On God
I know that some will try to say, even on the basis of our Scriptures, that God is a body, because they find it written in Moses, “Our God is a consuming fire,” and in the Gospel according to John, “God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” Fire and spirit, in their view, will be thought to be nothing other than body. I want to ask them what they say about the statement that God is light, as John says in his letter: “God is light, and in him there is no darkness.” This is indeed the light that illuminates the whole understanding of those who can receive the truth, as is said in the thirty-fifth Psalm: “In your light we will see light.” For what else is to be called the light of God, in which one sees light, but the power of God, by which a person, once illuminated, either sees through to the truth of all things or knows God himself, who is called the truth? Such, then, is the meaning of “In your light we will see light”: that is, in your Word and Wisdom, who is your Son, in him we will see you, the Father. Because he is called light, will he be thought similar to the light of this sun? And how could anyone gain even the slightest understanding, so as to derive the cause of knowledge from this bodily light and find an understanding of the truth? If, then, they accept this assertion of ours, which reason itself has demonstrated about the nature of light, and admit that God cannot be understood to be a body on the understanding of light, a similar account will be given of the consuming fire. For what will God consume in being fire? Will he be thought to consume bodily matter, such as wood or hay or straw? And what is said in this that is worthy of the praises of God, if God is a fire consuming materials of this kind? Let us rather consider that God does indeed consume and destroy; but he consumes the evil thoughts of minds, consumes shameful deeds, consumes the desires of sin, when he enters the minds of believers; and those souls which are made capable of his Word and Wisdom, dwelling in them together with his Son according to the saying, “I and the Father will come and make our home with him,” he makes a pure temple for himself and one worthy of him, when all their bad habits and uncontrolled emotions have been consumed. To those who think, because of the saying “God is spirit,” that God is a body, I think the answer should be this. It is the custom of holy Scripture, when it wishes to designate something contrary to this denser and more solid body, to call it spirit, as when it says, “The letter kills, but the spirit gives life.” There, without doubt, by “the letter” it means bodily things, and by “the spirit” intellectual things, which we also call spiritual. The Apostle also says: “Even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart; but when anyone turns to the Lord, the veil will be taken away; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.” For until someone turns to spiritual understanding, a veil lies over his heart; and by this veil, that is, by a more material understanding, Scripture itself is said or thought to be veiled. This is what is meant by the veil laid over Moses' face when he spoke to the people, that is, when the law was read publicly. But if we turn to the Lord, where the Word of God also is, and where the Holy Spirit reveals spiritual knowledge, then the veil will be taken away, and then with unveiled face we will see the glory of the Lord in the holy Scriptures. Again, although many saints share in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit certainly cannot be understood as some body, divided into bodily parts, of which each of the saints receives a part; rather he is a sanctifying power, in which all are said to have a share who have deserved to be sanctified by his grace. And so that what we say may be more easily understood, let us take an example from things that are, however, unequal. There are many who share in the discipline or art of medicine: are we then to think that all who share in medicine take for themselves particles of some body called medicine, placed in their midst, and so receive a share in it? Or are we rather to understand that whoever with ready and prepared minds grasp an understanding of the art and discipline itself are said to share in medicine? But these examples from medicine, compared with the Holy Spirit, are not to be thought wholly similar; they serve only to prove that what is shared by many is not on that account to be thought a body. For the Holy Spirit differs greatly from the principle or discipline of medicine, since the Holy Spirit is a thinking being with an actual existence of his own, whereas medicine is nothing of the kind. But now we must pass to the very saying of the Gospel where it is written that “God is spirit,” and show how it should be understood consistently with what we have said. Let us ask when our Savior said this, to whom, and what was being asked. We find without doubt that he said this when speaking to the Samaritan woman, who thought, according to the opinion of the Samaritans, that God ought to be worshiped on Mount Gerizim: to her he said that God is spirit. For the Samaritan woman, thinking him to be one of the Jews, asked him whether God ought to be worshiped in Jerusalem or on this mountain, and said: “Our fathers all worshiped on this mountain, and you say that in Jerusalem is the place where one ought to worship.” To these opinions of the Samaritan woman, then, who thought that God was worshiped less rightly or properly either by the Jews in Jerusalem or by the Samaritans on Mount Gerizim, because of the privilege of bodily places, the Savior replied that whoever wishes to follow the Lord must give up presumption about bodily places, and said: “The hour is coming when the true worshipers will worship the Father neither in Jerusalem nor on this mountain. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” And see how fittingly he has joined truth to spirit, naming spirit by way of distinction from bodies, and truth by way of distinction from shadow or image. For those who worshiped in Jerusalem, serving the shadow and image of heavenly things, will not worship God in truth or in spirit; and likewise neither will those who worship on Mount Gerizim. Having refuted, as far as we could, every notion which suggests that anything bodily is to be understood of God, we say that in truth God is incomprehensible and beyond measure. For whatever it is that we have been able to perceive or understand about God, we must believe that he is better by many degrees than what we have perceived. Suppose we saw someone who could barely look at a spark of light or the light of a very small lamp, whose eyesight could not take in more light than we have said, and we wished to teach him about the brightness and splendor of the sun: should we not have to tell him that the splendor of the sun is unspeakably and immeasurably better and more excellent than all this light which you see? So our mind, when it is shut within the barriers of flesh and blood and made duller and more obtuse by its sharing in such matter, although it is held to be far superior in comparison with bodily nature, yet when it strives toward incorporeal things and seeks to look at them, scarcely holds the place of a spark or a lamp. And what among all intellectual, that is, incorporeal, beings is so surpassing all, so unspeakably and immeasurably excellent, as God? His nature certainly cannot be grasped or seen by the sight of the human mind, even the purest and clearest mind. It does not seem absurd, however, if for a clearer demonstration of the matter we also use another comparison. Sometimes our eyes cannot look at the nature of light itself, that is, at the substance of the sun; but by looking at its brightness, or at its rays shining in, perhaps, through windows or any small openings for light, we can consider how great is the source and fountain of bodily light itself. In the same way, then, the works of divine providence and the art of this universe are like rays of the nature of God, in comparison with his very substance and nature. Since, therefore, our mind cannot by itself see God himself as he is, it understands the parent of the universe from the beauty of his works and the beauty of his creatures. God, therefore, is not to be thought either a body or in a body, but a simple intellectual nature, admitting in himself no addition whatever, so that he may not be believed to have in himself a greater and a lesser, but is in every respect a unity (μονάς) and, so to speak, a oneness (ἑνάς), and mind, and the fountain from which all intellectual nature, or mind, takes its beginning. Now mind, in order to move or operate, needs no bodily place, nor size perceived by the senses, nor bodily shape or color, nor does it need at all any of the other things that are proper to body or matter. For this reason that simple nature, wholly mind, can have no delay or hesitation in moving or operating anything, so that an addition of this kind does not seem to limit or hinder the simplicity of the divine nature in any way, or make what is the beginning of all things turn out to be composite and diverse, many rather than one; for, being foreign to all mixture with anything bodily, it must consist of one sole form, so to speak, of deity. That mind does not need place in order to move according to its own nature is certain also from the contemplation of our own mind. For if it remains within its own measure and no dullness affects it from any cause, it will never be slowed by difference of place from acting by its own movements; nor again does it gain any increase or growth of mobility from the quality of a place. And if anyone objects, for instance, that in those who sail and are tossed by the waves of the sea the mind is somewhat less vigorous than it usually is on land, it must be believed that it suffers this not from the difference of place but from the agitation or disturbance of the body to which the mind is joined or in which it is implanted. For the human body seems to live at sea as though against nature, and therefore, through a kind of unevenness of its own, to receive the movements of the mind in a disorderly and irregular way and to transmit the mind's sharp impulses less effectively; no less than happens to people on land who are gripped by fevers. In their case it is certain that if the mind, through the force of the fevers, performs its function less well, the cause must be laid not to the place but to the disease of the body, by which the body, disturbed and confused, by no means provides the mind with its usual services along its known and natural lines, since we human beings are a living creature composed of the meeting of body and soul; for in this way it was possible for us to live on the earth. But God, who is the beginning of all things, must not be thought composite, so that no elements turn out to exist before the beginning itself, from which everything is composed that is called composite, whatever it may be. Nor does mind need bodily size in order to do anything or to move, as the eye does, which in looking at larger bodies is spread out, but is narrowed and contracted for seeing small and tiny things. Mind does indeed need the capacity for greater understanding, because it grows in understanding rather than bodily size. For the mind is not increased by bodily growth together with the body up to twenty or thirty years of age; rather, when instruction and exercises are applied, the sharpness of the intellect is polished, the powers implanted in it are called out toward understanding, and it is made capable of greater understanding, not enlarged by bodily growth but polished by the exercises of learning. It cannot receive these at once from boyhood or from birth, because the frame of the limbs, which the mind uses as instruments for its own exercise, is still weak and feeble, and can neither bear the force of working nor supply the capacity for receiving instruction. But if there are any who think that the mind itself and the soul are a body, I wish they would answer me how it receives the reasons and proofs of matters so great, so difficult and so subtle. Where does a body get the power of memory, where does it get the contemplation of invisible things, where indeed does it get the understanding of incorporeal things? How does a bodily nature investigate the disciplines of the arts and the contemplations and reasons of things? How, too, can it perceive and understand divine teachings, which are clearly incorporeal? Unless perhaps someone should think that, just as this bodily form and the very shape of the ears or eyes contribute something to hearing and seeing, and the individual body parts formed by God have some fitness, from the very quality of their form, for what they were naturally appointed to do, so too the shape of the soul or mind should be understood as aptly and suitably formed for perceiving or understanding particular things and for being moved by vital movements. But what color of mind anyone could describe or name, insofar as it is mind and moves intelligibly, I do not see. Further, to confirm and explain what we have said about the mind or soul, that it is superior to the whole bodily nature, the following may also be added. Underlying each bodily sense there is a certain substance accessible to that sense, toward which the bodily sense itself is directed. For example, colors, shape and size underlie sight; voices and sound, hearing; smells, good or bad, the sense of smell; flavors, taste; hot or cold, hard or soft, rough or smooth, touch. That the sense of the mind is much better than these senses we have mentioned is clear to all. How then does it not seem absurd that substances should underlie these inferior senses for them to be directed toward, while to this power, which is better, that is, to the sense of the mind, nothing substantial at all is subject, but the power of an intellectual nature is something that happens to bodies or follows from them? Those who say this without doubt say it to the insult of the substance which is the better part in themselves; indeed, by this an injury is done even to God himself, when they think that he can be understood through a bodily nature, so that according to them he is a body, and that which can be understood or perceived through a body; and they are unwilling to have it understood that there is a certain kinship of the mind with God, of whom the mind itself is an intellectual image, and that through this it can perceive something of the nature of the divine being, especially if it is more purified and separated from bodily matter. But perhaps these assertions may seem to have less authority with those who wish to be instructed about divine things from the holy Scriptures, and who seek to have it proved to them from there how the nature of God surpasses the nature of bodies. See, then, whether the Apostle does not say the same when he speaks of Christ, saying: “who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation.” For it is not the case, as some think, that the nature of God is visible to some and invisible to others; for the Apostle did not say “the image of God invisible to human beings” or “invisible to sinners,” but pronounces with great firmness about the very nature of God, saying, “the image of the invisible God.” John too, by saying in the Gospel, “No one has ever seen God,” clearly declares to all who can understand that there is no nature to which God is visible: not as though he were visible by nature and escaped and exceeded the sight of a frailer creature, but because by nature it is impossible for him to be seen. And if you ask me what I think also about the Only-begotten himself, whether I say that the nature of God, which is naturally invisible, is not visible even to him, do not let this seem to you at once either impious or absurd; for we will explain the reason at the right point. It is one thing to see, another to know. To be seen and to see belong to bodies; to be known and to know belong to intellectual nature. Whatever, therefore, is proper to bodies is not to be thought of either the Father or the Son; but what belongs to the nature of the divine being holds between the Father and the Son. Indeed, even in the Gospel he did not say, “No one has seen the Father except the Son, nor the Son except the Father,” but said, “No one knows the Son except the Father, nor does anyone know the Father except the Son.” From this it is clearly indicated that what among bodily natures is called seeing and being seen is, between the Father and the Son, called knowing and being known, by the power of knowledge, not by the weakness of visibility. Since, then, of an incorporeal and invisible nature neither seeing nor being seen is properly said, therefore in the Gospel the Father is not said to be seen by the Son, nor the Son by the Father, but known. If anyone puts to us the question why it is said, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God,” our assertion will, in my opinion, be strengthened all the more by it. For what else is seeing God with the heart but, as we have explained above, understanding and knowing him with the mind? For the names of the bodily sense organs are often applied to the soul, so that it is said to see with the eyes of the heart, that is, to infer something intellectual by the power of intelligence. So too it is said to hear with the ears when it perceives the sense of a deeper understanding. So too we say that it can use teeth when it chews and eats the bread of life which comes down from heaven. In the same way it is said to use the services of the other body parts, which are transferred from their bodily meaning and fitted to the powers of the soul, as Solomon also says: “You will find a divine sense.” For he knew that there are two kinds of senses in us: one kind mortal, perishable, human; the other immortal and intellectual, which he here called “divine.” By this divine sense, then, not of the eyes but of a “pure heart,” which is the mind, God can be seen by those who are worthy. You will indeed find the heart named for the mind, that is, for the intellectual power, abundantly in all the Scriptures, new and old. In this way, then, having understood the nature of God, though far below what is fitting, as the weakness of human understanding allows, let us now see what the name of Christ means.
On Christ
First we must know that the nature of his deity in Christ, which is the only-begotten Son of the Father, is one thing, and the human nature which he took up in the last times for the sake of the divine plan is another. Therefore we must first see what the only-begotten Son of God is, who is called by many different names according to circumstances or the views of those who name him. For he is called Wisdom, as Solomon said: “The Lord created me as the beginning of his ways, and for his works; before he made anything, before the ages he established me. In the beginning, before he made the earth, before he brought forth the springs of waters, before the mountains were made firm, and before all the hills, he generates me.” He is also called firstborn, as the Apostle said: “who is the firstborn of all creation.” Yet the firstborn is not by nature another than Wisdom, but one and the same. Indeed the apostle Paul also says: “Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” Let no one think, however, that we are saying something without substance when we name him the Wisdom of God: that is, to give an example, that we understand Wisdom not as some wise living being but as something that makes people wise, offering and implanting itself in the minds of those who become capable of its powers and understanding. If, then, it has once been rightly accepted that the only-begotten Son of God is his Wisdom existing as a real being, I do not know whether our mind ought to wander any further into suspecting that perhaps this very hypostasis (ὑπόστασις, that is, substance) of his has something bodily, since everything bodily is marked out by shape or color or size. And who of sound mind ever looked for shape or color or measurable size in wisdom by reason of its being wisdom? And how can anyone who knows how to understand or feel anything reverent about God think or believe that God the Father ever existed, even for a single moment, without the generation of this Wisdom? For he will say either that God was unable to generate Wisdom before he generated it, so that he later generated into being what previously was not, or that he was able and, what it is impious to say of God, was unwilling to generate. Both are plainly absurd and impious to all: either that God advanced from being unable to being able, or that, though able, he held back and delayed generating Wisdom. Therefore we know God as always the Father of his only-begotten Son, who is born of him and draws what he is from him, yet without any beginning: not only such a beginning as can be marked off by intervals of time, but not even that which the mind alone is accustomed to contemplate within itself and to perceive, so to speak, with bare intellect and spirit. We must believe, therefore, that Wisdom was generated beyond every beginning that can be spoken of or understood. Wisdom's very existence contained the whole power and shaping of the creation to come, both of the things that exist primarily and of those that follow as consequences, formed beforehand and arranged by the power of foreknowledge. On account of these very creatures, which had been as it were outlined and prefigured in Wisdom herself, Wisdom says through Solomon that she was created the beginning of the ways of God, since she contains in herself the beginnings, forms and kinds of things in the whole creation. In the same way as we have understood Wisdom to be the beginning of the ways of God, and how she is said to be created, namely as forming beforehand and containing in herself the kinds and beginnings of the whole creation, in this way too she is to be understood to be the Word of God, because she discloses to all others, that is, to the whole creation, the meaning of the mysteries and secrets which are contained within the Wisdom of God; and she is called the Word because she is, as it were, the interpreter of the secrets of the mind. For this reason that saying written in the Acts of Paul also seems to me rightly spoken, that “this is the Word, a living being.” But John, in a more exalted and glorious way, at the beginning of his Gospel, defining the Word as God by a proper definition, says: “And the Word was God, and this was in the beginning with God.” Anyone who assigns a beginning to the Word of God or the Wisdom of God take care that he does not rather hurl his impiety against the unbegotten Father himself, since he denies that he was always Father, always generated the Word, and always had Wisdom, in all preceding times or ages or whatever else can be named. This Son, then, is also the truth and the life of all things that are; and rightly. For how could the things that were made live except from life? Or how could the things that are exist in truth unless they came down from the truth? Or how could there be rational beings unless the Word or reason preceded them? Or how could they be wise unless there were wisdom? But since it was going to happen that some would fall away from life and bring death upon themselves by the very fact of falling away from life (for death is nothing other than departing from life), and since it would certainly not be fitting that those who had once been brought into being by God to live should perish utterly, there had to be, before death, a power such as would destroy the death to come; there had to be a resurrection, which was formed in our Lord and Savior, a resurrection consisting in the very Wisdom and Word and life of God. Then, since it was going to happen that some of those who were created, because good was present in them not naturally, that is, substantially, but as a contingent quality, would not be willing to remain always unchangeable and unalterable and to continue always in the same goods with an even and measured balance, but would turn and change and fall from their state, the Word and Wisdom of God became the way. It is called the way because it leads to the Father those who walk along it. Whatever, then, we have said of the Wisdom of God will be fittingly applied and understood also of the Son of God as life, as the Word, as the truth, as the way and as the resurrection; for all these names are given from his works and powers, and in none of them can anything bodily be understood, even in the slightest notion, that might seem to denote size or shape or color. For the children of human beings or of other animals that we see among us correspond to the seed of their fathers, or of the mothers in whose womb they are formed and nourished, and have from them whatever it is that they take up and carry into this light when they come forth. But it is monstrous and unlawful to make God the Father, in the generation of his only-begotten Son and in the Son's existence, equal to any human being or other creature that reproduces; rather there must be something exceptional and worthy of God, to which no comparison at all can be found, not only among things but not even in thought or imagination, such that human thought could grasp how the unbegotten God becomes Father of the only-begotten Son. For his generation is as eternal and everlasting as the brightness that is generated from light. For he does not become Son from outside, through an adoption of the Spirit, but is Son by nature. Let us see, however, how what we say is supported also by the authority of divine Scripture. The apostle Paul says that the only-begotten Son is “the image of the invisible God” and “the firstborn of all creation”; and writing to the Hebrews he says of him that he is “the brightness of the glory and the exact representation of his being.” We also find in the book called the Wisdom of Solomon a certain description of the Wisdom of God, written in this way: “For she is,” it says, “a vapor of the power of God, and a most pure emanation (ἀπόρροια) of the glory of the Almighty; therefore nothing defiled can fall into her. For she is the brightness of eternal light, and the spotless mirror of the working of God, and the image of his goodness.” We say, then, as we said above, that Wisdom has her existence nowhere else than in him who is the beginning of all things, from whom she was also born. And this Wisdom, because he is the one who alone is Son by nature, is therefore also called only-begotten. Let us now see what is to be understood also by his being called the image of the invisible God, so that through this too we may observe how God is rightly called the Father of his Son; and let us first consider those things which in human usage are commonly called images. Sometimes that is called an image which is painted or carved on some material, such as wood or stone. Sometimes the one who is born is called the image of the his parent, when the features of the parent are in no way falsely reproduced in the likeness of the one born. I think, then, that the first example may be applied to the man who was made in the image and likeness of God, whom we will consider more carefully, God willing, when we come to explain that passage in Genesis. With the second comparison may be compared the image of the Son of God, of whom we are now speaking, also in this respect, that he is the invisible image of the invisible God, just as according to the history we say that Seth his son is the image of Adam. For it is written: “And Adam fathered Seth according to his own image and according to his own form.” This image also contains the unity of nature and substance of the Father and the Son. For if whatever the Father does, the Son also does likewise, then in that the Son does all things just as the Father does, the image of the Father is formed in the Son, who is certainly born of him like an act of will proceeding from the mind. And therefore I think that the will of the Father ought to be sufficient for what the Father wills to exist. For in willing he uses no other way than that which is produced by the decision of the will. In this way, then, the Son's existence too is generated by him. This must be accepted above all by those who confess that nothing is unbegotten, that is, unborn, except God the Father alone. For care must be taken that no one fall into the absurd stories of those who picture to themselves certain emanations, so as to divide the divine nature into parts and, as far as in them lies, to divide God the Father; for even to suspect this lightly of an incorporeal nature is not only the height of impiety but also the extreme of folly, and it is not at all consistent with reason that a substantial division of an incorporeal nature could be conceived. Rather, then, as will proceeds from mind, and neither cuts off any part of the mind nor is separated or divided from it, in some such way is the Father to be thought to have begotten the Son, his image, so that, as he himself is invisible by nature, so he generated an image that is also invisible. For the Son is the Word, and therefore nothing perceptible to the senses is to be understood in him. He is Wisdom, and in wisdom nothing bodily is to be suspected. He is the true light, which enlightens every human being coming into this world, but he has nothing in common with the light of this sun. Our Savior, therefore, is the image of the invisible God the Father: with respect to the Father himself he is the truth, but with respect to us, to whom he reveals the Father, he is the image through which we come to know the Father, whom no one knows except the Son and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him. And he reveals him by being himself understood; for by whomever he himself has been understood, the Father too is consequently understood, according to what he himself said: “He who has seen me has seen the Father also.” But since we have introduced the saying of Paul about Christ, where he says that he is “the brightness of the glory of God and the exact representation of his being,” let us see what is to be understood from this. “God is light,” according to John. The brightness, then, of this light is the only-begotten Son, proceeding from him inseparably as brightness from light and enlightening the whole creation. For in accordance with what we have set out above, how he is “the way” and leads to the Father, how he is “the Word” interpreting and revealing to the rational creation the secrets of wisdom and the mysteries of knowledge, and how he is also “the truth” or “the life” or “the resurrection,” we ought consequently to understand also the work of the brightness; for through the brightness what light itself is, is understood and perceived. This brightness, offering itself more gently and softly to the fragile and weak eyes of mortals, and gradually, as it were, teaching and accustoming them to bear the brightness of the light, when it has removed from them everything that clouds and hinders their sight, according to the Lord's saying, “Remove the beam from your eye,” makes them capable of receiving the glory of the light, becoming in this too a kind of mediator between human beings and the light. But since he is said by the Apostle to be not only the brightness of glory but also the exact representation of his substance or underlying reality, it does not seem to me an idle exercise of the understanding to consider how something other than the very substance of God, whatever that substance and underlying reality is called, can be said to be the figure of his substance. See, then, whether perhaps the Son of God, who is called his Word and Wisdom, and who alone knows the Father and reveals him to whom he wills, that is, to those who are capable of his Word and Wisdom, may be said to express the figure of his substance and underlying reality precisely in that he makes God understood and known; that is, when Wisdom first outlines in herself the things she wishes to reveal to others, by which God is known and understood by them, this may be called the exact representation of the substance of God. And so that it may be understood still more fully how the Savior is the figure of the substance or underlying reality of God, let us also use an example which, although it does not fully or properly signify the matter we are treating, may be taken up for this one purpose only: to show that the Son, who was in the form of God, emptying himself, seeks through this very self-emptying to show us the fullness of the divine being. Suppose, for instance, that a statue were made of such size as to fill the whole world, so that because of its immensity it could be seen by no one; and suppose another statue were made, similar in every respect in the shape of its limbs and the features of its face, in form and material, but without the immensity of size, so that those who could not view and see the immense one might, on seeing this one, be confident that they had seen the other, because it preserved all the features of the limbs and face, and the very form and material, with a likeness entirely indistinguishable. By some such likeness the Son of God, emptying himself of equality with the Father and showing us the way to know him, is made the exact representation of his substance, so that we who were unable to look at the glory of pure light set in the greatness of his divine being may, through his becoming brightness for us, find the way to see the divine light by looking at the brightness. The comparison of the statues, since it belongs to material things, is admitted for no other purpose than this: that the Son of God, placed in the very small form of a human body, showed by the likeness of his works and power the immense and invisible greatness of the Father in himself, when he said to his disciples, “He who sees me sees the Father also,” and “I and the Father are one.” With these is also to be understood the similar saying, “The Father is in me, and I in the Father.” Let us now see also how we should understand what we read written in the Wisdom of Solomon, who says this of wisdom: that she is “a kind of vapor of the power of God, and a most pure emanation (aporrhoea) of the glory of the Almighty, and the brightness of eternal light, and the spotless mirror of the working or power of God, and the image of his goodness.” In defining these things about God, he indicates by each of them certain things that are present in the Wisdom of God: for he names the power of God, and glory, and eternal light, and working, and goodness. He says, however, that wisdom is a vapor not of the glory of the Almighty, nor of eternal light, nor of the working of the Father, nor of his goodness, for it was not fitting that vapor be ascribed to any of these; but with complete propriety he says that wisdom is the vapor of the power of God. We must therefore understand the power of God, by which he is strong, by which he establishes or holds together or governs all things visible and invisible, which is sufficient for all things whose providence he exercises, to all of which he is present as if to one. Of this whole power, so great and so immeasurable, the vapor and, so to speak, the very vigor comes to be with its own distinct existence; and although it proceeds from the power itself as will from mind, yet the will of God itself nonetheless becomes a power of God. There comes to be, then, another power existing in its own distinct identity, as the word of Scripture says, a kind of vapor of the first and unbegotten power of God, drawing from there what it is; and there is no time when it was not. For if anyone should wish to say that it did not exist before but came into existence later, they should say why the Father who gave it existence did not do so before. And if he gives some beginning once for all, from which beginning this vapor proceeded from the power of God, we will ask again why not even before that which he called the beginning; and so, always inquiring about what is earlier and working backward through our questioning, we will arrive at this understanding: that since God was always able and willing, it was never fitting, nor could any reason exist, that he should not always have had the good that he willed. From this it is shown that this vapor of the power of God always existed, having no beginning but God himself. Nor was it fitting that there be any other beginning than God himself, from whom it both is and is born. And according to the Apostle, who says that “Christ is the power of God,” he is to be called not only the vapor of the power of God but power from power. Let us look also at the saying that she is “a most pure emanation (aporrhoea) of the glory of the Almighty”; and let us first consider what “the glory of the Almighty” is, and then we will perceive what its emanation is. Just as no one can be a father if there is no son, nor a lord without a possession or a servant, so neither can God be called almighty if there are none over whom he may exercise his power; and therefore, for God to be shown almighty, all things must exist. For if anyone would have it that some ages or periods, or whatever else he wishes to call them, passed when the things that have been made were not yet made, he will undoubtedly show that in those ages or periods God was not almighty and later became almighty, from the time when he began to have those over whom to exercise power; and in this way he will seem to have received some advance and to have come from worse to better, since there is no doubt that it is better for him to be almighty than not to be. And how will it not seem absurd that God, when he did not have some of those things which it was fitting for him to have, should later through some advance have come to have them? But if there is never a time when he was not almighty, then the things through which he is called almighty must also necessarily exist, and he must always have had those over whom he exercised power and which were governed by him as king or ruler. Of these we will speak more fully in their proper places, when we come to discuss his creatures. But I think it necessary to give a warning now, even if briefly, since the question of wisdom is being discussed by us, how wisdom is the most pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty: so that no one thinks that the title “Almighty” is prior in God to the birth of Wisdom, through which he is called Father, since Wisdom, which is the Son of God, is said to be the most pure emanation of the glory of the Almighty. Let anyone who would like to suspect this hear what Scripture most clearly declares, saying, “In wisdom you have made all things,” and what the Gospel teaches, that “all things were made through him, and without him nothing was made”; and they should understand from this that the title “Almighty” cannot be older in God than that of “Father,” for it is through the Son that the Father is almighty. But since he said that it is the glory of the Almighty of which Wisdom is the emanation, we are given to understand that Wisdom also has a share in the glory of omnipotence, Wisdom through whom God is called almighty. For through Wisdom, which is Christ, God holds power over all things, not only by the authority of one who rules but also by the willing service of his subjects. And so that you may know that the omnipotence of the Father and of the Son is one and the same, just as he is one and the same God and Lord with the Father, hear how John speaks in the Revelation: “These things says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” For who else is he who is to come but Christ? And just as no one ought to be offended that, though the Father is God, the Savior is also God, so too, when the Father is called almighty, no one ought to be offended that the Son of God is also called almighty. For in this way what he himself says to the Father will be true: “All mine are yours and yours are mine, and I am glorified in them.” If, then, all things that are the Father's are Christ's, and among all things that are, the Father is also almighty, without doubt the only-begotten Son also must be almighty, so that the Son may have all that the Father has. “And I am glorified,” he says, “in them.” For “at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of things in heaven, on earth and under the earth, and every tongue will confess that the Lord Jesus is in the glory of God the Father.” The emanation of the glory of God, then, insofar as he is almighty, is Wisdom herself, pure and clear, glorified as the emanation of omnipotence or of glory. And so that what the glory of omnipotence is may be more clearly understood, we add this as well. God the Father is almighty because he holds power over all things, that is, over heaven and earth, sun, moon and stars, and all that is in them. And he exercises power over them through his Word, since at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of things in heaven, on earth and under the earth. And if every knee bows to Jesus, without doubt it is Jesus to whom all things are subjected, and he it is who exercises power in all things and through whom all things are subjected to the Father; for it is through wisdom, that is, by word and reason, not by force and necessity, that all things are subjected. And therefore his glory lies in the very way he holds all things; and this is the most pure and clear glory of omnipotence, that all things are subjected by reason and wisdom, not by force and necessity. The “most pure and clear glory” of wisdom is said fittingly enough to distinguish it from that glory which is not purely or sincerely called glory. For every nature which is changeable and mutable, even if it is glorified in works of righteousness or wisdom, yet, by the very fact that it has righteousness or wisdom as a contingent quality, and what is contingent can also be lost, its glory cannot be sincere and most clear. But the Wisdom of God, which is his only-begotten Son, since it is in all respects unchangeable and immutable, and every good in it is substantial and can never be changed or altered, therefore its glory is proclaimed pure and sincere. Thirdly, wisdom is said to be the brightness of eternal light. The force of this we have already explained in what precedes, when we introduced the comparison of the sun and the brightness of its rays and showed, as far as we could, how this should be understood. We will add, however, this one point as well. That is properly called everlasting or eternal which neither had a beginning of its existence nor can ever cease to be what it is. This is indicated in John when he says that “God is light.” And his Wisdom is the brightness of his light, not only in that he is light but also in that he is everlasting light, so that his Wisdom is the eternal and everlasting brightness. If this is fully understood, it clearly declares that the existence of the Son comes down from the Father himself, but not in time, nor from any other beginning except, as we have said, from God himself. Wisdom is also named the spotless mirror of the ἐνέργεια, that is, of the working, of God. We must first understand, then, what the working of the power of God is: it is a kind of vigor, so to speak, by which the Father works, whether when he creates, or provides, or judges, or arranges and distributes each thing in its own time. Just as in a mirror the image formed through the mirror moves or acts with the very same acts and movements, deviating in nothing, as all the movements by which the one who looks into the mirror moves or acts, so too Wisdom wishes to be understood of herself, when she is named the spotless mirror of the Father's power and working; just as the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the Wisdom of God, declares of himself the works, saying, “Whatever the Father does, these the Son also does likewise”; and again he says that “the Son can do nothing of himself, except what he sees the Father doing.” Since, then, the Son in no way at all differs or varies from the Father in the power of his works, and the work of the Son is not other than the Father's, but one and the same movement, so to speak, is in all, therefore he named him a spotless mirror, so that by this no dissimilarity whatever of the Son to the Father may be understood. How, indeed, can the things said by some about the likeness or imitation of a disciple to his master, or that the Son makes in bodily matter what had first been formed by the Father in spiritual substances, be consistent with this, when in the Gospel the Son is said to do not similar things, but the same things in the same way? It remains to inquire what the image of his goodness is. In this, I think, it is fitting to understand the same things that we expressed above about the image formed through a mirror. For the original goodness is without doubt the Father, from whom the Son is born; and he, being in all respects the image of the Father, will without doubt fittingly be called also the image of his goodness. For there exists in the Son no other, second goodness besides that which is in the Father. For this reason the Savior himself also rightly says in the Gospel that “No one is good but one, God the Father,” so that by this it may be understood that the Son is not of another goodness but of that alone which is in the Father, of which he is rightly called the image, because he is from nowhere else than from that original goodness itself, so that no goodness other than the Father's seems to be in the Son. Nor is there any dissimilarity or difference of goodness in the Son. Therefore it should not be thought a kind of blasphemy that it is said, “No one is good but one, God the Father,” as if it were thought that either Christ or the Holy Spirit is therefore denied to be good; but, as we said above, the original goodness is to be understood in God the Father, from whom the Son is born and the Holy Spirit proceeds; and they without doubt reproduce in themselves the nature of his goodness, which is in that fountain from which the Son is born and the Holy Spirit proceeds. Now if any other things are called good in the Scriptures, whether an angel, or a man, or a servant, or a treasure, or a good heart, or a good tree, all these are said by an extended use, since they contain in themselves a goodness that is contingent, rather than part of their essential nature. It would be a great task, and one for another work or time, to gather all the names of the Son of God: for example, how he is the true light, or the door, or righteousness, or sanctification, or redemption, and countless others, and to explain for what reasons, or from what powers or dispositions, each of them is given. But content with what we have discussed above, let us go on to investigate the rest as well.
On the Holy Spirit
It follows now that we should inquire, as briefly as we can, about the Holy Spirit. All who in any way perceive that there is a providence confess that God is unbegotten, who created and arranged all things, and they acknowledge him as the parent of the universe. That he has a Son, however, we are not the only ones to declare, although this seems quite astonishing and incredible to those who are regarded as philosophers among Greeks and barbarians; yet some even of them seem to have held this opinion, when they confess that all things were created by the Word or reason of God. We, however, according to the faith of his teaching, which we hold for certain to be divinely inspired, believe that it is possible to set out and bring to human knowledge the higher and more divine account of the Son of God by no other means than by that Scripture alone which was inspired by the Holy Spirit, that is, the Gospels and the apostolic writings, and also the law and the prophets, as Christ himself asserted. But concerning the existence of the Holy Spirit no one could have had even a suspicion except those who were familiar with the law and the prophets, or those who claim to believe in Christ. For about God the Father, although no one is able to speak [worthily], it is possible to gain some understanding from the visible creatures and from what the human mind perceives by nature; and it is possible, moreover, for this to be confirmed from the holy Scriptures. And about the Son of God, although no one knows the Son except the Father, yet from the divine Scriptures the human mind is taught how it ought to think of him too, and not only from the New but also from the Old Testament, through the deeds of the saints which are referred figuratively to Christ, from which both his divine nature and the human nature taken up by him can be discerned. As to what the Holy Spirit is, many passages of Scripture have taught us, as David says in Psalm 50, “And do not take your Holy Spirit from me”; and in Daniel it is said, “the Holy Spirit who is in you.” In the New Testament we are taught by abundant passages of testimony, when the Holy Spirit is described as descending on Christ, and when the Lord himself breathed on the apostles after the resurrection, saying, “Receive the Holy Spirit.” And the angel says to Mary, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you.” And Paul says that “no one can say ‘Lord Jesus’ except in the Holy Spirit.” And in the Acts of the Apostles the Holy Spirit was given in baptism through the laying on of the apostles' hands. From all these we have learned that the substance of the Holy Spirit is of such authority and dignity that saving baptism is not completed except by the authority of the most excellent Trinity of all, that is, by naming the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and that the name of the Holy Spirit is joined to the unbegotten God the Father and his only-begotten Son. Who, then, is not amazed at how great is the majesty of the Holy Spirit, when he hears that one who has spoken a word against the Son of Man may hope for forgiveness, but that one who has blasphemed against the Holy Spirit has no forgiveness either in the present age or in the age to come? That all things were created by God, and that there is no creature which has not received from him its very existence, is proved by many statements of Scripture, which reject and refute what is falsely alleged by some, whether about matter coeternal with God or about unbegotten souls, in whom they would have it that God implanted not so much their existence as equality and order. For in the little book called the Shepherd, the book of the angel of repentance, which Hermas wrote, it is said: “First of all believe that there is one God, who created and arranged all things; who, when nothing existed before, made all things to be; who contains all things, but is himself contained by none.” Similar things are also written in the book of Enoch. Yet up to the present we have been able to find no statement in the holy writings by which the Holy Spirit is said to be a thing made or a creature, not even in the way in which we showed above that Solomon speaks of Wisdom, or in which we discussed how the names of Life or Word and the other titles of the Son of God are to be understood. The Spirit of God, therefore, who was carried over the waters, as is written at the beginning of the making of the world, I think is none other than the Holy Spirit, as far as I am able to understand, as we also showed when we were explaining those very passages, not according to the history, however, but according to the spiritual understanding. Some of our predecessors have indeed observed that in the New Testament, wherever the Spirit is named without an addition indicating what kind of spirit it is, it should be understood of the Holy Spirit; for example, “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy and peace,” and so on; and likewise, “Having begun in the Spirit, are you now made perfect in the flesh?” We, however, think that this distinction can be kept also in the Old Testament, as when it says: “He who gives spirit to the people on the earth, and spirit to those who walk on it.” For without doubt everyone who “walks on the earth,” that is, on earthly and bodily things, is someone who shares in the Holy Spirit, receiving him from God. My Hebrew teacher also used to say that the two seraphim in Isaiah, who are described with six wings each, calling to one another and saying, “Holy, holy, holy, Lord of hosts,” were to be understood of the only-begotten Son of God and of the Holy Spirit. And we think that what is said in the song of Habakkuk, “In the midst of the two living creatures” (or “of the two lives”) “you will be known,” is also to be understood of Christ and of the Holy Spirit. For all knowledge of the Father is gained through the Son's revelation in the Holy Spirit, so that both of these, which according to the prophet are called either living creatures or lives, are the cause of the knowledge of God the Father. For just as it is said of the Son that “no one knows the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wishes to reveal him,” the Apostle says the same of the Holy Spirit when he says, “But God has revealed it to us through his Spirit; for the Spirit searches all things, even the depths of God.” And again in the Gospel the Savior, mentioning the divine and deeper teachings which his disciples could not yet grasp, says to the apostles: “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now; but when the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father, comes, he will teach you all things and remind you of all that I have said to you.” And so we must think that just as the Son, who alone knows the Father, reveals him to whom he wills, so the Holy Spirit, who alone searches even the depths of God, reveals God to whom he wills. “For the Spirit breathes where he wills.” Nor are we to think that the Spirit, too, knows through the Son's revealing. For if the Holy Spirit knows the Father through the Son's revealing, he has then come from ignorance to knowledge; and it is surely as impious as it is foolish to confess the Holy Spirit and to ascribe ignorance to him. For it is not that he was something else before he was the Holy Spirit, and came by advancement to be the Holy Spirit, so that one might dare to say that when he was not yet the Holy Spirit he did not know the Father, but after he received knowledge he was made the Holy Spirit. If that were so, the Holy Spirit himself would never be counted in the unity of the Trinity, that is, with the unchangeable God the Father and his Son, unless he too had always been the Holy Spirit. Of course, when we say “always” or “was,” or adopt any other such term of temporal meaning, it must be taken simply and with allowance; for the meanings of these terms are temporal, but the things of which we speak, though they are named in temporal terms in the course of discussion, by their nature surpass every understanding of temporal sense. It seems right, however, to inquire what the reason is why one who is reborn by God for salvation has need of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and will not receive salvation unless the Trinity is complete; and why it is not possible to become someone who shares in the Father or of the Son without the Holy Spirit. In discussing these things it will undoubtedly be necessary to describe the special working of the Holy Spirit, and the special working of the Father and the Son. I think, then, that the working of the Father and the Son is both in saints and in sinners, in rational human beings and in animals without speech, and also in things without soul, and in absolutely all things that exist; but that the working of the Holy Spirit by no means extends to things without soul, nor to those that are living but without speech; nor is it found even in those who are rational but are set in wickedness and not at all turned toward better things. But I think that the work of the Holy Spirit is in those alone who are already turning to better things and walking in the ways of Christ Jesus, that is, who are engaged in good actions and remain in God. That the working of the Father and the Son is both in saints and in sinners is shown by the fact that all who are rational are those who share in the Word, that is, of reason, and by this they bear implanted in themselves certain seeds, as it were, of wisdom and righteousness, which is Christ. And all things that exist share in him who truly is, who said through Moses, “I am who I am”; and this participation in God the Father reaches all, both righteous and sinners, rational and irrational, and absolutely all things that exist. The Apostle too shows that all have a share in Christ, saying: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down), or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ (that is, to call Christ back from the dead). But what does Scripture say? ‘The word is near, in your mouth and in your heart.’” By this he signifies that Christ is in the heart of all, insofar as he is the Word or reason, by sharing in whom they are rational. And the saying in the Gospel, “If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin,” makes clear to those who understand reason up to what time a person does not have sin and from what age he is liable to sin, and it is plain and evident how people are said to have sin from their participation in the Word or reason: that is, from the time they have been made capable of understanding and knowledge, when the reason implanted within has suggested to them the distinction between good and evil; and when they have begun to know what evil is, if they do it, they become liable to sin. And this is what he means by saying that people have no excuse for their sin, from the time when the divine word or reason has begun to show them in their heart the distinction between good and evil, so that by it they ought to flee and beware of what is evil; for “to one who knows the good and does not do it, it is sin.” Again, that all human beings are not outside communion with God, the Gospel teaches in this way, when the Savior says: “The kingdom of God does not come in a way that can be observed; nor will they say, ‘Look, here,’ or ‘there’; but the kingdom of God is within you.” But we must also see whether perhaps the same thing is meant by what is written in Genesis, where it says: “And he breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul.” If this is understood to have been given generally to all human beings, then all human beings have a share in God. But if this is to be understood as said of the Spirit of God, since Adam too is found to have prophesied about some things, then it can be taken as given not generally but to the saints. Indeed, at the time of the flood, when all flesh had corrupted the way of God, it is written that God said, as of the unworthy and sinners, “My Spirit will not remain in these people forever, because they are flesh.” By this it is clearly shown that the Spirit of God is taken away from all who are unworthy. In the Psalms also it is written: “You will take away their spirit, and they will fail and return to their earth. You will send out your Spirit, and they will be created, and you will renew the face of the earth.” This is clearly said of the Holy Spirit, who, when sinners and the unworthy have been taken away and destroyed, himself “creates” a new people for himself and “renews the face of the earth,” when through the grace of the Spirit they put off the old self with its deeds and begin to walk in newness of life. And therefore it is fittingly said of him that the Holy Spirit will dwell not in all, nor in those who are flesh, but in those whose earth has been renewed. For this reason, indeed, the grace and revelation of the Holy Spirit was given after baptism through the laying on of the apostles' hands. And our Savior, too, after the resurrection, when the old things had passed away and all things had been made new, himself the new man and the firstborn from the dead, said to the apostles, who had also been renewed through faith in his resurrection, “Receive the Holy Spirit.” This, no doubt, is what the Savior and Lord himself indicated in the Gospel when he denied that new wine could be put into old wineskins and commanded that new wineskins be made, that is, that people should walk in newness of life, so that they might receive the new wine, that is, the newness of the grace of the Holy Spirit. In this way, then, the working of the power of God the Father and of the Son extends without distinction over every creature, but we find that participation in the Holy Spirit is held by the saints alone. Therefore it is said, “No one can say ‘Lord Jesus’ except in the Holy Spirit.” And even the apostles themselves are scarcely at last thought worthy to hear, “You will receive the power of the Holy Spirit coming upon you.” For this reason I think it also follows that one who has sinned against the Son of Man is worthy of forgiveness, because one who is someone who shares in the Word or reason of God, if he ceases to live according to reason, seems to have fallen into ignorance or folly and on this account to deserve forgiveness; but one who has already been counted worthy of participation in the Holy Spirit and has turned back is said, by this very fact and deed, to have blasphemed against the Holy Spirit. Let no one think, indeed, that because we have said that the Holy Spirit is granted to the saints alone, while the benefits or workings of the Father and the Son reach the good and the bad, the just and the unjust, we have by this preferred the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son, or are asserting a greater dignity for him; that would certainly be quite inconsistent. For we have described the particular character of his grace and work. Further, nothing in the Trinity is to be called greater or less, since the fountain of the one divine being holds all things together by his Word and reason, and sanctifies by the spirit of his mouth those things that are worthy of sanctification, as is written in the Psalm: “By the word of the Lord the heavens were established, and all their power by the spirit of his mouth.” There is also a special working of God the Father, besides that by which he naturally granted existence to all things. There is also a special ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ toward those on whom he naturally confers rationality, by which it is granted to them, in addition to their being, to be well. There is also another grace, that of the Holy Spirit, which is granted to the worthy, ministered through Christ but worked by the Father, according to the merit of those who become capable of it. This the apostle Paul most clearly indicates when, explaining the one and the same power of the Trinity, he says: “There are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; and there are varieties of ministries, but the same Lord; and there are varieties of workings, but the same God who works all in all. But to each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for what is beneficial.” From this it is most clearly indicated that there is no separation in the Trinity, but that what is called the gift of the Spirit is manifested through the Son and worked by God the Father. “But all these are worked by one and the same Spirit, dividing to each as he wills.” Having in this way declared these things about the unity of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, let us now return to the order we had begun to discuss. God the Father grants to all that they exist; participation in Christ, insofar as he is the Word or reason, makes them rational. From this it follows that they are worthy either of praise or of blame, because they are capable of virtue and wickedness. Consequently, therefore, the grace of the Holy Spirit is also present, so that those beings which are not holy in substance may be made holy by participation in him. Since, then, they have first their existence from God the Father, secondly their rationality from the Word, and thirdly their holiness from the Holy Spirit, those which have previously been sanctified through the Holy Spirit are again made capable of Christ, insofar as he is the righteousness of God; and those who have deserved to advance to this degree through the sanctification of the Holy Spirit will nonetheless obtain the gift of wisdom according to the power and working of the Spirit of God. And this I think Paul means when he says that to some is given the word of wisdom, to others the word of knowledge, according to the same Spirit. And indicating each distinction of gifts, he refers them all to the fountain of the universe, and says: “There are varieties of workings, but one God, who works all things in all.” For this reason the working of the Father, which grants existence to all, is found the more glorious and magnificent when each one, through participation in Christ as wisdom, as knowledge and as sanctification, advances and comes to higher degrees of progress; and through being made purer and more sincere by participation in the Holy Spirit, he is made worthy and receives the grace of wisdom and knowledge, so that, all the stains of pollution and ignorance being driven out and cleansed, he may receive so great an advance in sincerity and purity that what he received from God, his existence, may be such as is worthy of God, who granted him existence purely and perfectly, so that what exists may be as worthy as he who made it exist. For in this way the one who is such as he who made him wished him to be will receive from God the power to exist always and to remain forever. And so that this may happen, and that the things made by him may be present unceasingly and inseparably to him who is, it is the work of Wisdom to instruct and train them and bring them to perfection by the strengthening and unceasing sanctification of the Holy Spirit, through which alone they can receive God. Thus, by the unceasing work of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit toward us, renewed at every stage of progress, we may perhaps at last, with difficulty, see the holy and blessed life; and when after many struggles we have been able to reach it, we ought so to continue in it that no weariness of that good ever takes hold of us; but the more we perceive of that blessedness, the more our desire for it is enlarged and increased, as we ever more eagerly and with greater capacity receive and hold the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. But if weariness ever takes hold of any of those who have stood on the highest and perfect step, I do not think that he is suddenly emptied and falls away; rather he must slip down gradually and by degrees; so that it may sometimes happen that, if a brief lapse occurs and he quickly comes to his senses and returns to himself, he does not fall utterly but can draw back his foot and return to his position, and again make firm what had slipped through negligence.
On Defection, or Falling Away
To show this decline or falling away of those who have acted rather carelessly, it does not seem absurd to use the comparison of an example. Suppose, then, there is someone who has been gradually trained in some skill or art, for instance geometry or medicine, until he has come to perfection, having shaped himself over a long time by instruction and exercises so as to take on the discipline of that art completely: to such a one it can certainly never happen that he falls asleep skilled and wakes up unskilled. For it is not fitting now to bring forward or mention what happens through some injury or weakness, since these do not suit the comparison and example proposed. According to what we have proposed, then, so long as that geometer or doctor exercises himself in the study of his art and in its rational principles, the knowledge of the discipline remains with him. But if he neglects the exercises and abandons his diligence, at first, through negligence, a few things gradually slip away, then more, and so over a long time everything passes into oblivion and is entirely erased from memory. It can indeed happen that, when he has only begun to fall away and is still being corrupted by a small negligence, if he is roused and quickly returns to himself, he may restore what has only recently been lost and recover what had been taken from him by what is still only a slight loss from memory. Let us now transfer this to those who have devoted themselves to the knowledge and wisdom of God, whose learning and diligence surpass all other disciplines in incomparable ways, and let us consider, according to the form of the comparison proposed, what the acquisition of knowledge is and what its erasure; especially since we hear from the Apostle what is said of the perfect, that face to face they see the glory of the Lord through the revelation of mysteries. But in our wish to show the divine benefits bestowed on us through the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, which Trinity is the fountain of all holiness, we have said these things by way of a digression, and we thought we should touch, if only briefly, on the subject of the soul, since it had come up, as we were discussing the closely related subject of rational nature. More fittingly, however, we will discuss in its proper place, God granting it to us through Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit, the whole of rational nature, which is distinguished into three kinds and forms. This blessed and ruling (ἀρχική) power, then, that is, the power that holds rule over all things, we call the Trinity. This is the good God and kindly Father of all, at once the beneficent power (εὐεργετικὴ δύναμις) and the creative (δημιουργική), that is, the power of doing good, of creating and of providing. It is both absurd and impious to suppose that these powers of God were ever idle, even for a moment. For it is not permissible even to suspect lightly that these powers, through which God is chiefly understood, as is fitting, ever ceased from works worthy of them and were inactive. For we must not think that they were hindered from outside, since they are in God, or rather are God; nor again must we believe that, when nothing stood in their way, they were reluctant to act and to do what was worthy of them, or neglected to do it. And therefore no moment at all can be conceived in which that beneficent power did not do good. For this reason it follows that there always existed those to whom it did good, namely its works or creatures, and that, doing good, it distributed its benefits among them in due order and according to merit by the power of its providence. And through this it seems to follow that there was never a time when God was not creator, benefactor and provider. But here again human understanding is dulled and hemmed in: how can it be understood that, for as long as God has existed, creatures too have always existed and have had existence, so to speak, without beginning, when they must without doubt be believed to have been created and made by God? Since, then, there is this conflict of human thoughts and understandings with one another, very strong arguments meeting and resisting on both sides and each pulling the mind of the one who considers them over to its side, this occurs to us, within the slight and very narrow grasp of our mind, as something that can be confessed without any danger to piety: that God the Father always existed, always having his only-begotten Son, who, according to what we set out above, is also called Wisdom. This, then, is the Wisdom in whom God always “rejoiced when the world was completed,” so that by this God may be understood always to rejoice. In this Wisdom, then, who was always with the Father, the creation was always present, outlined and formed, and there was never a time when the prefiguration of the things that were to be was not with Wisdom. In this way, perhaps, we will seem, within our weakness, to think something reverent about God: neither calling creatures unbegotten and coeternal with God, nor, on the other hand, saying that God, having done nothing good before, turned to doing it; since that word is true which is written, “In wisdom you have made all things.” And if “all things” were made “in wisdom,” then, since Wisdom always existed, the things which were later also made in substance were always “in Wisdom” by way of prefiguration and preformation. And I think that Solomon, perceiving or understanding this, says in Ecclesiastes: “What is it that has been made? The very thing that is to be. And what is it that has been created? The very thing that is to be created. And there is nothing new under the sun. If anyone speaks and says, ‘See, this is new,’ it has already been in the ages that were before us.” If, then, the individual things that are “under the sun” already existed in those “ages that were before us,” since “there is nothing new under the sun,” then without doubt all things, whether categories or kinds, always existed, and perhaps even individually. In any case, what is shown is this: that God did not begin to be creator at some point, not having been so before.
On Rational Natures
After the discussion of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, which we have briefly set out as far as we were able, it follows that we should also say a little about rational natures, their kinds and ranks, and the offices both of the holy and of the evil powers, and also about those who are in some way intermediate between these good and evil ones and are still placed in the contest and struggle. For we find in the holy Scriptures a great many names of certain orders and offices, both of holy beings and of their opposites; we will first set these out, and then try, as far as we can, to discuss what they mean. There are certain holy angels of God, whom Paul calls ministering spirits, appointed for service for the sake of those who inherit salvation. In the same holy Paul we find, drawn I know not from where, the naming of certain thrones, dominions, principalities and powers; and after listing these, as though perceiving that there are still other rational offices and orders besides those he had mentioned, he says of the Savior: “who is above every ruler and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the age to come.” By this he plainly shows that there are certain others besides those he mentioned, which are named in this age, though they were not enumerated by him now and perhaps not understood by anyone else; and that there are others which are not named in this age, but will be named in the age to come. Next, it must be known that every rational being which departs from the limits and ordinances of reason is without doubt in sin, through transgression of what is right and just. Every rational creature, then, is capable of praise and blame: of praise if, in accordance with the reason it has in itself, it advances to better things; of blame if it departs from the reason and course of what is right; for which reason it is also rightly subject to pains and punishments. And this is to be thought also of the devil himself and of those who are with him and are called his angels. Their titles, however, must also be explained, so that we may know what these beings are of whom we must speak. The name of devil, then, and Satan, and the evil one is indicated in many passages of Scripture, and he is described as the enemy of God. Certain angels of the devil are also named, and also the prince of this world, who, whether he is the devil himself or someone else, has not yet been clearly declared. Certain princes of this world are also said to have a kind of wisdom that will be destroyed; but whether these princes are the same as those principalities against whom we wrestle, or others, does not seem to me easy for anyone to pronounce. After the principalities, powers also are named, against whom we wrestle and the struggle takes place, and also against the princes of this world and the rulers of this darkness; and certain spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places are named by Paul himself. And what are we to say of the evil spirits and unclean demons who are named in the Gospels? Then certain heavenly beings, too, are called by a similar name, but they are said to bend the knee, or to be about to bow it, at the name of Jesus; and also things on earth and under the earth, which Paul lists in order. In a place where we are discussing rational natures, it is not fitting to be silent even about ourselves, human beings, who are called a rational animal; nor should we idly pass over the fact that among us human beings too certain different orders are named, when it is said: “The portion of the Lord is his people Jacob, Israel the line of his inheritance.” The other nations are called the portion of the angels, since “when the Most High divided the nations and scattered the sons of Adam, he set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of the angels of God.” And therefore, together with the other rational natures, the account of the human soul too must be examined. Since, then, so many and such great names of orders and offices have been mentioned, under which it is certain that there are substances, we must ask whether God, the founder and creator of all things, made some of them so holy and blessed that they can receive nothing at all of the opposite; and whether he made some such that they could become capable of both virtue and wickedness; or whether we are to think that he made some so that they are wholly incapable of virtue, and others wholly unable to receive wickedness but able only to remain in blessedness, and others such as can receive either. And so that our first inquiry may arise from the names themselves, let us consider whether the holy angels, from the time they have existed, were always holy, are holy and will be holy, and have never received nor been able to receive any occasion of sin. Then let us also consider whether those who are called holy principalities began, as soon as they were created by God, to exercise rule over some who were subject to them, and whether those were created such and made for this, to be subordinate and subject. Likewise also those which are called powers: whether they were created such and for this very purpose, to exercise power, or whether this is a merit and reward of virtue by which they came to that power and dignity. And also those who are called thrones or seats: whether they deserved that seat and stability of blessedness at the same time as they were brought into existence, so that they possess it by the Creator's will alone; or whether in those called dominions their dominion was not added to them for the merit of their progress but given as a privilege of their creation, and is therefore in a certain way inseparable from them and natural. If we accept this, so that the holy angels and holy powers and blessed seats and glorious powers and magnificent dominions are thought to possess those powers and dignities and glories substantially, it will undoubtedly seem to follow that those named in the opposing offices must be understood in the same way: so that those principalities against whom we wrestle are thought not to have later taken on that purpose of struggling against and resisting all good by turning away from the good through freedom of choice, but to have had it substantially from the moment they existed; and likewise the authorities and powers, and that wickedness in them is not younger and later than their substance. Those also whom he called rulers of the world of darkness and princes are said to derive their ruling and holding of darkness not from perversity of purpose but from the necessity of their creation. The very logic of consequence will compel us to understand the same about the spiritual forces of wickedness, the evil spirits and the unclean demons. But if it seems absurd to understand this so of the evil and opposing powers, as it certainly is absurd, that the cause of their wickedness should be removed from the purpose of their own choice and necessarily ascribed to their creator, how are we not compelled to confess similar things about the good and holy powers also, namely, that the good is not substantial in them, which we have shown to be clearly so only in Christ and in the Holy Spirit, and certainly also in the Father? For the nature of the Trinity has been shown to have nothing composite, such that these things should seem to happen to it as consequences. It remains, therefore, that in every creature it was a result of its own work and its own movements that those powers which appear to hold rule over others, or to exercise power or dominion, were preferred and set over those whom they are said to rule or over whom they exercise power by merit, and not by the privilege of their creation. But so that we may not seem to assert such great and difficult matters prompted only by the logic of consequence, and to compel our hearers' agreement merely by conjectures, let us see whether we can also take some support from the holy Scriptures, by whose authority these things may be established more credibly. First we will set out what holy Scripture contains about the evil powers; then we will investigate the others too, as far as the Lord chooses to enlighten us, so that in matters so difficult [readers] may attain what is nearer the truth, or what ought to be held according to the rule of piety. We find, then, in the prophet Ezekiel two prophecies written to the prince of Tyre, the first of which might perhaps seem to someone, before he hears the second as well, to be said of some man who was prince of the Tyrians. So for the present we will take nothing from that first one; but since the second is most evidently such that it must be understood not at all of a man but of some higher power which fell from higher places and was cast down to lower and worse ones, we will take our example from it. By it may be most clearly shown that these opposing and evil powers were not founded or created such by nature, but came from better to worse and were turned to the worse; and that those blessed powers, too, are not of such a nature that they cannot receive the opposite if they so will and become negligent and do not guard the blessedness of their state with all care. For if he who is called the prince of Tyre is related to have been among the saints, and to have been spotless, and placed in the paradise of God, and adorned also with a crown of splendor and beauty, how is one who was such to be thought inferior to any of the saints? For he is described as having himself been a crown of splendor and beauty and as having walked spotless in the paradise of God; and how can anyone think that such a one was not one of those holy and blessed powers which, being placed in blessedness, must be believed to be endowed with no other honor than this? But let us see at last what the words of the prophecy themselves teach us. “And the word of the Lord came to me,” it says, “saying: Son of man, take up a lament over the prince of Tyre, and say to him: This is what the Lord God says: You were the seal of likeness and a crown of splendor in the delights of paradise; you were adorned with every good stone or gem, and clothed with sardius and topaz and emerald and carbuncle and sapphire and jasper, set in silver and gold, and agate and amethyst and chrysolite and beryl and onyx; and you filled your treasuries and your storehouses within yourself with gold. From the day you were created with the cherubim, I placed you on the holy mountain of God. You were among the fiery stones, you were spotless in your days, from the day you were created, until wrongdoings were found in you; by the multitude of your trading you filled your storehouses with wickedness, and you sinned and were wounded from the mountain of God. And the cherub cast you out from among the fiery stones; and your heart was lifted up in your splendor; your discipline was corrupted with your beauty. Because of the multitude of your sins I cast you to the earth before kings; I gave you up to be a spectacle and a mockery, because of the multitude of your sins and your wrongdoings; by your trading you polluted your holy things. And I will bring fire from among you, and it will devour you, and I will make you ashes and cinders on the earth in the sight of all who see you; and all who knew you among the nations will mourn over you. You have become destruction, and you will not exist any more forever.” Since these things are said so, who, hearing “You were the seal of likeness and a crown of splendor in the delights of paradise,” or hearing that “from the time you were created with the cherubim I placed you on the holy mountain of God,” could weaken their meaning so far as to suspect that they were said of some human being, even a holy one, not to speak of the prince of Tyre? Or what fiery stones will he think there are, among which a human being could live? Or who could be understood to have been spotless from the very day he was created, in whom later at some time wrongdoings were found, and who is then said to have been cast down to the earth? This certainly signifies that it is said of one who, not being on the earth, was cast down to the earth; and his holy things too are said to have been polluted. These things about the prince of Tyre from the prophet Ezekiel, which refer to an opposing power, we have set out; by them it is most clearly demonstrated that this power was formerly holy and blessed, and fell from that blessedness from the time wickedness was found in it, and was sunk to the earth, and was not such by nature and creation. They think, then, that these things are said of a certain angel who was allotted the office of governing the Tyrian nation, to whom the care of their souls also seems to have been entrusted. But what Tyre, or what souls of Tyrians, we ought to understand, whether this city situated in the regions of the province of Phoenicia or some other of which this one we know on earth is a figure, and whether the souls of the Tyrians are those of this city or of those who belong to that Tyre which is understood spiritually, does not seem to be a question for this place, so that we do not seem to investigate in passing into matters so great and so hidden, which certainly require a work and effort of their own. Again, from the prophet Isaiah we are taught similar things about another opposing power. For he says: “How has Lucifer fallen from heaven, who rose in the morning! He who sent out to all the nations has been broken and dashed to the ground. But you said in your mind: I will ascend into heaven; above the stars of heaven I will set my throne; I will sit on a lofty mountain above the lofty mountains that are toward the north; I will ascend above the clouds; I will be like the Most High. But now you will be sunk into the underworld and into the foundations of the earth. Those who see you will wonder at you and say: This is the man who provoked the whole earth, who shook kings, who made the whole world a desert, who destroyed cities, and did not release those who were in chains. All the kings of the nations have slept in honor, each in his own house; but you will be cast out on the mountains like a loathsome corpse, with the many dead who were pierced with swords and went down into the underworld. As a garment clotted and stained with blood will not be clean, so neither will you be clean, because you have ruined my land and killed my people; you will not remain forever, most evil offspring. Prepare your sons for slaughter for the sins of your father, so that they do not rise and possess the earth as an inheritance and fill the earth with wars; and I will rise up against them, says the Lord of hosts, and I will cause their name to perish, and their remnant and their descendants.” By these words it is most clearly shown that he fell from heaven who was formerly Lucifer and who rose in the morning. For if, as some think, he was of the nature of darkness, how is he said to have formerly been Lucifer? Or how could he rise in the morning who had nothing of light in himself? The Savior, too, teaches us about the devil, saying: “Look, I saw Satan fallen from heaven like lightning.” For he was once light. And our Lord, who is the truth, also compared the power of his own glorious coming to lightning, saying: “For as the lightning shines from the height of heaven to its height, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.” And yet he compares this one too to lightning and says that he fell from heaven, to show by this that he too was once in heaven, and had a place among the saints, and shared in this light in which all the saints share, by which angels become angels of light and the apostles are called by the Lord the light of the world. In this way, then, this one too was once light, before he transgressed and fell to this place, and his glory was turned into dust, which is properly the lot of the impious, as the prophet also says; from this he was also called the prince of this world, that is, of the earthly dwelling. For he exercised rule over those who followed his wickedness, since “this whole world” (and by world I now mean this earthly place) “lies in the evil one,” and in this apostate. That he is an apostate, that is, a runaway, the Lord also says in Job: “You will draw out with a hook the dragon, the apostate,” that is, the runaway. It is certain that the dragon is understood to be the devil himself. If, then, the opposing powers are named and said once to have been spotless, and to be spotless belongs substantially to none except the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, but holiness in every creature is a contingent quality, and what is contingent can also be lost; and if these opposing powers were once spotless and were among those which still remain spotless: by this it is shown that no one is either substantially or naturally spotless, nor substantially polluted. And from this it follows that it lies with us and with our own movements whether we are blessed and holy, or through laziness and carelessness turn from blessedness to wickedness and ruin, to such a degree that an excessive progress, so to speak, in wickedness, if someone neglects himself so far, may bring him to the state of becoming what is called an opposing power.
On the End or Consummation
An end or consummation seems to be the mark of things perfected and completed. This reminds us at this point that anyone who has conceived the desire to read and understand such matters must bring a mature and trained mind to understanding things so demanding and difficult, so that if he has had no practice in questions of this kind, they do not seem pointless and unnecessary to him; or, if he bears a mind already prejudiced and preoccupied with other views, he does not think them heretical and contrary to the church's faith, not so much convinced by reason as deciding by the prejudice of his own mind. These things are indeed said by us with great fear and caution, as discussing and examining rather than laying down as certain and defined. For we have indicated above which matters must be settled by clear doctrine, which I think we have done as far as we could when we spoke of the Trinity. But now we are exercising ourselves, as best we can, in the manner of discussion rather than of definition. The end and consummation of the world, then, will come when each one is subjected to punishments according to what his sins deserve, a time which God alone knows, when each will pay what he deserves. We think, indeed, that the goodness of God through his Christ will call back the whole creation to one end, even his enemies being subdued and subjected. For holy Scripture says this: “The Lord said to my Lord, Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies the footstool of your feet.” And if what the prophetic word means by this is not clear enough to us, let us learn from the apostle Paul, who says more openly that Christ must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. And if not even this so clear statement of the Apostle has sufficiently taught us what it is for the enemies to be put under his feet, hear him further in what follows: “For all things must be subjected to him.” What, then, is the subjection by which all things must be subjected to Christ? I think it is that very subjection by which we too desire to be subject to him, by which the apostles and all the saints who have followed Christ are subject to him. For the term subjection, by which we are subjected to Christ, indicates the salvation, which is from Christ, of those who are subjected; as David also said: “Should not my soul be subject to God? For from him is my salvation.” Looking, then, to such an end, when all enemies will be subjected to Christ, and when the last enemy, death, will be destroyed, and when the kingdom will be handed over to God the Father by Christ, to whom all things are subjected, let us, I say, from such an end of things contemplate their beginnings. For the end is always like the beginning; and therefore, as there is one end of all things, so one beginning of all things must be understood; and as there is one end of many things, so from one beginning come many differences and varieties, which in turn, through the goodness of God, submission to Christ and the unity of the Holy Spirit, are called back to one end, which is like the beginning: namely all those who, bending the knee at the name of Jesus, have by this very act declared the signs of their subjection, those of things in heaven, on earth and under the earth, in which three terms the whole universe is indicated; those, that is, who from that one beginning were arranged, each according to his own movements and varieties, in different orders according to merit. For goodness was not present in them substantially, as in God and his Christ and in the Holy Spirit. In this Trinity alone, which is the author of all things, goodness is present substantially; the others have it as a contingent quality that can be lost, and they are in blessedness only when they share in holiness and wisdom and in the divine being itself. But if they neglect and disregard such participation, then, by the fault of their own laziness, one more quickly and another more slowly, one more and another less, each becomes himself the cause of his own slip or fall. And since, as we have said, this slip or fall, by which each one declines from his state, contains very great diversity according to the movements of mind and purpose, so that one declines more lightly, another more gravely, to lower things, here lies the just judgment of God's providence, that to each one there comes, according to the diversity of his movements, what is deserved by his departure and disturbance. Of those, indeed, who remained in that beginning which we have described as like the end to come, some in the ordering and arrangement of the world are allotted the angelic order, others that of powers, others of principalities, others of authorities, so that they may exercise power over those who need to have a power over their head; others the order of thrones, having the office of judging or ruling those who need this; others dominion, no doubt over servants; all of which divine providence conferred on them according to their merit and the progress by which they had advanced in the participation and imitation of God, by a fair and just judgment. Those, however, who have been moved from their state of first blessedness, yet not moved beyond remedy, have been made subject to be arranged and ruled by the holy and blessed orders we described above; and by their help, reformed by beneficial instructions and disciplines, they may return and be restored to the state of their blessedness. From these, I think, as far as I am able to perceive, this order of the human race was established, which in the age to come, or in the ages that follow, when there will be a new heaven and a new earth according to Isaiah, will certainly be restored to that unity which the Lord Jesus promises when he says to God the Father about his disciples: “I do not pray for these only, but also for all who will believe in me through their word, that they all may be one, as I am in you, Father, and you in me, so also they may be one in us”; and again where he says: “that they may be one, as we also are one, I in them and you in me, that they too may be perfected in one.” As the apostle Paul also confirms, saying: “Until we all attain to the unity of the faith, to the mature person, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.” And as the same Apostle urges us, placed even in the present life in the Church, in which there is certainly a figure of the kingdom to come, to this same likeness of unity, saying: “That you all say the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfected in one and the same mind and in one and the same judgment.” It must be known, however, that some who fell from that one beginning of which we spoke above have given themselves up to such unworthiness and wickedness that they have been judged unworthy of this instruction or training by which the human race in the flesh is instructed and trained with the help of the heavenly powers; on the contrary, they are even the adversaries and opponents of those who are being trained and instructed. For this reason all this life of mortals has its contests and struggles, since those who have fallen without any restraint from a better state, who are called the devil and his angels, and the other orders of wickedness which the Apostle named among the opposing powers, struggle and fight against us. Now whether any of these orders that act under the rule of the devil and obey his wickedness will at some time in the ages to come be able to turn back to goodness, because there is in them the faculty of free choice, or whether a persistent and deeply rooted wickedness is turned by habit into a kind of nature, you yourself who read must judge: whether this part will in fact never be entirely out of harmony with that final unity, either in these visible, temporal ages or in the invisible, eternal ones. Meanwhile, however, both in these temporal ages which are seen and in those which are not seen and are eternal, all these beings are arranged according to order, reason, measure and the worth of their merits: so that some in the first, others in the second, and some even in the last times, through greater and heavier punishments, long ones endured, so to speak, for many ages, are renewed and restored by harsher corrections, first by the instructions of angels, then also by the powers of higher ranks; and so, advanced step by step to higher things, they reach those things that are invisible and eternal, having passed through, in a kind of course of instruction, each of the offices of the heavenly powers. From this, I think, the logic of the matter itself seems to show that each rational nature can, passing from one order to another, go through each to all and from all to each, while each one undergoes various movements of progress or decline according to its own movements and efforts, by the faculty of free choice. Since Paul says that some things are visible and temporal, and others besides these invisible and eternal, we ask how these things that are seen are temporal: whether because there will be nothing at all after these in all those periods of the age to come in which that dispersion and division of the one beginning is restored to one and the same end and likeness; or because the outward form of the things seen passes away, though their substance is not wholly destroyed. And Paul seems to confirm what we said second, when he says, “For the form of this world is passing away.” David too seems to show the same when he says: “The heavens will perish, but you will remain; and they will all grow old like a garment, and like a cloak you will change them, and like a garment they will be changed.” For if the heavens will be changed, what is changed certainly does not perish; and if the form of the world passes away, it is not a total extermination or destruction of the material substance that is indicated, but a certain change of quality and transformation of form. Isaiah too, when he says in prophecy that there will be a new heaven and a new earth, undoubtedly suggests a similar understanding. For the renewal of heaven and earth, the transformation of the form of this world, and the change of the heavens will undoubtedly be prepared for those who, walking by that way which we showed above, are making for that end of blessedness to which even the enemies themselves are said to be subjected, the end in which God is said to be all in all. If anyone thinks that at this end material, that is, bodily, nature will perish entirely, I can in no way conceive how so many and so great substances could live and exist without bodies, since it is proper to the nature of God alone, that is, of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, to be understood to exist without material substance and without any association of bodily addition. Another will perhaps say that at that end all bodily substance will be so pure and cleansed that it can be thought of as like the ether, the fine substance of the heavens and of a kind of heavenly purity and clearness. But how the matter will be, God alone knows for certain, and any who are his friends through Christ and the Holy Spirit.
On Incorporeal and Corporeal Beings
Let what we have discussed above about rational natures stand as set out in general terms, treated and discussed by way of inference rather than as defined doctrine, following the place in which we explained, as far as we could, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Let us now see, then, what we ought to discuss next according to our doctrine, that is, according to the faith of the Church. All souls and all rational natures were made or created, whether they are holy or wicked; all of these according to their own nature are incorporeal; but even in being incorporeal they were nonetheless made, since all things were made by God through Christ, as John teaches in a general way in the Gospel, saying: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. This was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him nothing was made.” The apostle Paul, describing the things that were made by kinds, numbers and rank, discusses them in this way, to show that all things were made through Christ, saying: “And in him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, whether visible or invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers; all things were created through him and in him, and he is before all, and he is the head.” He clearly declares, then, that all things were made and created in Christ and through Christ, whether visible, which are bodily, or invisible, which I think are none other than the incorporeal and spiritual powers. Of those which he had spoken of generally as bodily or incorporeal, he then, as it seems to me, lists the kinds: thrones, dominions, rulers, authorities, powers. These things have been said by us in advance because we wish to come in due order, by inference, to the inquiry about the sun and moon and stars: whether they too should be counted among the principalities, because they are said to have been made for ἀρχάς, that is, for the rule of the day or of the night; or whether they are to be thought to hold only this rule of day and night, which they exercise by giving light, and yet not to be princes of that order of principalities. Yet when it is said that all things were made through him and all things were created in him, whether things in heaven or things on earth, there can be no doubt that those things which are in the firmament, which is certainly called heaven, in which these lights are said to be set, are also numbered among heavenly things. Then, since the course of our discussion has clearly found that all things were made or created, and that among the things made there is nothing that does not admit good and evil and is not capable of both, how will it be thought consistent, what some even of our own people think about the sun and moon and stars, that they are unchangeable and incapable of the opposite? Some have thought this even of the holy angels, and the heretics also of souls, which among them are called spiritual natures. First, then, let us see what reason itself finds about the sun, moon and stars, whether what some think is right, that they are strangers to change; and as far as possible let the statement of the holy Scriptures be brought in first. For Job seems to show that not only can the stars be subject to sins, but that they are in fact not clean from the contagion of sin. For it is written this way: “Even the stars are not clean in his sight.” This is certainly not meant of the brightness of their body, as if we were to say, for example, “the garment is not clean”; for if it were so understood, it would undoubtedly reflect badly on the Creator, if anything unclean were charged in the brightness of their body. For if they can neither take on a brighter body for themselves by their own diligence nor a less pure one by laziness, why should the stars be blamed as not clean, when they will not be praised for being clean? But so that these things may be understood more clearly, we must first inquire whether it is right to understand them to be living and rational beings; then whether their souls came into existence together with their bodies or seem to be prior to their bodies; and also whether after the consummation of the age they are to be understood to be released from their bodies, and whether, as we cease from this life, so they too will cease from illuminating the world. Although to inquire into this may seem a kind of boldness, yet since we are moved by enthusiasm to grasp the truth, it does not seem absurd to search out and test what is possible for us according to the grace of the Holy Spirit. We think, then, that they can be shown to be living beings by this, that they are said to receive commandments from God, which is certainly done only to rational living beings. He says, therefore: “I have given a command to all the stars.” And what are those commands? Namely, that each star in its own order and its own courses should give the world the amount of brightness granted to it. For those called planets move in some orders, and those called ἀπλανεῖς (fixed) in others. In this it is most clearly shown that the movement of no body can be brought about without a soul, and that things that are living can never be without movement. And since the stars move with such order and such reason that their course has never at any time been seen to be hindered in any way, is it not utterly foolish to say that so great an order, so great an observance of discipline and reason, is required of or fulfilled by irrational things? In Jeremiah, indeed, the moon is even called the queen of heaven. If, then, the stars are living and rational beings, there will undoubtedly seem to be among them some progress and decline. For what Job says, “The stars are not clean in his sight,” seems to me to indicate some such understanding. Now as to those beings which the course of the discussion has found to be living and rational, we must examine whether they seem to have been given souls together with their bodies at the time when Scripture says that “God made two great lights, the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night, and the stars,” or whether he implanted the spirit not with the bodies themselves but from outside, after the bodies had been made. I indeed suspect that the spirit was implanted from outside, but it will seem worth the effort to show this from the Scriptures. For by conjecture the assertion will seem easy, but by the testimonies of the Scriptures it is certainly more difficult to affirm. By conjectures, then, it can be shown thus. If the soul of a human being, which is certainly inferior while it is a human soul, is shown to have been not formed with the body but properly implanted from outside, much more is this so of those living beings that are called heavenly. For as regards human beings, how will the soul of him who displaced his brother in the womb, that is, Jacob, seem to have been formed together with the body? Or how was the soul formed or molded together with the body of him who, while still in his mother's womb, was filled with the Holy Spirit? I mean John, leaping in his mother's womb and stirring with great joy because the voice of Mary's greeting had come to the ears of his mother Elizabeth. How was the soul of that one too formed and molded together with the body, who is said to have been known to God before he was formed in the womb, and to have been sanctified by him before he came out from the womb? Otherwise God might seem to fill some with the Holy Spirit not by judgment and according to merit, and to sanctify them undeservedly. And how can we escape that saying, “Is there injustice with God? By no means”? Or that one: “Is there favoritism with God?” For this follows from that defense which asserts that souls come into existence together with bodies. As far, then, as can be conceived from comparison with the human condition, I think it follows that this must be held much more of the heavenly beings, which both reason itself and the authority of Scripture seem to show even in the case of human beings. But let us see whether we can find in holy Scripture any indication properly concerning these heavenly beings themselves. The apostle Paul says this: “For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it in hope, because the creation itself will be set free from the bondage of corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.” To what futility, I ask, was the creation subjected, or what creation, or how unwillingly, or in what hope? And in what way will the creation itself be set free from the bondage of corruption? Elsewhere too the Apostle himself says: “For the expectation of the creation waits for the revelation of the children of God.” And again elsewhere he says: “And not only we, but the creation itself groans and is in pain until now.” So we must inquire what its groaning is, and what its pains are. First, then, let us see what is the futility to which the creation was subjected. I think that the futility is nothing other than bodies; for although the body of the stars is of the fine substance of the upper air, it is still material. For this reason Solomon too, it seems to me, addresses the whole bodily nature, as in a way burdensome and as slowing the vigor of spirits, in this way: “Utter futility, all is futility, said the Preacher; all is futility. For I looked,” he says, “and saw all things that are under the sun, and look, all is futility.” To this futility, then, the creation was subjected, especially that creation which holds the greatest and most distinguished rule of its work in this world: that is, the sun, moon and stars are said to be subjected to futility, being placed in bodies and assigned the office of giving light to the human race. “And not willingly,” he says, “was this creation subjected to futility.” For it did not undertake by its own will to give service to futility, but because he who subjected it willed it, because of him who subjected it, who promised those who were subjected to futility not by their own will that, when the service of his magnificent work is completed, they will be set free from this bondage of corruption and futility, when the time of the redemption of the glory of the children of God has come. Having received this hope, and hoping for the fulfillment of this promise, the whole creation meanwhile groans now, as having affection for those whom it serves, and suffers patiently, hoping for what has been promised. Consider also whether perhaps that saying of Paul can be applied to those who, though unwillingly, yet by the will of him who subjected them and in the hope of the promises, were subjected to futility, where he says: “For I would desire to be released, or to return, and to be with Christ; for it is far better.” For I think that the sun too might similarly say, “I would desire to be released, or to return, and to be with Christ; for it is far better.” And Paul indeed adds, “But to remain in the flesh is more necessary for your sake”; while the sun may say, “But to remain in this heavenly and shining body is more necessary for the sake of the revelation of the children of God.” The same is to be thought and said of the moon and the stars. Let us now see what the freedom of the creation is, or its release from bondage. When Christ has handed over the kingdom to God the Father, then these living beings too, having first become the kingdom of Christ, will be handed over together with the whole kingdom to be ruled by the Father; so that when God is all in all, these too, since they are among all, may have God in them as in all.
On the Angels
I think the same reasoning must be applied to the angels also, and we must not suppose that it happens by chance that this office is assigned to this angel: for example, to Raphael the work of curing and healing, to Gabriel the oversight of wars, to Michael the care of the prayers and earnest requests of mortals. For we must not think that they deserved these offices otherwise than that each received them by his own merits, according to the enthusiasm and virtues which they displayed before the framing of this world; and that then in the archangelic order this or that kind of office was assigned to each, while others deserved to be enrolled in the order of angels and to act under this or that archangel, or this or that leader or chief of his order. All these things, as I have said, were ordered not by chance and without discrimination but by the most fitting and just judgment of God, and arranged according to merit, he himself judging and approving: so that to one angel the church of the Ephesians should be entrusted, to another that of the Smyrnaeans; that one angel should be Peter's, another Paul's; and then, for each of the least who are in the Church, which angels should be assigned to each, who also daily see the face of God; and also which angel should be the one who camps around those who fear God. All these things, certainly, must not be thought to be done by accident or by chance, nor because they were made such by nature, so that the Creator is not accused of unfairness in this too; but we must believe that they are conferred according to merits and virtues, and according to each one's vigor and ability, by God, the most just and most fair governor of all. [We must take care] not to fall into the foolish and impious stories of those who imagine spiritual natures to be different, and for this reason founded by different founders, both among the heavenly beings and among the souls of human beings; since it seems absurd to them, as it truly is absurd, that different natures of rational creatures should be ascribed to one and the same Creator, and yet they do not know the cause of that diversity. For they say it does not seem consistent that one and the same Creator, with no cause of merits existing, should impose on some the power of dominion and subject others to those who rule, give rule to some and make others subjects of rulers. All of this, as I think, the logic of the reasoning we have set out above disproves and overturns, by which it is shown that the cause of the diversity and variety in each of the creatures arises from their own movements, more eager or more sluggish, toward virtue or toward wickedness, and not from unfairness in the one who arranges them. But so that this may more easily be recognized to be so among the heavenly beings, let us bring forward examples from what has been done or is done among human beings, so that from things visible we may consequently contemplate also things invisible. They affirm that Paul and Peter were without doubt of the spiritual nature. Since, then, Paul is found to have acted against piety in persecuting the Church of God, and Peter committed such a serious sin that, when the servant girl at the door questioned him, he affirmed with an oath that he did not know who Christ was, how did these men, who according to them are spiritual, fall into sins of this kind? Especially since they are accustomed often to assert and say that a good tree cannot bear bad fruit. And if a good tree certainly cannot bear bad fruit, while according to them Peter and Paul were from the root of a good tree, how are they to be thought to have borne such very bad fruits? And if they reply with what they usually invent, that it was not Paul who persecuted but some other unidentified person who was in Paul, and that it was not Peter who denied but another who denied in Peter, why then did Paul, if he had not sinned at all, say, “I am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God”? And why did Peter himself weep most bitterly, if another had sinned? By this all their absurdities are refuted. According to us, however, there is nothing in any rational creature that is not capable of both good and evil. But because we say that there is no nature that cannot receive evil, we do not therefore affirm that every nature has received evil, that is, has been made evil; just as one may say that the nature of every human being has received the capacity to sail, yet it does not follow that every human being will sail; and again, it is possible for every human being to learn the art of grammar or medicine, yet it is not by that shown that every human being is a doctor or a grammarian. So if we say that there is no nature which cannot receive evil, it is not by that indicated that it has in fact received evil; and again, there is no nature which does not receive good, and yet not every nature is therefore proved to have received what is good. For according to us not even the devil himself was incapable of good; but because he could receive good, it does not follow that he also willed it or applied himself to virtue. For, as we are taught by the examples we brought forward from the prophets, he was once good, when he lived in the paradise of God among the cherubim. Just as he, then, had in himself the faculty of receiving either virtue or wickedness, and, turning away from virtue, turned with his whole mind to evil, so also the other creatures, since they have the faculty of either, flee evil by freedom of choice and hold firmly to the good. There is, therefore, no nature which does not admit good or evil, except the nature of God, which is the fountain of all good things, and of Christ; for he is wisdom, and wisdom certainly cannot admit folly; and he is righteousness, and righteousness will certainly never admit unrighteousness; and he is the Word or reason, which certainly cannot be made irrational. He is also light, and it is certain that darkness does not take hold of the light. Likewise the nature of the Holy Spirit, which is holy, does not admit pollution; for it is holy naturally or substantially. But if any other nature is holy, it has its sanctification from the reception or inspiration of the Holy Spirit, not possessing this from its own nature but as a contingent quality, and for this reason what is contingent can also be lost. So too one can have righteousness as a contingent quality, and therefore it is possible for it to fall away. And one has wisdom likewise as a contingent quality, although it is placed in our power, by our enthusiasm and the merit of our life, to become wise if we devote ourselves to wisdom; and if we always keep up that enthusiasm, we always share in wisdom, and it comes to us more or less, according either to the merit of our life or the measure of our enthusiasm. For the goodness of God, as is fitting for him, calls and draws all things to that blessed end where all pain and sorrow and sighing fall away and flee. I think, then, as it seems to me, that the preceding discussion has sufficiently shown that it is not without discrimination or by some chance that the principalities hold their rule or the other orders each obtain their office, but that they have attained the rank of this dignity according to their merits, although it is not for us either to know or to ask what those acts were by which they deserved to come into that order. But it is enough to know this much to demonstrate the fairness and justice of God, that, according to the statement of the apostle Paul, “there is no favoritism with God,” who rather distributes all things according to the merits and progress of each. Neither, then, does the office of angels exist except from merit, nor do the powers exercise power except from their progress, nor do those which are called seats, that is, powers of judging or ruling, administer except from merit, nor do dominions rule contrary to merit. And this is the one supreme and most excellent order of rational creatures in the heavenly places, arranged in a glorious variety of offices. In the same way we must also think of the opposing powers, which have given themselves to that place and office, so that their being principalities or powers or rulers of the world of darkness or spiritual forces of wickedness or evil spirits or unclean demons they have not substantially, nor because they were created such, but they have obtained these ranks of wickedness according to their movements and the progress by which they advanced in crime. And this is the second order of rational creatures, which has given itself so headlong to wickedness that it is unwilling rather than unable to be recalled, since the madness of crime is now a passion and gives delight. The third order of rational creatures is that of those who are judged fit by God to replenish the human race, that is, the souls of human beings, which through progress are also taken up into that order of angels; and we see some of them taken up, namely those who have been made sons of God or sons of the resurrection, or those who have left darkness and loved light and been made sons of light; or those who, overcoming every battle and made peacemakers, have become sons of peace and sons of God; or those who, putting to death their earthly parts, and transcending not only bodily nature but even the uncertain and fragile movements of the soul itself, have joined themselves to the Lord, made wholly spirit, so as to be always one spirit with him, discerning each thing with him, until they come to this, that having been made perfectly spiritual they discern all things, in that, enlightened in mind in all holiness through the Word and Wisdom of God, they can be discerned by no one at all. We think that those things are by no means to be accepted which some are accustomed needlessly to inquire into or assert, namely that souls come to such a decline that, forgetting their rational nature and dignity, they sink even into the order of irrational living beings, either wild beasts or cattle. For these views they are accustomed to bring certain invented supports from the Scriptures: namely that the beast to which a woman has unnaturally submitted herself is held equally guilty with the woman and is commanded to be stoned equally; or that the goring bull is likewise ordered to be stoned; and also that Balaam's donkey, when God opened its mouth, spoke, and the beast of burden without speech, answering with a human voice, rebuked the madness of the prophet. These views we not only do not accept, but we refute and reject all these assertions of theirs as contrary to our faith. Nevertheless, in its proper place and time, when this perverse doctrine has been refuted and driven off, we will explain how the passages which they bring forward from the holy Scriptures ought to be understood.
Connections in On the First Principles, Book 1
0 connections
No connections in this book yet.