less perfectly
instructed, but who has done works that are approved of,[1] he will be
capable of receiving instruction in that Jerusalem, the city of the
saints, i.e., he will be educated and moulded, and made a living stone,
a stone elect and precious, because he has undergone with firmness and
constancy the struggles of life and the trials of piety; and will there
come to a truer and clearer knowledge of that which here has been
already predicted, viz., that "man shall not live by bread alone, but
by every word which proceedeth from the mouth of God."[2] And they also
are to be understood to be the princes and rulers who both govern those
of lower rank, and instruct them, and teach them, and train them to
divine things.
4. But if these views should not appear to fill the minds of
those who hope for such results with a becoming desire, let us go back
a little, and, irrespective of the natural and innate longing of the
mind for the thing itself, let us make inquiry so that we may be able
at last to describe, as it were, the very forms of the bread of life,
and the quality of that wine, and the peculiar nature of the
principalities, all in conformity with the spiritual view of things.[3]
Now, as in those arts which are usually performed by means of manual
labour, the reason why a thing is done, or why it is of a special
quality, or for a special purpose, is an object of investigation to the
mind,[4] while the actual work itself is unfolded to view by the agency
of the hands; so, in those works of God which were created by Him, it
is to be observed that the reason and understanding of those things
which we see done by Him remains undisclosed. And as, when our eye
beholds the products of an artist's labour, the mind, immediately on
perceiving anything of unusual artistic excellence, burns to know of
what nature it is, or how it was formed, or to what purposes it was
fashioned; so, in a much greater degree, and in one that is beyond all
comparison, does the mind burn with an inexpressible desire to know the
reason of those things which we see done by God. This desire, this
longing, we believe to be unquestionably implanted within us by God;
and as the eye naturally seeks the light and vision, and our body
naturally desires food and drink, so our mind is possessed with a
becoming and natural desire to become acquainted with the truth of God
and the causes of things. Now we have received this desire from God,
not in order that it should never be gratified or be capable of
gratification; otherwise the love of truth would appear to have been
implanted by God into our minds to no purpose, if it were never to have
an opportunity of satisfaction. Whence also, even in this life, those
who devote themselves with great labour to the pursuits of piety and
religion, although obtaining only some small fragments from the
numerous and immense treasures of divine knowledge, yet, by the very
circumstance that their mind and soul is engaged in these pursuits, and
that in the eagerness of their desire they outstrip themselves, do they
derive much advantage; and, because their minds are directed to the
study and love of the investigation of truth, are they made fitter for
receiving the instruction that is to come; as if, when one would paint
an image, he were first with a light pencil to trace out the outlines
of the coming picture, and prepare marks for the reception of the
features that are to be afterwards added, this preliminary sketch in
outline is found to prepare the way for the laying on of the true
colours of the painting; so, in a measure, an outline and sketch may be
traced on the tablets of our heart by the pencil of our Lord Jesus
Christ. And therefore perhaps is it said, "Unto every one that hath
shall be given, and be added."[5] By which it is established, that to
those who possess in this life a kind of outline of truth and
knowledge, shall be added the beauty of a perfect image in the future.
5. Some such desire, I apprehend, was indicated by him who said,
"I am in a strait betwixt two, having a desire to depart, and to be
with Christ, which is far better; "[6] knowing that when he should have
returned to Christ he would then know more clearly the reasons of all
things which are done on earth, either respecting man, or the soul of
man, or the mind; or regarding any other subject, such as, for
instance, what is the Spirit that operates, what also is the vital
spirit, or what is the grace of the Holy Spirit that is given to
believers. Then also will he understand what Israel appears to be, or
what is meant by the diversity of nations; what the twelve tribes of
Israel mean, and what the individual people of each tribe. Then, too,
will he understand the reason of the priests and Levites, and of the
different priestly orders, the type of which was in Moses, and also
what is the true meaning of the jubilees, and of the weeks of years
with God. He will see also the reasons for the festival days, and holy
days, and for all the sacrifices and purifications. He will perceive
also the reason of the purgation from leprosy, and what the different
kinds of leprosy are, and the reason of the purgation of those who lose
their seed. He will come to know, moreover, what are the good
influences,[1] and their greatness, and their qualities; and those too
which are of a contrary kind, and what the affection of the former, and
what the strife-causing emulation of the latter is towards men. He will
behold also the nature of the soul, and the diversity of animals
(whether of those which live in the water, or of birds, or of wild
beasts), and why each of the genera is subdivided into so many species;
and what intention of the Creator, or what purpose of His wisdom, is
concealed in each individual thing. He will become acquainted, too,
with the reason why certain properties are found associated with
certain roots or herbs, and why, on the other hand, evil effects are
averted by other herbs and roots. He will know, moreover, the nature of
the apostate angels, and the reason why they have power to flatter in
some things those who do not despise them with the whole power of
faith, and why they exist for the purpose of deceiving and leading men
astray. He will learn, too, the judgment of Divine Providence on each
individual thing; and that, of those events which happen to men, none
occur by accident or chance, but in accordance with a plan so carefully
considered, and so stupendous, that it does not overlook even the
number of the hairs of the heads, not merely of the saints, but perhaps
of all human beings, and the plan of which providential government
extends even to caring for the sale of two sparrows for a denarius,
whether sparrows there be understood figuratively or literally. Now
indeed this providential government is still a subject of
investigation, but then it will be fully manifested. From all which we
are to suppose, that meanwhile not a little time may pass by until the
reason of those things only which are upon the earth be pointed out to
the worthy and deserving after their departure from life, that by the
knowledge of all these things, and by the grace of full knowledge, they
may enjoy an unspeakable joy. Then, if that atmosphere which is between
heaven and earth is not devoid of inhabitants, and those of a rational
kind, as the apostle says, "Wherein in times past ye walked according
to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of
the air, the spirit who now worketh in the children of
disobedience."[2] And again he says, "We shall be caught up in the
clouds to meet Christ in the air, and so shall we ever be with the
Lord."[3]
6. We are therefore to suppose that the saints will remain there
until they recognise the twofold mode of government in those things
which are performed in the air. And when I say "twofold mode," I mean
this: When we were upon earth, we saw either animals or trees, and
beheld the differences among them, and also the very great diversity
among men; but although we saw these things, we did not understand the
reason of them; and this only was suggested to us from the visible
diversity, that we should examine and inquire upon what principle these
things were either created or diversely arranged. And a zeal or desire
for knowledge of this kind being conceived by us on earth, the full
understanding and comprehension of it will be granted after death, if
indeed the result should follow according to our expectations. When,
therefore, we shall have fury comprehended its nature, we shall
understand in a twofold manner what we saw on earth. Some such view,
then, must we hold regarding this abode in the air. I think, therefore,
that all the saints who depart from this life will remain in some place
situated on the earth, which holy Scripture calls paradise, as in some
place of instruction, and, so to speak, class-room or school of souls,
in which they are to be instructed regarding all the things which they
had seen on earth, and are to receive also some information respecting
things that are to follow in the future, as even when in this life they
had obtained in some degree indications of future events, although
"through a glass darkly," all of which are revealed more clearly and
distinctly to the saints in their proper time and place. If any one
indeed be pure in heart, and holy in mind, and more practised in
perception, he will, by making more rapid progress, quickly ascend to a
place in the air, and reach the kingdom of heaven, through those
mansions, so to speak, in the various places which the Greeks have
termed spheres, i.e., globes, but which holy Scripture has called
heavens; in each of which he will first see clearly what is done there,
and in the second place, will discover the reason why things are so
done: and thus he will in order pass through all gradations, following
Him who hath passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, who said,
"I will that where I am, these may be also."[4] And of this diversity
of places He speaks, when He says, "In My Father's house are many
mansions." He Himself is everywhere, and passes swiftly through all
things; nor are we any longer to understand Him as existing in those
narrow Limits in which He was once confined for our sakes, i.e., not in
that circumscribed body which He occupied on earth, when dwelling among
men, according to which He might be considered as enclosed in some one
place.
7. When, then, the saints shall have reached the celestial
abodes, they will clearly see the nature of the stars one by one, and
will under- 300
stand whether they are endued with life, or their condition, whatever it is. And they will comprehend also the other reasons for the works of God, which He Himself will reveal to them. For He will show to them, as to children, the causes of things and the power of His creation,[1] and will explain why that star was placed in that particular quarter of the sky, and why it was separated from another by so great an intervening space; what, e.g., would have been the consequence if it had been nearer or more remote; or if that star had been larger than this, how the totality of things would not have remained the same, but all would have been transformed into a different condition of being. And so, when they have finished all those matters which are connected with the stars, and with the heavenly revolutions, they will come to those which are not seen, or to those whose names only we have heard, and to things which are invisible, which the Apostle Paul has informed us are numerous, although what they are, or what difference may exist among them, we cannot even conjecture by our feeble intellect. And thus the rational nature, growing by each individual step, not as it grew in this life in flesh, and body, and soul, but enlarged in understanding and in power of perception, is raised as a mind already perfect to perfect knowledge, no longer at all impeded by those carnal senses, but increased in intellectual growth; and ever gazing purely, and, so to speak, face to face, on the causes of things, it attains perfection, firstly, viz., that by which it ascends to (the truth),[2] and secondly, that by which it abides in it, having problems and the understanding of things, and the causes of events, as the food on which it may feast. For as in this life our bodies grow physically to what they are, through a sufficiency of food in early life supplying the means of increase, but after the due height has been attained we use food no longer to grow, but to live, and to be preserved in life by it; so also I think that the mind, when it has attained perfection, eats and avails itself of suitable and appropriate food in such a degree, that nothing ought to be either deficient or superfluous. And in all things this food is to be understood as the contemplation and understanding of God, which is of a measure appropriate and suitable to this nature, which was made and created; and this measure it is proper should be observed by every one of those who are beginning to see God, i.e., to understand Him through purity of heart.