(Page1)

Apotolic and Ante-Nicene Fathers

Polycarp

THE MARTYRDOM OF SAINT POLYCARP, BISHOP OF SMYRNACharles H. Hoole's 1885 translationCHAPTER 0

1 The church of God which sojourneth in Smyrna, to the church of God that sojourneth in Philomelia, and to all the settlements of the holy and Catholic Church in every place, mercy, peace, and love from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ be multiplied unto you.

CHAPTER 1

1:1 We have written unto you, brethren, the things respecting those who were martyred, and concerning the blessed Polycarp, who made the persecution to cease, having as it were set his seal to it by his testimony. For almost all the things that went before happened in order that the Lord might show us from above the testimony that is according to the gospel;

1:2 for he endured to be betrayed, even as did the Lord, that we might become imitators of him, not as considering the things that concern ourselves only, but also the things that concern our neighbours; for it belongeth to true and firm love not only to desire to be saved itself, but also that all the brethren should be saved.

CHAPTER 2

2:1 Blessed, therefore, and noble are all the testimonies that happened according to the will of God, for it is right that we should be the more careful, and should ascribe unto God the authority over all things.

2:2 For who would not admire their nobility and endurance and obedience? who, though they were torn with stripes so that the internal arrangement of their flesh became evident even as far as the veins and arteries within, endured it, so that even the bystanders compassionated them and bemoaned them; and that others even arrived at such a pitch of nobility that none of them would either sob or groan, showing all of us that in that hour the martyrs of Christ departed being tortured in the flesh, or rather that the Lord, standing by, associated himself with them.

2:3 And applying themselves to the grace of Christ, they despised the torture of this world, purchasing by the endurance of a single hour remission from eternal punishment; and the fire of their harsh tormentors was cold to them, for they had before their eyes to escape the eternal and never-quenched fire; and with the eyes of their heart they looked up to the good things that are reserved for those that endure, which neither hath ear heard, nor eye seen, nor hath it entered into the heart of man; but which were shown by the Lord unto them, who were no longer men, but already angels.

2:4 And in like manner they who had been condemned to the wild beasts endured dreadful punishments, lying upon beds of prickles, and punished with various other tortures, in order that, if it were possible, the tyrant might turn them by assiduous punishment to a denial of the faith.

CHAPTER 3

3:1 For the devil contrived many things against them, but thanks be unto God, for he prevailed not against all. For the most noble Germanicus strengthened their cowardice through the patience that was in him, who also in a notable way fought against wild beasts. For when the proconsul would have persuaded him, charging him to have compassion on his youth, he drew upon himself the wild beast by force, wishing to be the sooner freed from their unjust and lawless life.

3:2 From this, therefore, all the multitude, wondering at the nobleness of the God-loving and God-fearing race of Christians, called out, Away with the Atheists; let Polycarp be sought for.

CHAPTER 4

4:1 But a certain man named Quintus, a Phrygian, who had newly come from Phrygia, when he saw the wild beasts, became afraid. This was he who constrained himself and others to come in of their own accord. This man, the proconsul, with much importunity, persuaded to swear and to sacrifice. On this account, brethren, we praise not them that give themselves up, since the gospel doth not so teach.

CHAPTER 5

5:1 But the most admirable Polycarp at the first, when he heard these things, was not disturbed, but desired to remain in the city. But the majority persuaded him to withdraw secretly; and he departed secretly to a villa not far from the city, and remained there with a few men, doing no other thing either by night or day but pray concerning all men, and for the churches that are in the world, as was his custom;

5:2 and as he prayed he fell into a trance three days before he was taken, and saw his pillow burning with fire, and he turned and said prophetically to those who were with him, I must be burned alive.

CHAPTER 6

6:1 And when those who sought him continued in the pursuit, he departed unto another villa, and straightway they who sought him came up. And when they found him not, they apprehended two lads, of whom the one, when put to the torture, confessed.

6:2 For it was impossible for him to escape their notice, since they who betrayed him were of his own household. For the Eirenarchus, which is the same office as Cleronomus, Herodes by name, hasted to bring him into the arena, that he indeed might fulfil his proper lot, by becoming a partaker of Christ, and that they who betrayed him might undergo the same punishment as Judas.

CHAPTER 7

7:1 Having, therefore, with them the lad, on the day of the preparation, at the hour of dinner, there came out pursuers and horsemen, with their accustomed arms, as though going out against a thief. And having departed together late in the evening, they found him lying in a certain house, in an upper chamber. And he might have departed from thence unto another place, but was unwilling, saying, The will of the Lord be done.

7:2 And when he heard that they were present, he descended and talked with them. And they who were present wondered at the vigour of his age and his soundness of body, and that they had had to use so much trouble to capture so old a man. He straightway commanded that meat and drink should be set before them at that hour, as much as they wished, and asked them to grant him an hour to pray without molestation.

7:3 And when they suffered him, he stood and prayed, being full of the grace of God, so that he could not be silent for two hours, and they that heard him were astonished, and many repented that they had come against so divine an old man.

CHAPTER 8

8:1 And when he had finished his prayer, having made mention of all who had at any time come into contact with him, both small and great, noble and ignoble, and of the whole Catholic Church throughout the world, when the hour of his departure had come, having seated him on an ass, they led him into the city, it being the great Sabbath.

8:2 And the Eirenarch Herodes and his father Nicetes met him in a chariot, who, having transferred him into their car, seating themselves beside him, would have persuaded him, saying, What is the harm to say, Caesar, Caesar, and to sacrifice, and to do such like things, and thus to be saved? But he at the first did not answer them; but when they persisted, he said, I will not do that which ye advise me.

8:3 But they, when they had failed to persuade him, said unto him dreadful words, and thrust him with such haste from the chariot that in descending from the car he grazed his shin. And paying no attention to it, as though he had suffered nothing, he proceeded zealously and with eagerness, being led to the arena, there being such a noise in the arena that no one could even be heard.

CHAPTER 9

9:1 But to Polycarp, as he entered the arena, there came a voice from heaven, saying, Be strong, and play the man, O Polycarp. And the speaker no man saw; but the voice those of our people who were present heard. And when he was brought in there was a great tumult, when men heard that Polycarp was apprehended.

9:2 Then, when he had been brought in, the proconsul asked him if he was Polycarp. And when he confessed, he would have persuaded him to deny, saying, Have respect unto thine age, and other things like these, as is their custom to say: Swear by the fortunes of Caesar; Repent; Say, Away with the Atheists. But Polycarp, when he had looked with a grave face at all the multitude of lawless heathen in the arena, having beckoned unto them with his hand, sighed, and looking up unto heaven, said, Away with the Atheists!

9:3 And when the proconsul pressed him, and said, Swear, and I will release thee, revile Christ; Polycarp said, Eighty and six years have I served him, and in nothing hath he wronged me; and how, then, can I blaspheme my King, who saved me?

CHAPTER 10

10:1 But when he again persisted, and said, Swear by the fortune of Caesar, he answered, If thou art vainly confident that I shall swear by the fortune of Caesar, as thou suggestest, and pretendest to be ignorant of me who I am, hear distinctly, I am a Christian. But if thou desirest to learn the scheme of Christianity, give me a day to speak, and hearken unto me.

10:2 The proconsul said, Persuade the people. But Polycarp said, I have thought thee indeed worthy to receive explanation, for we have been taught to render such honour as is fitting, and as does not injure us, to the powers and authorities ordained by God; but those I consider not worthy that I should make my defence before them.

CHAPTER 11

11:1 But the proconsul said unto him, I have wild beasts; I will deliver thee unto them, unless thou repentest. But he said, Call them, for repentance from the better to the worse is impossible for us; but it is a good thing to change from evil deeds to just ones.

11:2 But he said again unto him, I will cause thee to be consumed by fire if thou despisest the wild beasts, unless thou repentest. But Polycarp said, Thou threatenest me with fire that burneth but for a season, and is soon quenched. For thou art ignorant of the fire of the judgment to come, and of the eternal punishment reserved for the wicked. But why delayest thou? Bring whatever thou wishest.

CHAPTER 12

12:1 While he was saying these and more things, he was filled with courage and joy, and his face was filled with grace; so that he not only was not troubled and confused by the things said unto him, but, on the contrary, the proconsul was astonished, and sent his herald into the midst of the arena to proclaim a third time: Polycarp has confessed himself to be a Christian.

12:2 When this had been said by the herald, the whole multitude, both of Gentiles and Jews, that inhabit Smyrna, with irrestrainable anger and a loud voice, called out, This is the teacher of impiety, the father of the Christians, the destroyer of your gods, who teacheth many neither to sacrifice nor to worship the gods. Saying these things, they shouted out, and asked the Asiarch Philip to let loose a lion at Polycarp. But Philip replied that it was not lawful for him to do so, since he had finished the exhibition of wild beasts.

12:3 Then it seemed good unto them to shout with one voice that Polycarp should be burnt alive; for it was necessary that the vision that appeared unto him on his pillow should be fulfilled, when seeing it burning, he prayed, and said prophetically, turning to the faithful who were with him, I must be burnt alive.

CHAPTER 13

13:1 These things, therefore, happened with so great rapidity, that they took less time than the narration, the multitude quickly collecting logs and brushwood from the workshops and baths, the Jews especially lending their services zealously for this purpose, as is their custom.

13:2 But when the pyre was ready, having put off all his garments, and having loosed his girdle, he essayed to take off his shoes; not being in the habit of doing this previously, because each of the faithful used to strive which should be the first to touch his body, for, on account of his good conversation, he was, even before his martyrdom, adorned with every good gift.

13:3 Straightway, therefore, there were put around him the implements prepared for the pyre. And when they were about besides to nail him to it, he said, Suffer me thus, for he who gave me to abide the fire will also allow me, without the security of your nails, to remain on the pyre without moving.

CHAPTER 14

14:1 They, therefore, did not nail him, but bound him. But he, having placed his hands behind him, and being bound, like a notable ram appointed for offering out of a great flock, prepared as a whole burnt-offering acceptable unto God, having looked up unto heaven, said, O Lord God Almighty, Father of thy beloved and blessed Son Jesus Christ, through whom we have received our knowledge concerning thee, the God of angels and powers, and of the whole creation, and of all the race of the just who lived before thee,

14:2 I thank thee that thou hast deemed me worthy of this day and hour, that I should have my portion in the number of the martyrs, in the cup of thy Christ, unto the resurrection of eternal life, both of the soul and body, in the incorruptibility of the Holy Spirit. Among these may I be received before thee this day as a rich and acceptable sacrifice, even as thou hast prepared and made manifest beforehand, and hast fulfilled, thou who art the unerring and true God.

14:3 On this account, and concerning all things, I praise thee, I bless thee, I glorify thee, together with the eternal and heavenly Jesus Christ thy beloved Son, with whom to thee and the Holy Spirit be glory both now and for ever. Amen.

CHAPTER 15

15:1 And when he had uttered the Amen, and had finished his prayer, the men who superintended the fire kindled it. And a great flame breaking out, we, to whom it was given to see, saw a great wonder; for to this end also were we preserved, that we might announce what happened to the rest of mankind.

15:2 For the fire, assuming the form of a vault, like the sail of a vessel filled with the wind, defended the body of the martyr roundabout; and it was in the midst of the flame not like flesh burning, but like bread being baked, or like gold and silver glowing in the furnace. And we perceived such a sweet-smelling savour, as though from the breath of incense, or some other precious perfume.

CHAPTER 16

16:1 At last these wicked men, perceiving that his body could not be consumed by the fire, commanded the slaughterer to come near and plunge in a sword. And when he had done this, there came out a dove and an abundance of blood, so that it quenched the fire, and all the multitude wondered that there was such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect.

16:2 Of whom this most admirable martyr Polycarp was one, having been in our time an apostolic and prophetic teacher, and bishop of the Catholic church which is in Smyrna. For every word which he uttered from his mouth both hath been fulfilled, and shall be fulfilled.

CHAPTER 17

17:1 But the evil one, who is the opponent and envier, who is the enemy to the race of men, beholding both the greatness of his testimony and his conversation blameless from the beginning, how he was crowned with a crown of immortality, and how he carried off a prize that could not be spoken against, contrived that not even a relic of him should be taken by us, though many desired to do this, and to communicate with his holy flesh.

17:2 He suborned, therefore, Nicetes, the father of Herodes, and the brother of Alce, to make interest with the governor so as not to give his body to the tomb, Lest, said he, they abandon the crucified and begin to worship this man. And these things they said at the suggestion and instance of the Jews, who also kept watch when we were about to take the body from the fire, not knowing that we shall never be able to abandon Christ, who suffered for the salvation of the whole world of those who are saved, the blameless on behalf of sinners, nor to worship any one else.

17:3 Him we adore as the Son of God; but the martyrs, as the disciples and imitators of the Lord, we love according to their deserts, on account of their incomparable love for their King and Teacher, with whom may it be our lot to be partners and fellow-disciples.

CHAPTER 18

18:1 Therefore, the centurion, seeing the strife that had risen among the Jews, placed the body in the midst of the fire and burned it.

18:2 Thus we, having afterwards taken up his bones, more valuable than precious stones, laid them where it was suitable.

18:3 There, so far as is allowed us, when we are gathered together in exultation and joy, the Lord will enable us to celebrate the birthday of the martyrs, both for the memory of those who have contended, and for the exercise and preparation of those to come.

CHAPTER 19

19:1 Such were the things that happened to the blessed Polycarp, who together with those from Philadelphia was the twelfth who suffered martyrdom in Smyrna; but he alone is held in memory by all, so that he is spoken of in every place even by the Gentiles; not only being a distinguished teacher, but also an eminent martyr, whose testimony we desire to imitate, since it happened according to the Gospel of Christ.

19:2 For having overcome by patience the unjust governor, and so having received the crown of immortality, rejoicing together with the apostles and all the just, he glorifieth God and the Father, and blesseth our Lord Jesus Christ the Saviour of our souls, and the pilot of our bodies, and the shepherd of the Catholic Church throughout the world.

CHAPTER 20

20:1 Ye therefore desired that the things that had happened should be shown unto you more at length; but we for the present have related them unto you briefly by means of our brother Marcus. Now do ye, when ye have read these things, send on the letter to the brethren who are further off, that they also may glorify the Lord, who is making a selection from among his own servants.

20:2 To him who is able to bring us all in, by his grace and gift, into his eternal kingdom, through his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ; to him be the glory, honour, strength, majesty for ever. Amen. Salute all the saints. They who are with us salute you, and Evarestus who wrote these things, and all his house.

CHAPTER 21

21:1 Now the blessed Polycarp was martyred on the second day of the month Xanthicus, on the twenty-fifth of April, on the great Sabbath, at the eighth hour. But he was apprehended by Herodes, when Philip of Tralles was high priest, Statius Quadratus being proconsul, and Jesus Christ king for ever, to whom be glory, honour, majesty, and eternal throne, from generation to generation. Amen.

CHAPTER 22

22:1 We pray, brethren, that you may fare well, walking by the word of the gospel of Jesus Christ, with whom be glory to God and the Father, and the Holy Spirit, for the salvation of the holy elect, even as the blessed Polycarp hath born witness, in whose steps may we be found in the kingdom of Jesus Christ.

22:2 These things have been transcribed by Gaius, from the manuscripts of Irenaeus, the disciple of Polycarp, who also was a fellow-citizen to Irenaeus. But I, Socrates, made a copy in Corinth from the copies of Gaius. Grace be with you all.

22:3 But I, Pionius, afterwards copied them from the above written, having sought them out, after that the blessed Polycarp had made them manifest to me by a revelation, as I will show in what follows; having gathered them together, when they had already become almost obliterated by time, in order that the Lord Jesus Christ may gather me also together with his elect, unto his heavenly kingdom, to whom be glory with the Father and the Holy Spirit, world without end. Amen.

Justin Martyr

Excerpts from the Dialog with Trypho

www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.viii.iv.lxii.html

Chapter LXII.The words Let Us make man agree with the testimony of Proverbs.

And the same sentiment was expressed, my friends, by the word of God [written] by Moses, when it indicated to us, with regard to Him whom it has pointed out,2173 that God speaks in the creation of man with the very same design, in the following words: Let Us make man after our image and likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heaven, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creeping things that creep on the earth. And God created man: after the image of God did He create him; male and female created He them. And God blessed them, and said, Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and have power over it.2174 And that you may not change the [force of the] words just quoted, and repeat what your teachers assert,either that God said to Himself, Let Us make, just as we, when about to do something, oftentimes say to ourselves, Let us make; or that God spoke to the elements, to wit, the earth and other similar substances of which we believe man was formed, Let Us make,I shall quote again the words narrated by Moses himself, from which we can indisputably learn that [God] conversed with some one who was numerically distinct from Himself, and also a rational Being. These are the words: And God said, Behold, Adam has become as one of us, to know good and evil.2175 In saying, therefore, as one of us, [Moses] has declared that [there is a certain] number of persons associated with one another, and that they are at least two. For I would not say that the dogma of that heresy2176 which is said to be among you2177 is true, or that the teachers of it can prove that [God] spoke to angels, or that the human frame was the workmanship of angels. But this Offspring, which was truly brought forth from the Father, was with the Father before all the creatures, and the Father communed with Him; even as the Scripture by Solomon has made clear, that He whom Solomon calls Wisdom, was begotten as a Beginning before all His creatures and as Offspring by God, who has also declared this same thing in the revelation made by Joshua the son of Nave (Nun). Listen, therefore, to the following from the book of Joshua, that what I say may become manifest to you; it is this: And it came to pass, when Joshua was near Jericho, he lifted up his eyes, and sees a man standing over against him. And Joshua approached to Him, and said, Art thou for us, or for our adversaries? And He said to him, I am Captain of the Lords host: now have I come. And Joshua fell on his face on the ground, and said to Him, Lord, what commandest Thou Thy servant? And the Lords Captain says to Joshua, Loose the shoes off thy feet; for the place whereon thou standest is holy ground. And Jericho was shut up and fortified, and no one went out of it. And the Lord said to Joshua, Behold, I give into thine hand Jericho, and its king, [and] its mighty men. 2178

2173 Justin, since he is of opinion that the Word is the beginning of the universe, thinks that by these words, in the beginning, Moses indicated the Word, like many other writers. Hence also he says in Ap. i. 23, that Moses declares the Word to be begotten first by God. If this explanation does not satisfy, read, with regard to Him whom I have pointed out (Maranus).

2174 Gen. i. 26, 28.

2175 Gen. iii. 22.

2176 Heresy or sect.

2177 Or, among us. Maranus pronounces against this latter reading for the following reasons: (1.) The Jews had their own heresies which supplied many things to the Christian heresies, especially to Menander and Saturninus. (2.) The sect which Justin here refutes was of opinion that God spoke to angels. But those angels, as Menander and Saturninus invented, exhorted themselves, saying, Let us make, etc. (3.) The expression suits the rabbins well. So Justin frequently calls them. (4.) Those teachers seem for no other cause to have put the words in the angels mouths than to eradicate the testimony by which they proved divine persons.

2178 Josh. v. 13 ad fin., and Josh.vi. 1, 2.

Chapter LXIII.It is proved that this God was incarnate.

And Trypho said, This point has been proved to me forcibly, and by many arguments, my friend. It remains, then, to prove that He submitted to become man by the Virgin, according to the will of His Father; and to be crucified, and to die. Prove also clearly, that after this He rose again and ascended to heaven.

I answered, This, too, has been already demonstrated 229 by me in the previously quoted words of the prophecies, my friends; which, by recalling and expounding for your sakes, I shall endeavour to lead you to agree with me also about this matter. The passage, then, which Isaiah records, Who shall declare His generation? for His life is taken away from the earth,2179does it not appear to you to refer to One who, not having descent from men, was said to be delivered over to death by God for the transgressions of the people?of whose blood, Moses (as I mentioned before), when speaking in parable, said, that He would wash His garments in the blood of the grape; since His blood did not spring from the seed of man, but from the will of God. And then, what is said by David, In the splendours of Thy holiness have I begotten Thee from the womb, before the morning star.2180 The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchizedek, 2181does this not declare to you2182 that [He was] from of old,2183 and that the God and Father of all things intended Him to be begotten by a human womb? And speaking in other words, which also have been already quoted, [he says]: Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever: a sceptre of rectitude is the sceptre of Thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness, and hast hated iniquity: therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above Thy fellows. [He hath anointed Thee] with myrrh, and oil, and cassia from Thy garments, from the ivory palaces, whereby they made Thee glad. Kings daughters are in Thy honour. The queen stood at Thy right hand, clad in garments embroidered with gold.2184 Hearken, O daughter, and behold, and incline thine ear, and forget thy people and the house of thy father; and the King shall desire thy beauty: because he is thy Lord, and thou shalt worship Him.2185 Therefore these words testify explicitly that He is witnessed to by Him who established these things,2186 as deserving to be worshipped, as God and as Christ. Moreover, that the word of God speaks to those who believe in Him as being one soul, and one synagogue, and one church, as to a daughter; that it thus addresses the church which has sprung from His name and partakes of His name (for we are all called Christians), is distinctly proclaimed in like manner in the following words, which teach us also to forget [our] old ancestral customs, when they speak thus:2187 Hearken, O daughter, and behold, and incline thine ear; forget thy people and the house of thy father, and the King shall desire thy beauty: because He is thy Lord, and thou shalt worship Him.

2179 Isa. liii. 8.

2180 Note this beautiful rendering, Ps. cx. 3.

2181 Ps. cx. 4.

2182 Or, to us.

2183 ; in Lat. vers. antiquitus, which Maranus prefers.

2184 Literally, garments of gold, variegated.

2185 Ps. xlv. 611.

2186 The incarnation, etc.

2187 Being so, literally.

Origen and Tertullian

Excerpt from the Philacalia of Origen

www.tertullian.org/fathers/origen_philocalia_02_text.htm

CHAP. XII.----That a man ought not to faint in reading the Divine Scripture if he cannot comprehend the dark riddles and parables therein. From the 20th Homily on Joshua, the son of Nun.

1. A hearer greatly profits by such readings as these if he can understand the true inheritance which Joshua divided by lot to the children of Israel, and if he can both ascend to the holy land, the true, really good land, and, following the list of names, can adapt the local descriptions to the varying circumstances of those who receive the inheritance. But it is difficult to find a man who thus profits, and we therefore wish to encourage our hearers not to faint as they read. "What the encouragement is which I offer to him who hears such passages, I must now tell. Charms have a certain natural force; and any one who comes under the influence of the charm, even if he does not understand it, gets something from it, according to the nature of the sounds thereof, either to the injury or to the healing of his body, or his soul. Just so, pray observe, it is with the giving of names in the Divine Scriptures, only they are stronger than any charm. For there are certain faculties in us, the best of which are nourished by these "charms," as I may call them, being akin to them, though we may not perceive that those faculties by understanding what we are told become more effective in the development of our lives. For that there are certain invisible departments of our being, and those many in number, the words of the Psalm will prove, "Bless the Lord, O my soul, and all that is within me bless his holy name." 219 There is, then, within us a multitude of faculties amongst which we have been, as it were, souls and bodies, divided by lot; and these are such that if holy they profit and gather strength at the reading of the Scripture, even though the understanding be unfruitful; as it is written concerning him who speaketh "in a tongue," "My spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful." 220 Please note, then, that though at times our understanding is unfruitful, the faculties which assist the soul, and the understanding, and help us all, are nourished with rational nourishment drawn from the Holy Scriptures, and from these names, and that being nourished they are better able to assist us. And just as our better faculties, as |56 it were, use the charm and are profited, and gain strength through Scriptures and names like these, so the opposing faculties of our inner nature, we may say, are weakened and overcome by God's enchantments, and being overcome are put to sleep.

2. If any of you have ever seen an asp or some other venomous creature under the spell of the charmer, I would have you take that as an illustration of the Scripture. If it be read and not understood, the hearer sometimes grows listless and weary; yet let him believe that the asps and vipers within him are weakened through the charms of the charmers, that is to say, by wise Moses, wise Joshua, the wise and holy Prophets. Let us not then weary when we hear Scriptures which we do not understand; but let it be unto us according to our faith,221 by which we believe that all Scripture being inspired by God is profitable.222 For as regards these Scriptures, you must admit one of two things: either that they are not inspired because they are not profitable, as an unbeliever might suppose; or, as a believer, you must allow that because they are inspired they are profitable. We must, however, know that we often profit without perceiving it, just as frequently happens when we diet ourselves to improve our eyesight; we do not, I suppose, while we are eating perceive that our eyesight is better, but after two or three days, when the food is assimilated which benefits the eye, we are convinced of the fact by experience; and the same remark applies to other foods which benefit other parts of the body. Well, then, have the like faith with regard to Divine Scripture; believe that thy soul is profited by the mere reading, even though thy understanding does not receive the fruit of profiting by these passages. Our inner nature is charmed; its better elements are nourished, the worse weakened and brought to nought.

219.Ps. ciii. (cii.) 1.

220.1 Cor. xiv. 14.

221.Cf. Matt. ix. 29.

222.Cf. 2 Tim. iii. 16.

Nicene Fathers

Historians: Eusebius, Socrates and Bede

Excerpts from the Ecclesiastical History

www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.html

Chapter IV.The First Successors of the Apostles.

1. That Paul preached to the Gentiles and laid the foundations of the churches from Jerusalem round about even unto Illyricum, is evident both from his own words,601 and from the account which Luke has given in the Acts.602

2. And in how many provinces Peter preached Christ and taught the doctrine of the new covenant to those of the circumcision is clear from his own words in his epistle already mentioned as undisputed,603 in which he writes to the Hebrews of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.604

3. But the number and the names of those among them that became true and zealous followers of the apostles, and were judged worthy to tend the churches founded by them, it is not easy to tell, except those mentioned in the writings of Paul.

4. For he had innumerable fellow-laborers, or fellow-soldiers, as he called them,605 and most of them were honored by him with an imperishable memorial, for he gave enduring testimony concerning them in his own epistles.

5. Luke also in the Acts speaks of his friends, and mentions them by name.606

6. Timothy, so it is recorded, was the first to receive the episcopate of the parish in Ephesus,607 Titus of the churches in Crete.608

7. But Luke,609 who was of Antiochian parentage and a physician by profession,610 and who was especially intimate with Paul and well acquainted with the rest of the apostles,611 has left us, in two inspired books, proofs of that spiritual healing art which he learned from them. One of these books is the Gospel,612 which he testifies that he wrote as those who were from the beginning eye witnesses and ministers of the word delivered unto him, all of whom, as he says, he followed accurately from the first.613 The other book is the Acts of the Apostles614 which he 137composed not from the accounts of others, but from what he had seen himself.

8. And they say that Paul meant to refer to Lukes Gospel wherever, as if speaking of some gospel of his own, he used the words, according to my Gospel.615

9. As to the rest of his followers, Paul testifies that Crescens was sent to Gaul;616 but Linus, whom he mentions in the Second Epistle to Timothy617 as his companion at Rome, was Peters successor in the episcopate of the church there, as has already been shown.618

10. Clement also, who was appointed third bishop of the church at Rome, was, as Paul testifies, his co-laborer and fellow-soldier.619

11. Besides these, that Areopagite, named Dionysius, who was the first to believe after Pauls address to the Athenians in the Areopagus (as recorded by Luke in the Acts)620 is mentioned by another Dionysius, an 138ancient writer and pastor of the parish in Corinth,621 as the first bishop of the church at Athens.

12. But the events connected with the apostolic succession we shall relate at the proper time. Meanwhile let us continue the course of our history.

601 Rom. xv. 19.

602 From Acts ix. on.

603 In chap. 3, 1.

604 1 Pet. i. 1.

605 Philip. ii. 25; Philem. 2.

606 Barnabas (Acts ix. 27, and often); John Mark (xii. 25; xiii. 13; xv. 37, 39); Silas (xv. 40); Timothy (xvi. 1 sqq. and often); Aquila and Priscilla (xviii.); Erastus (xix. 22); Gaius of Macedonia (xix. 29); Aristarchus (xix. 29; xx. 4; xxvii. 2); Sopater, Secundus, Gaius of Derbe (perhaps the same as the Gaius of Macedonia?), and Tychichus (xx. 4); Trophimus (xx. 4; xxi. 29).

607 That Timothy was the first bishop of Ephesus is stated also by the Apost. Const. (VII. 46), and by Nicephorus (H. E. III. 11), who records (upon what authority we do not know) that he suffered martyrdom under Domitian. Against the tradition that he labored during his later years in Ephesus there is nothing to be urged; though on the other hand the evidence for it amounts to little, as it seems to be no more than a conclusion drawn from the Epistles to Timothy, though hardly a conclusion drawn by Eusebius himself, for he uses the word , which seems to imply that he had some authority for his statement. According to those epistles, he was at the time of their composition in Ephesus, though they give us no hint as to whether he was afterward there or not. From Heb. xiii. 23 (the date of which we do not know) we learn that he had just been released from some imprisonment, apparently in Italy, but whither he afterward went is quite uncertain. Eusebius report that he was bishop of Ephesus is the customary but unwarranted carrying back into the first century of the monarchical episcopate which was not known until the second. According to the Apost. Const. VII. 46 both Timothy and John were bishops of Ephesus, the former appointed by Paul, the latter by himself. Timothy is a saint in the Roman Catholic sense, and is commemorated January 24.

608 Cf. Tit. i. 5. Titus is commonly connected by tradition with Crete, of which he is supposed to have been the first bishop,the later institution being again pushed back into the first century. In the fragment de Vita et Actis Titi, by the lawyer Zenas (in Fabric. Cod. Apoc. N.T. II. 831 sqq., according to Howson, in Smiths Dict. of the Bible), he is said to have been bishop of Gortyna, a city of Crete (where still stand the ruins of a church which bears his name), and of a royal Cretan family by birth. This tradition is late, and, of course, of little authority, but at the same time, accords very well with all that we know of Titus; and consequently there is no reason for denying it in toto. According to 2 Tim. iv. 10, he went, or was sent, into Dalmatia; but universal tradition ascribes his later life and his death to Crete. Candia, the modern capital, claims the honor of being his burial place (see CavesApostolici, ed. 1677, p. 63). Titus is a saint, in the Roman Catholic sense, and is commemorated January 4.

609 Of Luke personally we know very little. He is not mentioned in the Acts, and only three times in Pauls epistles (Col. iv. 14; Philem. 24; 2 Tim. iv. 11), from which passages we learn that he was a physician, was one of Pauls fellow-workers who was very dear to him, and was with him during his last imprisonment. Irenus, who is the first to ascribe the third Gospel and the Acts to this Luke, seems to know nothing more about him personally. Eusebius is the first to record that he was born at Antioch; but the tradition must have been universally accepted in his day, as he states it without any misgivings and with no qualifying phrase. Jerome (de vir. ill. 7) and many later writers follow Eusebius in this statement. There is no intrinsic improbability in the tradition, which seems, in fact, to be favored by certain minor notices in the Acts (see Schaff, Ch. Hist. I. 651). Gregory Nazianzen (Orat. 25) says that he labored in Achaia, and in Orat. 4 he calls him a martyr. Jerome (ibid.) says that he was buried in Constantinople. According to Nicephorus (H. E. II. 43) and later writers, Luke was a painter of great skill; but this late tradition, of which the earlier Fathers know nothing, is quite worthless. Epiphanius (Hr. II. 11) makes him one of the Seventy, which does not accord with Lukes own words at the beginning of his Gospel, where he certainly implies that he himself was not an eye-witness of the events which he records. In the same connection, Epiphanius says that he labored in Dalmatia, Gallia, Italy, and Macedonia,a tradition which has about as much worth as most such traditions in regard to the fields of labor of the various apostles and their followers. Theophylact (On Luke xxiv. 1324) records that some supposed that he was one of the disciples with whom Christ walked to Emmaus, and this ingenious but unfounded guess has gained some modern supporters (e.g. Lange). He is a saint in the Roman Catholic sense, and is commemorated October 18.

610 See Col. iv. 14

611 Of Lukes acquaintance with the other apostles we know nothing, although, if we suppose him to have been the author of the We sections in the Acts, he was with Paul in Jerusalem at the time he was taken prisoner (Acts xxi.), when he met James at least, and possibly others of the Twelve. It is not at all improbable that in the course of his life he became acquainted with several of the apostles.

612 The testimony to the existence of our third Gospel, although it is not so old as that for Matthew and Mark, is still very early. It was used by Marcion, who based upon it his own mutilated gospel, and is quoted very frequently by Justin Martyr. The Gospel is first distinctly ascribed to Luke by Irenus (III. 1. 1) and by the Muratorian Fragment. From that time on tradition was unanimous both as to its authorship and its authority. The common opinionstill defended by the great majority of conservative criticshas always been that the third Gospel was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. The radical critics of the present century, however, bring its composition down to a latter dateranging all the way from 70 to 140 (the latter is Baurs date, which is now universally recognized as very wild). Many conservative critics put its composition after the destruction of Jerusalem on account of the peculiar form of its eschatological discoursese.g. Weiss, who puts it between 70 and 80 (while putting Matthew and Mark before the destruction of Jerusalem). The traditional and still prevalent opinion is that Lukes Gospel was written later than those of Matthew and Mark. See the various commentaries and New Testament Introductions, and for a clear exhibition of the synoptical problem in general, see Schaffs Ch. Hist. I. p. 607 sqq. On Luke in particular, p. 648 sqq.

613 Luke i. 2, 3.

614 Traces of a knowledge of the Acts are found in the Apostolic Fathers, in Justin, and in Tatian, and before the end of the second century the book occupied a place in the Canon undisputed except by heretics, such as the Marcionites, Manicheans, &c. The Muratorian Fragment and Irenus (III. 14) are the first to mention Luke as the author of the Acts, but from that time on tradition has been unanimous in ascribing it to him. The only exception occurs in the case of Photius (ad Amphil. Qust. 123, ed. Migne), who states that the work was ascribed by some to Clement, by others to Barnabas, and by others to Luke; but it is probable as Weiss remarks that Photius, in this case, confuses the Acts with the Epistle to the Hebrews. As to the date of its composition. Irenus (III. 1. 1) seems (one cannot speak with certainty, as some have done) to put it after the death of Peter and Paul, and therefore, necessarily, the Acts still later. The Muratorian Fragment implies that the work was written at least after the death of Peter. Later, however, the tradition arose that the work was written during the lifetime of Paul (so Jerome, de vir. ill. 7), and this has been the prevailing opinion among conservative scholars ever since, although many put the composition between the death of Paul and the destruction of Jerusalem; while some (e.g. Weiss) put it after the destruction of Jerusalem, though still assigning it to Luke. The opposite school of critics deny Lukes authorship, throwing the book into the latter part of the first century (Scholten, Hilgenfeld, &c.), or into the times of Trajan and Hadrian (e.g. Volkmar, Keim, Hausrath, &c.). The Tbingen School saw in the Acts a tendency-writing, in which the history was intentionally perverted. This theory finds few supporters at present, even among the most extreme critics, all of whom, however, consider the book a source of the second rank, containing much that is legendary and distorted and irreconcilable with Pauls Epistles, which are looked upon as the only reliable source. The question turns upon the relation of the author of the we sections to the editor of the whole. Conservative scholars agree with universal tradition in identifying them (though this is not necessary in order to maintain the historical accuracy of the work), while the opposite school denies the identity, considering the we sections authentic historical accounts from the pen of a companion of Paul, which were afterward incorporated into a larger work by one who was not a pupil of Paul. The identity of the author of the third Gospel and of the Acts is now admitted by all parties. See the various Commentaries and New Testament Introductions; and upon the sources of the Acts, compare especially Weizsckers Apost. Zeitalter, p. 182 sqq., and Weiss Einleitung, p. 569 sq.

615 Rom. ii. 16, xvi. 25; 2 Tim. ii. 8. Eusebius uses the expression , they say, which seems to imply that the interpretation was a common one in his day. Schaff (Ch. Hist. I. p. 649) says that Origen also thus interpreted the passages in Romans and Timothy referred to, but he gives no references, and I have not been able to find in Origens works anything to confirm the statement. Indeed, in commenting upon the passages in the Epistle to the Romans he takes the words my Gospel to refer to the gospel preached by Paul, not to the Gospel written by Luke. It is true, however, that in the passage from his Commentary on Matthew, quoted by Eusebius in VI. 25, below, Origen does suppose Paul to refer to Luke and his Gospel in 2 Cor. viii. 18. The interpretation of the words according to my Gospel, which Eusebius represents as common in his day, is adopted also by Jerome (de vir. ill. chap. 7), but is a gross exegetical blunder. Paul never uses the word in such a sense, nor is it used by any New Testament writer to designate the gospel record, or any one of the written Gospels. It is used always in the general sense of glad tidings, or to denote the scheme of salvation, or the substance of the gospel revelation. Eusebius is not the first to connect Lukes Gospel with Paul. The Muratorian Fragment speaks of Lukes connection with Paul, and Irenus (III. 1. 1, quoted below in V. 8. 2) says directly that Luke recorded the Gospel preached by Paul. Tertullian (Adv. Marcion. IV. 5) tells us that Lukes form of the Gospel is usually ascribed to Paul, and in the same work, IV. 2, he lays down the principle that the preaching of the disciples of the apostles needs the authority of the apostles themselves, and it is in accord with this principle that so much stress was laid by the early Church upon the connection of Mark with Peter and of Luke with Paul. In chap. 24 Eusebius refers again to Lukes relation to Paul in connection with his Gospel, and so, too, Origen, as quoted by Eusebius, Bk. VI. chap. 25. The Pauline nature of the Gospel has always been emphasized, and still is by the majority of scholars. This must not be carried so far, however, as to imply that Luke drew his materials from Paul; for Paul himself was not an eye-witness, and Luke expressly states in his preface the causes which induced him to write, and the sources from which he derived his material. The influence of Paul is seen in Lukes standpoint, and in his general spirithis Gospel is the Gospel of universal salvation.

616 2 Tim. iv. 10, where the Greek word used is , which means simply went or is gone. That Paul had sent him as Eusebius states (using the word ) is not implied in the epistle. Instead of (or ) most of the ancient mss. of the New Testament have , which is the reading of the Textus Receptus, of Tregelles, of Westcott and Hort and others. Some mss., however (including the Sinaitic), have , which Tischendorf adopts; and some of the mss. of Eusebius also have this form, though the majority read . Christophorsonus in his edition of Eusebius reads , but entirely without ms. authority. Epiphanius (Hr. LI. 11) contends that in 2 Tim. iv. 10 should be read and not : & 139 , & 139. Theodoret (in 2 Tim. iv. 10) reads , but interprets it as meaning : .

617 2 Tim. iv. 21.

618 See chap. 2, note 1, above.

619 Clement is mentioned in Phil. iv. 3, but is not called a fellow-soldier. Eusebius was evidently thinking of Pauls references to Epaphroditus (Phil. ii. 25) and to Archippus (Philem. 2), whom he calls his fellow-soldiers. The Clement to whom Eusebius here refers was a very important personage in the early Roman church, being known to tradition as one of its first three bishops. He has played a prominent part in Church history on account of the numerous writings which have passed under his name. We know nothing certain about his life. Eusebius identifies him with the Philippian Clement mentioned by Paul,an identification apparently made first by Origen, and after him repeated by a great many writers. But the identification is, to say the least, very doubtful, and resting as it does upon an agreement in a very common name deserves little consideration. It was quite customary in the early Church to find Pauls companions, whenever possible, in responsible and influential positions during the latter part of the first century. A more plausible theory, which, if true, would throw an interesting light upon Clement and the Roman church of his day, is that which identifies him with the consul Flavius Clement, a relative of the emperor Domitian (see below, chap. 18, note 6). Some good reasons for the identification might be urged, and his rank would then explain well Clements influential position in the Church. But as pointed out in chap. 18, note 6, it is extremely improbable that the consul Flavius Clement was a Christian; and in any case a fatal objection to the identification (which is nevertheless adopted by Hilgenfeld and others) is the fact that Clement is nowhere spoken of as a martyr until the time of Rufinus, and also that no ancient writer identifies him or connects him in any way with the consul, although Eusebius mention of the latter in chap. 23 shows that he was a well-known person. When we remember the tendency of the early Church to make all its heroes martyrs, and to ascribe high birth to them, the omission in this case renders the identification, we may say, virtually impossible. More probable is the conjecture of Lightfoot, that he was a freedman belonging to the family of the consul Clement, whose name he bore. This is simply conjecture, however, and is supported by no testimony. Whoever Clement was, he occupied a very prominent position in the early Roman church, and wrote an epistle to the Corinthians which is still extant (see below, chap. 16; and upon the works falsely ascribed to him, see chap. 38). In regard to his place in the succession of Roman bishops, see chap. 2, note 1, above. For a full account of Clement, see especially Harnacks Prolegomena to his edition of Clements Epistle (Patrum Apost. Opera, Vol. 1.), Salmons article, Clemens Romanus, in the Dict. of Christ. Biog., Schaffs Ch. Hist. II. 636 sq., and Donaldsons Hist. of Christ. Lit. and Doctrine, I. p. 90 sq.

620 Acts xvii. 34. This Dionysius has played an important part in Church history, as the pretended author of a series of very remarkable writings, which pass under the name of Dionysius, the Areopagite, but which in reality date from the fifth or sixth century and probably owe their origin to the influence of Neo-Platonism. The first mention of these writings is in the records of the Council of Constantinople (532 a.d.); but from that time on they were constantly used and unanimously ascribed to Dionysius, the Areopagite, until, in the seventeenth century, their claims to so great antiquity were disputed. They are still defended, however, in the face of the most positive evidence, by many Roman Catholic writers. The influence of these works upon the theology of the Middle Ages was prodigious. Scholasticism may be said to be based upon them, for Thomas Aquinas used them, perhaps, more than any other source; so much so, that he has been said to have drawn his whole theological system from Dionysius. Our Dionysius has had the further honor of being identified by tradition with Dionysius (St. Denis), the patron saint of France,an identification which we may follow the most loyal of the French in accepting, if we will, though we shall be obliged to suppose that our Dionysius lived to the good old age of two to three hundred years. The statement of Dionysius of Corinth that the Areopagite was bishop of Athens (repeated by Eusebius again in Bk. IV. chap. 23) is the usual unwarranted throwing back of a second century conception into the first century. That Dionysius held a position of influence among the few Christians whom Paul left in Athens is highly probable, and the tradition that later he was made the first bishop there is quite natural. The church of Athens plays no part in the history of the apostolic age, and it is improbable that there was any organization there until many years after Pauls visit; for even in the time of Dionysius of Corinth, the church there seems to have been extremely small and weak (cf. Bk. IV. chap. 23, 2). Upon Dionysius and the writings ascribed to him, see especially the article of Lupton in the Dict. of Christ. Biog. I. p. 841848.

621 Upon Dionysius of Corinth, see Bk. IV. chap. 23, below.

Chapter XVIII.The Apostle John and the Apocalypse.

1. It is said that in this persecution the apostle and evangelist John, who was still alive, was condemned to dwell on the island of Patmos in consequence of his testimony to the divine word.713

2. Irenus, in the fifth book of his work Against Heresies, where he discusses the number of the name of Antichrist which is given in the so-called Apocalypse of John,714 speaks as follows concerning him:715

3. If it were necessary for his name to be proclaimed openly at the present time, it would have been declared by him who saw the revelation. For it was seen not long ago, but almost in our own generation, at the end of the reign of Domitian.

4. To such a degree, indeed, did the teaching of our faith flourish at that time that even those writers who were far from our religion did not hesitate to mention in their histories the persecution and the martyrdoms which took place during it.716

5. And they, indeed, accurately indicated the time. For they recorded that in the fifteenth year of Domitian717 Flavia Domitilla, daughter of a sister of Flavius Clement, who at that time was one of the consuls of Rome,718 was exiled with many others to the island of Pontia in consequence of testimony borne to Christ.

713 Unanimous tradition, beginning with Irenus (V. 30. 3, quoted just below, and again in Eusebius V. 8) assigns the banishment of John and the apocalyptic visions to the reign of Domitian. This was formerly the common opinion, and is still held by some respectable writers, but strong internal evidence has driven most modern scholars to the conclusion that the Apocalypse must have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem, the banishment therefore (upon the assumption that John wrote the Apocalypse, upon which see chap. 24, note 19) taking place under Nero instead of Domitian. If we accept this, we have the remarkable phenomenon of an event taking place at an earlier date than that assigned it by tradition, an exceptional and inexplicable thing. We have too the difficulty of accounting for the erroneousness of so early and unanimous a tradition. The case thus stood for years, until in 1886 Vischer published his pamphlet Die Offenbarung des Johannes, eine jdische Apocalypse in Christlicher Bearbeitung (Gebhardt and Harnacks Texte und Untersuchungen, Band II. Heft. 3), which if his theory were true, would reconcile external and internal evidence in a most satisfactory manner, throwing the original into the reign of Neros successor, and the Christian recension into the reign of Domitian. Compare especially Harnacks appendix to Vischers pamphlet; and upon the Apocalypse itself, see chap. 24, below.

714 Rev. xiii. 18. It will be noticed that Eusebius is careful not to commit himself here on the question of the authorship of the Apocalypse. See below, chap. 24, note 20.

715 Irenus, Adv. Hr. V. 30. 3; quoted also below, in Bk. V. chap. 8.

716 Jerome, in his version of the Chron. of Eusebius (year of Abr. 2112), says that the historian and chronographer Bruttius recorded that many of the Christians suffered martyrdom under Domitian. Since the works of Bruttius are not extant, we have no means of verifying the statement. Dion Cassius (LXVII. 14) relates some of the banishments which took place under Domitian, among them that of Flavia Domitilla, who was, as we know, a Christian; but he does not himself say that any of these people were Christians, nor does he speak of a persecution of the Christians.

717 We learn from Suetonius (Domit. chap. 15) that the events referred to by Eusebius in the next sentence took place at the very end of Domitians reign; that is, in the year 96 a.d., the fifteenth year of his reign, as Eusebius says. Dion Cassius also (LXVII. 14) puts these events in the same year.

718 Flavius Clemens was a cousin of Domitian, and his wife, Domitilla, a niece of the emperor. They stood high in favor, and their two sons were designated as heirs to the empire, while Flavius Clemens himself was made Domitians colleague in the consulship. But immediately afterward Clemens was put to death and Domitilla was banished. Suetonius (Domit, chap. 15) accuses Clemens of contemtissim inerti, and Dion Cassius (LXVII. 14) of atheism (). These accusations are just such as heathen writers of that age were fond of making against the Christians (compare, for instance, Athenagoras Adv. Gent. chap. 4, and Tertullians Apol. chap. 42). Accordingly it has been very commonly held that both Flavius Clemens and Domitilla were Christians, and were punished on that account. But early tradition makes only Domitilla a Christian; and certainly if Clemens alsoa man of such high rankhad been a Christian, an early tradition to that effect would be somewhere preserved. We must, therefore, conclude that his offense was something else than Christianity. The very silence of Christian tradition as to Clement is an argument for the truth of the tradition in regard to Domitilla, and the heathen historians referred to confirm its main points, though they differ in minor details. The Acts of Martyrdom of Nereus and Achilles represent Domitilla as the niece, not the wife, of Flavius Clemens, and Eusebius does the same. More than that, while the heathen writers report that Domitilla was banished to the island Pandeteria, these Acts, as well as Eusebius and Jerome (Ep. adv. Eustachium, Mignes ed., Ep. CVIII. 7), give the island of Pontia as the place of banishment. Tillemont and other writers have therefore assumed that there were two Domitillas,aunt and niece,one banished to one island, the other to another. But this is very improbable, and it is easier to suppose that there was but one Domitilla and but one island, and that the discrepancies are due to carelessness or to the mistakes of transcribers. Pandeteria and Pontia were two small islands in the Mediterranean, just west of central Italy, and were very frequently employed by the Roman emperors as places of exile for prisoners.

Augustine

Excerpt from The Confessions

www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf101.vi.html

Chapter XII.Having Prayed to God, He Pours Forth a Shower of Tears, And, Admonished by a Voice, He Opens the Book and Reads the Words in Rom. XIII. 13; By Which, Being Changed in His Whole Soul, He Discloses the Divine Favour to His Friend and His Mother.

28. But when a profound reflection had, from the secret depths of my soul, drawn together and heaped up all my misery before the sight of my heart, there arose a mighty storm, accompanied by as mighty a shower of tears. Which, that I might pour forth fully, with its natural expressions, I stole away from Alypius; for it suggested itself to me that solitude was fitter for the business of weeping.677 So I retired to such a distance that even his presence could not be oppressive to me. Thus was it with me at that time, and he perceived it; for something, I believe, I had spoken, wherein the sound of my voice appeared choked with weeping, and in that state had I risen up. He then remained where we had been sitting, most completely astonished. I flung myself down, how, I know not, under a certain fig-tree, giving free course to my tears, and the streams of mine eyes gushed out, an acceptable sacrifice unto Thee.678 And, not indeed in these words, yet to this effect, spake I much unto Thee,But Thou, O Lord, how long?679 How long, Lord? Wilt Thou be angry for ever? Oh, remember not against us former iniquities;680 for I felt that I was enthralled by them. I sent up these sorrowful cries,How long, how long? Tomorrow, and tomorrow? Why not now? Why is there not this hour an end to my uncleanness?

29. I was saying these things and weeping in the most bitter contrition of my heart, when, lo, I heard the voice as of a boy or girl, I know not which, coming from a neighbouring house, chanting, and oft repeating, Take up and read; take up and read. Immediately my countenance was changed, and I began most earnestly to consider whether it was usual for children in any kind of game to sing such words; nor could I remember ever to have heard the like. So, restraining the torrent of my tears, I rose up, interpreting it no other way than as a command to me from Heaven to open the book, and to read the first

Chapter I should light upon. For I had heard of Antony,681 that, accidentally coming in whilst the gospel was being read, he received the admonition as if what was read were addressed to him, Go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven; and come and follow me.682 And by such oracle was he forthwith converted unto Thee. So quickly I returned to the place where Alypius was sitting; for there had I put down the volume of the apostles, when I rose thence. I grasped, opened, and in silence read that paragraph on which my eyes first fell,Not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying; but put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof.683 No further would I read, nor did I need; for instantly, as 128the sentence ended,by a light, as it were, of security infused into my heart,all the gloom of doubt vanished away.

30. Closing the book, then, and putting either my finger between, or some other mark, I now with a tranquil countenance made it known to Alypius. And he thus disclosed to me what was wrought in him, which I knew not. He asked to look at what I had read. I showed him; and he looked even further than I had read, and I knew not what followed. This it was, verily, Him that is weak in the faith, receive ye;684 which he applied to himself, and discovered to me. By this admonition was he strengthened; and by a good resolution and purpose, very much in accord with his character (wherein, for the better, he was always far different from me), without any restless delay he joined me. Thence we go in to my mother. We make it known to her,she rejoiceth. We relate how it came to pass,she leapeth for joy, and triumpheth, and blesseth Thee, who art able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think;685 for she perceived Thee to have given her more for me than she used to ask by her pitiful and most doleful groanings. For Thou didst so convert me unto Thyself, that I sought neither a wife, nor any other of this worlds hopes,standing in that rule of faith686 in which Thou, so many years before, had showed me unto her in a vision. And thou didst turn her grief into a gladness,687 much more plentiful than she had desired, and much dearer and chaster than she used to crave, by having grandchildren of my body.

677 See note 3, page 71.

678 1 Pet. ii. 5.

679 Ps. vi. 3

680 Ps. lxxix. 5, 8.

681 See his Life by St. Athanasius, secs. 2, 3.

682 Matt. xix. 2l.

683 Rom. xiii. 13, 14.

684 Rom. xiv. 1.

685 Eph. iii. 20.

686 See book iii. sec. 19.

687 Ps. xxx. 11.

Athanasius

Introduction and Excerpt from Expositio Fidei

www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf204.x.html

Introduction to Expositio Fidei.

The date of this highly interesting document is quite uncertain, but there is every ground for placing it earlier than the explicitly anti-Arian treatises. Firstly, the absence of any express reference to the controversy against Arians, while yet it is clearly in view in 3 and 4, which lay down the rule afterwards consistently adopted by Athanasius with regard to texts which speak of the Saviour as created. Secondly, the untroubled use of (1, note 4) to express the Sons relation to the Father. Thirdly, the close affinity of this Statement to the Sermo Major de Fide which in its turn has very close points of contact with the pre-Arian treatises. But see Prolegg. ch. iii. 1 (37).

If we are to hazard a conjecture, we may see in this a statement of faith published by Athanasius upon his accession to the Episcopate, a.d. 328. The statement proper (Hahn 119) consists of 1. 24 are an explanatory comment insisting on the distinct Existence of the Son, and on His essential uncreatedness.

The translation which follows has been carefully compared with one made by the late Prof. Swainson in his work on the Creeds, pp. 7376. Dr. Swainson there refers to a former imperfect and misleading translation (in Irons Athanasius contra Mundum) which the present editor has not seen. Dr. Swainson expresses doubts as to the Athanasian authorship of the Ecthesis, but without any cogent reason. The only point of importance is one which acquaintance with the usual language of Athanasius shews to make distinctly in favour of, and not against, the genuineness of this little tract. Three times in the course of it the Human Body, or Humanity of the Lord is spoken of as . Dr. Swainson exaggerates the strangeness of the expression by the barbarous rendering Lordly man (How would he translate ?). But the phrase certainly requires explanation, although the explanation is not difficult. (1) It is quoted by Facundus of Hermiane from the present work (Def. Tr. Cap. xi. 5), and by Rufinus from an unnamed work of Athanasius (libellus), probably the present one. Moreover, Athanasius himself uses the phrase, frequently in the Sermo Major de Fide, and in his exposition of Psalm xl. (xli.). Epiphanius uses it at least twice (Ancor. 78 and 95); and from these Greek Fathers the phrase (Dominicus Homo) passed on to Latin writers such as Cassian and Augustine (below, note 5), who, however, subsequently cancelled his adoption of the expression (Retr. I. xix. 8). The phrase, therefore, is not to be objected to as un-Athanasian. In fact (2) it is founded upon the profuse and characteristic use by Ath. of the word to designate the manhood of our Lord (see Orat. c. Ar. i. 41, 45, ii. 45, note 2. Dr. Swainson appears unaware of this in his unsatisfactory paragraph p. 77, lines 14 and foll.). If the human nature of Christ may be called (1 Tim. ii. 5) at all, there is no difficulty in its being called . (Serm. M. de F. 24 and 30), or , a phrase equated with [] in Serm. M. de F. 19 and 2831 (see also a discussion in Thilo Athan. Opp. Dogm. select. p. 2). This use of the word , if carelessly employed, might lend itself to a Nestorian sense. But Athanasius does not employ it carelessly, nor in an ambiguous context; although of course he might have used different language had he foreseen the controversies of the fifth century. At any rate, enough has been said to shew that its use in the present treatise does not expose its genuineness to cavil.

Statement of Faith.

1. We believe in one Unbegotten428 God, Father Almighty, maker of all things both visible and invisible, that hath His being from Himself. And in one Only-begotten Word, Wisdom, Son, begotten of the Father without beginning and eternally; word not pronounced429 nor mental, nor an effluence430 of the Perfect, nor a dividing of the impassible Essence, nor an issue431; but absolutely perfect Son, living and powerful (Heb. iv. 12), the true Image of the Father, equal in honour and glory. For this, he says, is the will of the Father, that as they honour the Father, so they may honour the Son also (Joh. v. 23): very God of very God, as John says in his general Epistles, And we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ: this is the true God and everlasting life (1 Joh. v. 20): Almighty of Almighty. For all things which the Father rules and sways, the Son rules and sways likewise: wholly from the Whole, being like432 the Father as the Lord says, he that hath seen Me hath seen the Father (Joh. xiv. 9). But He was begotten ineffably and incomprehensibly, for who shall declare his generation? (Isa. liii. 8), in other words, no one can. Who, when at the consummation of the ages (Heb. ix. 26), He had descended from the bosom of the Father, took from the undefiled Virgin Mary our humanity (), Christ Jesus, whom He delivered of His own will to suffer for us, as the Lord saith: No man taketh My life from Me. I have power to lay it down, and have power to take it again (Joh. x. 18). In which humanity He was crucified and died for us, and rose from the dead, and was taken up into the heavens, having been created as the beginning of ways for us (Prov. viii. 22), when on earth He shewed us light from out of darkness, salvation from error, life from the dead, an entrance to paradise, from which Adam was cast out, and into which he again entered by means of the thief, as the Lord said, This day shalt thou be with Me in paradise (Luke xxiii. 43), into which Paul also once entered. [He shewed us] also a way up to the heavens, whither the humanity of the Lord433, in which He will judge the quick and the dead, entered as precursor for us. We believe, likewise, also in the Holy Spirit that searcheth all things, even the deep things of God (1 Cor. ii. 10), and we anathematise doctrines contrary to this.

2. For neither do we hold a Son-Father, as do the Sabellians, calling Him of one but not of the same434 essence, and thus destroying the existence of the Son. Neither do we ascribe the passible body which He bore for the salvation of the whole world to the Father. Neither can we imagine three Subsistences separated from each other, as results from their bodily nature in the case of men, lest we hold a plurality of gods like the heathen. But just as a river, produced from a well, is not separate, and yet there are in fact two visible objects and two names. For neither is the Father the Son, nor the Son the Father. For the Father is Father of the Son, and the Son, Son of the Father. For like as the well is not a river, nor the river a well, but both are one and the same water which is conveyed in a channel from the well to the river, so the Fathers deity passes into the Son without flow and without division. For the Lord says, I came out from the Father and am come (Joh. xvi. 28). But He is ever 85with the Father, for He is in the bosom of the Father, nor was ever the bosom of the Father void of the deity of the Son. For He says, I was by Him as one setting in order (Prov. viii. 30). But we do not regard God the Creator of all, the Son of God, as a creature, or thing made, or as made out of nothing, for He is truly existent from Him who exists, alone existing from Him who alone exists, in as much as the like glory and power was eternally and conjointly begotten of the Father. For He that hath seen the Son hath seen the Father (Joh. xiv. 9). All things to wit were made through the Son; but He Himself is not a creature, as Paul says of the Lord: In Him were all things created, and He is before all (Col. i. 16). Now He says not, was created before all things, but is before all things. To be created, namely, is applicable to all things, but is before all applies to the Son only.

3. He is then by nature an Offspring, perfect from the Perfect, begotten before all the hills (Prov. viii. 25), that is before every rational and intelligent essence, as Paul also in another place calls Him first-born of all creation (Col. i. 15). But by calling Him First-born, He shews that He is not a Creature, but Offspring of the Father. For it would be inconsistent with His deity for Him to be called a creature. For all things were created by the Father through the Son, but the Son alone was eternally begotten from the Father, whence God the Word is first-born of all creation, unchangeable from unchangeable. However, the body which He wore for our sakes is a creature: concerning which Jeremiah says, according to the edition of the seventy translators435 (Jer. xxxi. 22): The Lord created for us for a planting a new salvation, in which salvation men shall go about: but according to Aquila the same text runs: The Lord created a new thing in woman. Now the salvation created for us for a planting, which is new, not old, and for us, not before us, is Jesus, Who in respect of the Saviour436 was made man, and whose name is translated in one place Salvation, in another Saviour. But salvation proceeds from the Saviour, just as illumination does from the light. The salvation, then, which was from the Saviour, being created new, did, as Jeremiah says, create for us a new salvation, and as Aquila renders: The Lord created a new thing in woman, that is in Mary. For nothing new was created in woman, save the Lords body, born of the Virgin Mary without intercourse, as also it says in the Proverbs in the person of Jesus: The Lord created me, a beginning of His ways for His works (Prov. viii. 22). Now He does not say, created me before His works, lest any should take the text of the deity of the Word.

4. Each text then which refers to the creature is written with reference to Jesus in a bodily sense. For the Lords Humanity437 was created as a beginning of ways, and He manifested it to us for our salvation. For by it we have our access to the Father. For He is the way (Joh. xiv. 6) which leads us back to the Father. And a way is a corporeal visible thing, such as is the Lords humanity. Well, then, the Word of God created all things, not being a creature, but an offspring. For He created none of the created things equal or like unto Himself. But it is the part of a Father to beget, while it is a workmans part to create. Accordingly, that body is a thing made and created, which the Lord bore for us, which was begotten for us438, as Paul says, wisdom from God, and sanctification and righteousness, and redemption; while yet the Word was before us and before all Creation, and is, the Wisdom of the Father. But the Holy Spirit, being that which proceeds from the Father, is ever in the hands439 of the Father Who sends and of the Son Who conveys Him, by Whose means He filled all things. The Father, possessing His existence from Himself, begat the Son, as we said, and did not create Him, as a river from a well and as a branch from a root, and as brightness from a light, things which nature knows to be indivisible; through whom to the Father be glory and power and greatness before all ages, and unto all the ages of the ages. Amen. 428See de Syn. 3, 46, 47, and the Excursus in Lightfoots Ignatius, vol. ii. pp. 90 and foll (first ed.).

429 Cf. note by Newman on de Synodis, 26 (5).

430 Cf. Newmans note (8) on de Decr. 11.

431 Or development (Gr. ) a word with Gnostic and Sabellian antecedents, cf. Newmans note 8 on de Synodis, 16.

432 This word, which became the watchword of the Acacian party, the successors of the Eusebians, marks the relatively early date of this treatise. At a later period Athanasius would not use it without qualification (see Orat. ii. 22, note 4), and later still, rejected the Word entirely as misleading (de Synodis, 53. note 9). Yet see ad Afros. 7, and Orat. ii. 34.

433 (see above, introductory remarks). The expression is quoted as used by Ath., apparently from this passage, by Rufinus (Hieron. Opp. ix. p. 131, ed. 1643), Theodoret, Dial. 3, and others. The expression Dominicus Homo used by St. Augustine is rendered Divine Man in Nicene and P. N. Fathers, Series i. vol. vi. p. 40 b.

434 (see Prolegg. ch. ii. 3 (2) b sub fin.). The distinction cannot (to those accustomed to use the Nicene Creed in English) be rendered so as to imply a real difference. The real distinction lies, not in the prefixes - and -, but in the sense to be attached to the ambiguous term

435 Heb. For the Lord hath created a new thing in the earth, A woman shall encompass a man. Cf.Orat. ii. 46, note 5.

436 The same phrase also in Serm. M. de Fid. 18.

437 , see above.

438 (1 Cor. i. 30, ). The two words are constantly confused in mss., and I suspect that , which (pace Swainson p. 78, note) the context really requires, was what Ath. wrote.

439 See also de Sent. Dionys. 17.

Pseudo-Dionysius

Excerpt from The Mystical Theology

www.ccel.org/ccel/rolt/dionysius.v.html

CHAPTER I

Wheat is the Divine Gloom.

Trinty, which exceedeth all Being, Deity, and Goodness!514 Thou that instructeth Christians in Thy heavenly wisdom! Guide us to that topmost height of mystic lore515 which exceedeth light and more than exceedeth knowledge, where the simple, absolute, and unchangeable mysteries of heavenly Truth lie hidden in the dazzling obscurity of the secret Silence, outshining all brilliance with the intensity of their darkness, and surcharging our blinded intellects with the utterly impalpable and invisible fairness of glories which exceed all beauty! Such be my prayer; and thee, dear Timothy, I counsel that, in the earnest exercise of mystic contemplation, thou leave the senses and the activities of the intellect and all things that the senses or the intellect can perceive, and all things in this world of nothingness, or in that world of being, and that, thine understanding being laid to rest,516 thou strain (so far as thou mayest) towards an union with Him whom neither being nor understanding can contain. For, by the unceasing and absolute renunciation 192of thyself and all things, thou shalt in pureness cast all things aside, and be released from all, and so shalt be led upwards to the Ray of that divine Darkness which exceedeth all existence.517

These things thou must not disclose to any of the uninitiated, by whom I mean those who cling to the objects of human thought, and imagine there is no super-essential reality beyond; and fancy that they know by human understanding Him that has made Darkness His secret place.518 And, if the Divine Initiation is beyond such men as these, what can be said of others yet more incapable thereof, who describe the Transcendent Cause of all things by qualities drawn from the lowest order of being, while they deny that it is in any way superior to the various ungodly delusions which they fondly invent in ignorance of this truth?519 That while it possesses all the positive attributes of the universe (being the universal Cause), yet in a stricter sense It does not possess them, since 193It transcends them all, wherefore there is no contradiction between affirming and denying that It has them inasmuch as It precedes and surpasses all deprivation, being beyond all positive and negative distinctions?520

Such at least is the teaching of the blessed Bartholomew.521 For he says that the subject-matter of the Divine Science is vast and yet minute, and that the Gospel combines in itself both width and straitness. Methinks he has shown by these his words how marvellously he has understood that the Good Cause of all things is eloquent yet speaks few words, or rather none; possessing neither speech nor understanding because it exceedeth all things in a super-essential manner, and is revealed in Its naked truth to those alone who pass right through the opposition of fair and foul,522 and pass beyond the topmost altitudes of the holy ascent and leave behind them all divine enlightenment and voices and heavenly utterances and plunge into the Darkness where truly dwells, as saith the Scripture, that One Which is beyond all things. For not without reason523 is the blessed Moses bidden first to undergo purification himself and then to separate himself from those who have not undergone it; and after all purification hears the many-voiced trumpets and sees many lights flash forth with pure and diverse-streaming rays, and then stands separate from the multitudes and with the chosen priests presses forward to the topmost pinnacle of the Divine Ascent. Nevertheless he meets not with God Himself, 194yet he beholdsnot Him indeed (for He is invisible)but the place wherein He dwells. And this I take to signify that the divinest and the highest of the things perceived by the eyes of the body or the mind are but the symbolic language of things subordinate to Him who Himself transcendeth them all. Through these things His incomprehensible presence is shown walking upon those heights of His holy places which are perceived by the mind; and then It breaks forth, even from the things that are beheld and from those that behold them, and plunges the true initiate unto the Darkness of Unknowing wherein he renounces all the apprehensions of his understanding and is enwrapped in that which is wholly intangible and invisible, belonging wholly to Him that is beyond all things and to none else (whether himself or another), and being through the passive stillness of all his reasoning powers united by his highest faculty to Him that is wholly Unknowable, of whom thus by a rejection of all knowledge he possesses a knowledge that exceeds his understanding.

CHAPTER II

How it is necessary to be united with and render praise to Him Who is the cause of all and above all.

Unto this Darkness which is beyond Light we pray that we may come, and may attain unto vision through the loss of sight and knowledge, and that in ceasing thus to see or to know we may learn to know that which is beyond all perception and understanding (for this emptying of our faculties is true sight and knowledge),524 and that we may offer Him that transcends 195all things the praises of a transcendent hymnody, which we shall do by denying or removing all things that arelike as men who, carving a statue out of marble, remove all the impediments that hinder the clear perceptive of the latent image and by this mere removal display the hidden statue itself in its hidden beauty.525; Now we must wholly distinguish this negative method from that of positive statements. For when we were making positive statements526 we began with the most universal statements, and then through intermediate terms we came at last to particular titles,527 but now ascending upwards from 196particular to universal conceptions we strip off all qualities528 in order that we may attain a naked knowledge of that Unknowing which in all existent things is enwrapped by all objects of knowledge,529 and that we may begin to see that super-essential Darkness which is hidden by all the light that is in existent things.

CHAPTER III

What are the affirmative expressions respecting God, and what are the negative.

Now I have in my Outlines of Divinity set forth those conceptions which are most proper to the affirmative method, and have shown in what sense Gods holy nature is called single and in what sense trinal, what is the nature of the Fatherhood and Sonship which we attribute unto It; what is meant by the articles of faith concerning the Spirit; how from the immaterial and indivisible Good the interior rays of Its goodness have their being and remain immovably in that state of rest which both within their Origin and within themselves is co-eternal with the act by which they spring from It;530 in what manner 197Jesus being above all essence531 has stooped to an essential state in which all the truths of human nature meet; and all the other revelations of Scripture whereof my Outlines of Divinity treat. And in the book of the Divine Names I have considered the meaning as concerning God of the titles Good, Existent, Life, Wisdom, Power and of the other titles which the understanding frames, and in my Symbolic Divinity I have considered what are the metaphorical titles drawn from the world of sense and applied to the nature of God; what are the mental or material images we form of God or the functions and instruments of activity we attribute to Him; what are the places where He dwells and the robes He is adorned with; what is meant by Gods anger, grief, and indignation, or the divine inebriation and wrath; what is meant by Gods oath and His malediction, by His slumber and awaking, and all the other inspired imagery of allegoric symbolism. And I doubt not that you have also observed how far more copious are the last terms than the first for the doctrines of Gods Nature and the exposition of His Names could not but be briefer than the Symbolic Divinity.532 For 198the more that we soar upwards the more our language becomes restricted to the compass of purely intellectual conceptions, even as in the present instance plunging into the Darkness which is above the intellect we shall find ourselves reduced not merely to brevity of speech but even to absolute dumbness both of speech and thought. Now in the former treatises the course of the argument, as it came down from the highest to the lowest categories, embraced an ever-widening number of conceptions which increased at each stage of the descent, but in the present treatise it mounts upwards from below towards the category of transcendence, and in proportion to its ascent it contracts its terminology, and when the whole ascent is passed it will be totally dumb, being at last wholly united with Him Whom words cannot describe.533 But why is it, you will ask, that after beginning from the highest category when one method was affirmative we begin from the lowest category where it is negative?534 Because, when affirming, the existence of that which transcends all affirmation, we were obliged to start from that which is most akin to It, and then to make the affirmation on which the rest depended; but when pursuing the negative method, to reach that which is beyond all negation, we must start by applying our negations to those qualities which differ most from the ultimate goal. Surely it is truer to affirm that God is life and goodness than that He is air or stone, and truer to deny that drunkenness or fury can be attributed to Him 199than to deny that the may apply to Him the categories of human thought.535

CHAPTER IV

That He Who is the Pre-eminent Cause of everything sensibly perceived is not Himself any one of the things sensibly perceived.

We therefore maintain536 that the universal Cause transcending all things is neither impersonal nor lifeless, nor irrational nor without understanding: in short, that It is not a material body, and therefore does not possess outward shape or intelligible form, or quality, or quantity, or solid weight; nor has It any local existence which can be perceived by sight or touch; nor has It the power of perceiving or being perceived; nor does It suffer any vexation or disorder through the disturbance of earthly passions, or any feebleness through the tyranny of material chances, or any want of light; nor any change, or decay, or division, or deprivation, or ebb and flow, or anything else which the senses can perceive. None of these things can be either identified with it or attributed unto It.

200

CHAPTER V

That He Who is the Pre-eminent Cause of everything intelligibly perceived is not Himself any one of the things intelligibly perceived.

Once more, ascending yet higher we maintain537 that It is not soul, or mind, or endowed with the faculty of imagination, conjecture, reason, or understanding; nor is It any act of reason or understanding; nor can It be described by the reason or perceived by the understanding, since It is not number, or order, or greatness, or littleness, or equality, or inequality, and since It is not immovable nor in motion, or at rest, and has no power, and is not power or light, and does not live, and is not life; nor is It personal essence, or eternity, or time; nor can It be grasped by the understanding since It is not knowledge or truth; nor is It kingship or wisdom; nor is It one, nor is It unity, nor is It Godhead538 or Goodness; nor is It a Spirit, as we understand the term, since It is not Sonship or Fatherhood; nor is It any other thing such as we or any other being can have knowledge of; nor does It belong to the category of non-existence or to that of existence; nor do existent beings know It as it actually is, nor does It know them as they actually are;539 nor can the reason attain to It to name It or to know It; nor is it darkness, nor is It light, or error, or truth;540 201nor can any affirmation or negation541 apply to it; for while applying affirmations or negations to those orders of being that come next to It, we apply not unto It either affirmation or negation, inasmuch as It transcends all affirmation by being the perfect and unique Cause of all things, and transcends all negation by the pre-eminence of Its simple and absolute nature-free from every limitation and beyond them all.542

514Lit. Super-Essential, Supra-Divine, Super-Excellent.

515Lit. Oracles i. e. to the most exalted