Subscribe
to CF
Be
first to know
Read our AAA review
from Catholic Culture
Our Mission
To
bring Jesus Christ; the Way, the Truth and the Life; to all who will follow,
according to scripture and tradition, per the Magisterium
of the Roman Catholic Church.
While you visit!
Listen
to
Radio
For the Sacred
Heart of Jesus and the Immaculate Heart of Mary. |
METHODIUS
FROM THE DISCOURSE ON THE RESURRECTION
PART I.
I. God did not make evil,(2) nor is He at all in any way the author of
evil; but whatever failed to keep the law, which He in all justice ordained,
after being made by Him with the faculty of free-will, for the purpose
of guarding and keeping it, is called evil. Now it is the gravest fault
to disobey God, by overstepping the bounds of that righteousness which
is consistent with free-will.
II.
Now the question has already been raised,(3) and answered,(4) that the "coats of skins"(5) are not bodies. Nevertheless, let us
speak of it again, for it is not enough to have mentioned it once. Before
the preparation of these coats of skins, the first man himself acknowledges
that he has both bones and flesh; for when he saw the woman brought to
him: "This is now," he cried,(6) "bone of m bone and flesh
of my flesh." And again: She shall be called Woman, because she was
taken out of man.(7) For this cause shall unto his wife, and they two shall
be one flesh." For I cannot endure the trifling of some who shamelessly
do violence to Scripture, in order that their opinion, that the resurrection
is without flesh, may find support; supposing rational bones and flesh,
and in different ways changing it backwards and forwards by allego-rizing.
And Christ confirms the taking of these things as they are written, when,
to the question of the Pharisees about putting away a wife, He answers: "Have
ye not read that He which made them at the beginning made them male and
female; and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father,"(8)
and so on.
III. But it is evidently absurd to think that the body will not co-exist
with the soul in the eternal state, because it is a bond and fetters; in
order that, according to their view, we who are to live in the kingdom
of light may not be for ever condemned to be bondmen of corruption. For
as the question has been sufficiently solved, and the statement refitted
in which they defined the flesh to be the soul's chain, the argument also
is destroyed, that the flesh will not rise again, lest, if we resume it,
we be prisoners in the kingdom of light.
IV. In order, then, that man might not be an undying or ever-living evil,
as would have been the case if sin were dominant within him, as it had
sprung up in an immortal body, and was provided with immortal sustenance,
God for this cause pronounced him mortal, and clothed him with mortality.
For this is what was meant by the coats of skins, in order that, by the
dissolution of the body, sin might be altogether destroyed from the very
roots, that there might not be left even the smallest particle of root
from which new shoots of sin might again burst forth.
V.
For as a fig-tree, which has grown in the splendid buildings(9) of a
temple, and has reached
a
great size, and is spread over all the joints
of the stones with thickly-branching roots, ceases not to grow, till, by
the loosening of the stones from the place in which it sprung up, it is
altogether torn away; for it is possible for the stones to be fitted into
their own places, when the fig tree is taken away, so that the temple may
be preserved, having no longer to support what was the cause of its own
destruction; while the fig-tree, torn away by the roots, dies; in the same
way also, God, the builder, checked by the seasonable application of death,
His own temple, man, when he had fostered sin, like a wild fig-tree, "killing,"(10)
in the words of Scripture, "and making alive," in order that
the flesh, after sin is withered and dead, may, like a restored temple.
be raised up again with the same parts, uninjured and immortal, while sin
is utterly and entirely destroyed. For while the body still lives, before
it has passed through death, sin must also live with it, as it has its
roots concealed within us even though it be externally checked by the wounds
inflicted by corrections and warnings; since, otherwise, it would not happen
that we do wrong after baptism, as we should be entirely and absolutely
free from sin. But now, even after believing, and after the time of being
touched by the water of sanctification, we are oftentimes found in sin.
For no one can boast of being so free from sin as not even to have an evil
thought. So that it is come to pass that sin is now restrained and lulled
to sleep by faith, so that it does not produce injurious fruits, but yet
is not torn up by the roots. For the present we restrain its sprouts, such
as evil imaginations, "test any root of bitterness springing up trouble"(1)
us, not suffering its leaves to unclose and open into shoots; while the
Word, like an axe, cuts at its roots which grow below. But hereafter the
very thought of evil will disappear.
VI.
But come now, since there is need of many examples in matters of this
kind, let us
examine them
particularly from this point of view, without
desisting till our argument ends in clearer explanation and proof. It appears,
then, as if an eminent craftsman were to cast over again a noble image,
wrought by himself of gold or other material, and beautifully proportioned
in all its members, upon his suddenly perceiving that it had been mutilated
by some infamous man, who, too envious to endure the image being beautiful,
spoiled it, and thus enjoyed the empty pleasure of indulged jealousy. For
take notice, most wise Aglaophon, that, if the artificer wish that that
upon which he has bestowed so much pains and care and labour, shall be
quite free from injury, he will be impelled to melt it down, and restore
it to its former condition. But if he should not cast it afresh, nor reconstruct
it, but allow it to remain as it is, repairing and restoring it, it must
be that the image, being passed through the fire and forged, cannot any
longer be preserved unchanged, but will be altered and wasted. Wherefore,
if be should wish it to be perfectly beautiful and faultless, it must be
broken up and recast, in order that all the disfigurements and mutilations
inflicted upon it by treachery and envy, may be got rid of by the breaking
up and recasting of it, while the image is restored again uninjured and
unalloyed to the same form as before, and made as like itself as possible.
For it is impossible for an image under the hands of the original artist
to be lost, even if it be melted down again, for it may be restored; but
it is possible for blemishes and injuries to be put off, for they melt
away and cannot be restored; because in every work of art the best craftsman
looks not for blemish or failure, but for symmetry and correctness in his
work. Now God's plan seems to me to have been the same as that which prevails
among ourselves. For seeing man, His fairest work, corrupted by envious
treachery, He could not endure, with His love for man to leave him in such
a condition, lest he should be for ever faulty, and bear the blame to eternity;
but dissolved him again into his original materials, in order that, by
remodelling, all the blemishes in him might waste, away and disappear.
For the melting down of the statue in the former case corresponds to the
death and dissolution of the body in the latter, and the remoulding of
the material in the former, to the resurrection after death in the latter;
as also saith the prophet Jeremiah, for he addresses the Jews in these
words, "And I went down to the potter's house; and, behold, he wrought
a work upon the stones. And the vessel which he made in his hands was broken;
and again he made another vessel, as it pleased him to make it. And the
word of the Lord came to me, saying, Cannot I do to you as this potter,
O house of lsrael? Behold, as the clay of the potter are ye in my hands."(2)
VII. For I call your attention to this, that, as I said, after man's transgression
the Great Hand was not content to leave as a trophy of victory its own
work, debased by the Evil One, who wickedly injured it from motives of
envy; but moistened and reduced it to clay, as a potter breaks up a vessel,
that by the remodelling of it all the blemishes and bruises in it may disappear,
and it may be made afresh faultless and pleasing.
VIII.
But it is not satisfactory to say that the universe will be utterly destroyed,
and
sea and air and
sky will be no longer. For the whole world
will be deluged with fire from heaven, and burnt for the purpose of purification
and renewal; it will not, however, come to complete ruin and corruption.
For if it were better for the world not to be than to be, why did God,
in making the world, take the worse course? But God did not work in vain,
or do that which was worst. God therefore ordered the creation with a view
to its existence and continuance, as also the Book of Wisdom confirms,
saying, "For God created all things that they might have their being;
and the generations of the world were healthful, and there is no poison
of destruction in them."(3) And Paul clearly testifies this, saying, "For
the earnest expectation of the creature(4) waiteth for the manifestation
of the sons of God. For the creature(4) was made subject to vanity, not
willingly, but by reason of him that subjected the same in hope: because
the creature(4) itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption
into the glorious liberty of the children of God."(1) For the creation
was made subject to vanity, he says, and he expects that it will be set
free from such servitude, as he intends to call this world by the name
of creation. For it is not what is unseen but what is seen that is subject
to corruption. The creation, then, after being restored to a better and
more seemly state, remains, rejoicing and exulting over the children of
God at the resurrection; for whose sake it now groans and travails,(2)
waiting itself also for our redemption from the corruption of the body,
that, when we have risen and shaken off the mortality of the flesh, according
to that which is written, "Shake off the dust, and arise, and sit
down, O Jerusalem,"(3) and have been set free from sin, it also shall
be freed from corruption and be subject no longer to vanity, but to righteousness.
Isaiah says, too, "For as the new heaven and the new earth which I
make, remaineth before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and your
name be;"(4) and again, "Thus saith the Lord that created the
heaven, it is He who prepared the earth and created it, He determined it;
He created it not in vain, but formed it to be inhabited."(5) For
in reality God did not establish the universe in vain, or to no purpose
but destruction, as those weak-minded men say, but to exist, and be inhabited,
and continue. Wherefore the earth and the heaven must exist again after
the conflagration and shaking of all things.
IX.
But if our opponents say, How then is it, if the universe be not destroyed,
that the Lord
says
that "heaven and earth shall pass away;"(6)
and the prophet, that "the heaven shall perish as smoke, and the earth
shall grow old as a garment;"(7) we answer, because it is usual for
the Scriptures to call the change of the world from its present condition
to a better and more glorious one, destruction; as its earlier form is
lost in the change of all things to a state of greater splendour; for there
is no contradiction nor absurdity in the Holy Scriptures. For not "the
world" but the "fashion of this world" passeth away,(8)
it is said; so it is usual for the Scriptures to call the change from an
earlier form to a better and more comely state, destruction; just as when
one calls by the name of destruction the change from a childish form into
a perfect man, as the stature of the child is turned into manly size and
beauty. We may expect that the creation will pass away, as if it were to
perish in the burning, in order that it may be renewed, not however that
it will be destroyed, that we who are renewed may dwell in a renewed world
without taste of sorrow; according as it is said, "When Thou lettest
Thy breath go forth, they shall be made, and Thou shalt renew the face
of the earth;"(9) God henceforth providing for the due temperature
of that which surrounds it. For as the earth is to exist after the present
age,(10) there must be by all means inhabitants for it, who shall no longer
be liable to death, nor shall marry, nor beget children, but live in all
happiness, like the angels, without change or decay. Wherefore it is silly
to discuss in what way of life our bodies will then exist, if there is
no longer air, nor earth, nor anything else.
X. But in addition to what has been said, there is this point worth consideration,
since it misleads very much, if we may be outspoken about matters of such
importance, Aglaophon For you said that the Lord declared plainly(11) that
those who shall obtain the resurrection shall then be as the angels.(12)
You brought this objection: The angels, being without flesh, are on this
account in the utmost happiness and glory. We must then, as we are to be
made equal to the angels, be like them stripped of flesh, and be angels.
But you overlooked this, my excellent friend, that He who created and set
in order the universe out of nothing, ordained the nature of immortal beings
to be distributed not only among angels and ministers, but also among principalities,
and thrones, and powers. For the race of angels is one, and that of principalities
and powers another; because immortal beings are not all of one order, and
constitution, and tribe, and family, but there are differences of race
and tribe. And neither do the cherubim, departing from their own nature,
assume the form of angels; nor, again, do angels assume the form of the
others. For they cannot be anything but what they are and have been made.
Moreover, man also having been appointed by the original order of things
to inhabit the world, and to rule over all that is in it, when he is immortal,
will never be changed from being a man into the form either of angels or
any other; for neither do angels undergo a change from their original form
to another. For Christ at His coming did not proclaim that the human nature
should, when it is immortal, be remoulded or transformed into another nature,
but into what it was before the fall. For each one among created things
must remain in its own proper place, that none may be wanting to any, but
all may be full: heaven of angels, thrones of powers, luminaries of ministers;
and the more divine spots, and the undefiled and untainted luminaries,
with seraphim, who attend the Supreme Council, and uphold the universe;
and the world of men. For if we granted that men are changed into angels,
it would follow that we say that angels also are changed into powers, and
these into one thing and the other, until our argument proceed too far
for safety.
XI.
Neither did God, as if He had made man badly, or committed a mistake
in the formation
of him,
determine afterwards to make an angel, repenting
of His work, as the worst of craftsmen do; nor did He fashion man, after
He had wished originally to make an angel, and failed; for this would be
a sign of weakness, etc. Why even then did He make man and not angels,
if He wished men to be angels and not men? Was it because He was unable?
It is blasphemy to suppose so. Or was He so busy in making the worse as
to loiter about the better? This too is absurd. For He does not fail in
making what is good, nor defers it, nor is incapable of it; but He has
the power to act how and when He pleases, inasmuch as He is Himself power.
Wherefore it was because He intended man to be man, that He originally
made him so. But if He so intended--since He intends what is good--man
is good. Now man is said to be composed of soul and body; he cannot then
exist without a body, but with a body, unless there be produced another
man besides man. For all the orders of immortal beings must be preserved
by God, and among these is man. "For," says the Book of Wisdom, "God
created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own eternity."(1)
The body then perishes not; for man is composed of soul and body.
XII.
Wherefore observe that these are the very things which the Lord wished
to teach to the
Sadducees,
who did not believe in the resurrec- tion of
the flesh. For this was the opinion of the Sadducees. Whence it was that,
having contrived the parable about the woman and the seven brethren, that
they might cast doubt upon the resurrection of the flesh, "There came
to Him,"(2) it is said, "the Sadducees also, who say that there
is no resurrection." Christ, then, if there had been no resurrection
of the flesh, but the soul only were saved, would have agreed, with their
opinion as a right and excellent one. But as it was, He answered and said, "In
the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are
as the angels in heaven,"(2) not on account of having no flesh, but
of not marrying nor being married, but being henceforth incorruptible.
And He speaks of our being near the angels in this respect, that as the
angels in heaven, so we also in paradise, spend our time no more in marriage-feasts
or other festivities. but in seeing God and cultivating life, under the
direction of Christ. For He did not say "they shall be angels," but
like angels, in being, for instance, crowned, as it is written, with glory
and honour; differing a little from the angels,(3) while near to being
angels. Just as if He had said. while observing the fair order of the sky,
and the stillness of the night, and everything illumined by the heavenly
light of the moon, "the moon shines like the sun." We should
not then say that He asserted that the moon was absolutely the sun, but
like the sun. As also that which is not gold, but approaching the nature
of gold, is said not to be gold, but to be like gold. But if it were gold,
it would be said to be, and not to be like, gold. But since it is not gold,
but approaching to the nature of it, and has the appearance of it, it is
said to be like gold; so also when He says that the saints shall. in the
resurrection be like the angels, we do not understand Him to assert that
they will then be actually angels, but approaching to the condition of
angels. So that it is most unreasonable to say, "Since Christ declared
that the saints in the resurrection appear as angels, therefore their bodies
do not rise," although the very words employed give a clear proof
of the real state of the case. For the term "resurrection" is
not applied to that which has not fallen, but to that which has fallen
and rises again; as when the prophet says, "I will also raise up again
the tabernacle of David which has fallen down."(4) Now the much-desired
tabernacle of the soul is fallen, and sunk down into "the dust of
the earth."(5) For it is not that which is not dead, but that which
is dead, that is laid down. But it is the flesh which dies; the soul is
immortal. So, then, if the soul be immortal, and the body be the corpse,
those who say that there is a resurrection, but not of the flesh, deny
any resurrection; because it is not that which remains standing, but that
which has fallen(6) and been laid down, that is set up; according to that
which is written, "Does not he who fills rise again, and he who turns
aside return?"(7)
XIII.
Since flesh was made to border on incorruption and corruption, being
itself neither
the one
nor the other, and was overcome by corruption for
the sake of pleasure, though it was the work and property of incorruption;
therefore it became corruptible, and was laid in the dust of the earth.
When, then, it was overcome by corruption, and delivered over to death
through disobedience, God did not leave it to corruption. to be triumphed
over as an inheritance; but, after conquering death by the resurrection,
delivered it again to incorruption, in order that corruption might not
receive the property of incorruption, but. incorruption that of corruption.
Therefore the apostle answers thus, "For this corruptible must put
on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."(1) Now
the corruptible and mortal putting on immortality, what else is it but
that which is "sown in corruption and raised in incorruption,"(2)--for
the soul is not corruptible or mortal; but this which is mortal and corrupting
is of flesh,--in order that, "as we have borne the image of the earthy,
we shall also bear the image of the heavenly?"(3) For the image of
the earthy which we have borne is this, "Dust thou art, and unto dust
shalt thou return."(4) But the image of the heavenly is the resurrection
from the dead, and incorruption, in order that "as Christ was raised
up from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also should walk in
newness of life."(5) But if any one were to think that the earthy
image is the flesh itself, but the heavenly image some other spiritual
body besides the flesh; let him first consider that Christ, the heavenly
man, when He appeared, bore the same form of limbs and the same image of
flesh as ours, through which also He, who was not man, became man, that "as
in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."(6) For
if He bore flesh for any other reason than that of setting the flesh free,
and raising it up, why did He bear flesh superfluously, as He purposed
neither to save it, nor to raise it up? But the Son of God does nothing
superfluously. He did not then take the form of a servant uselessly, but
to raise it up and save it. For He truly was made man, and died, and not
in mere appearance, but that He might truly be shown to be the first begotten
from the dead, changing the earthy into the heavenly, and the mortal into
the immortal. When, then, Paul says that "flesh and blood cannot inherit
the kingdom of God,"(7) he does not give a disparaging opinion of
the regeneration of the flesh, but would teach that the kingdom of God,
which is eternal life, is not possessed by the body, but the body by the
life. For if the kingdom of God, which is life, were possessed by the body,
it would happen that the life would be consumed by corruption. But now
the life possesses what is dying, in order that "death may be swallowed
up in victory"(8) by life, and the corruptible may he seen to be the
possession of incorruption and immortality, while it becomes unbound and
free from death and sin, but the slave and servant of immortality; so that
the body may be the possession of incorruption, and not incorruption that
of the body.
XIV.
If, then, out of such a drop, small, and previously without any existence,
in its actual
state
of moistness, contractedness, and insignificance, in
fact out of nothing, man is brought into being, how much rather shall man
spring again into being out of a previously existing man? For it is not
so difficult to make anything anew after it has once existed and fallen
into decay, as to produce out of nothing that which has never existed.
Now, in case we choose to exhibit the seminal fluid discharged from a man,
and place by it a corpse, each by itself, which of them, as they both lie
exposed to view, will the spectators think most likely to become a man--that
drop, which is nothing at all, or that which has already shape, and size,
and substance? For if the very thing which is nothing at all, merely because
God pleases, becomes a man, how much rather shall that which has existence
and is brought to perfection become again a man, if God pleases? For what
was the purpose of the theologian Moses, in introducing, under a mystical
sense, the Feast of Tabernacles in the Book of Leviticus? Was it that we
may keep a feast to God, as the Jews with their low view of the Scriptures
interpret it? as if God took pleasure in such tabernacles, decked out with
fruits and boughs and leaves, which immediately wither and lose their verdure.
We cannot say so. Tell me, then, what was the object of the Feast of Tabernacles?
It was introduced to point to this real tabernacle of ours, which, after
it was fallen down to corruption through the transgression of the law,
and broken up by sin, God promised to put together again, and to raise
up in incorruptibility, in order that we may truly celebrate in His honour
the great and renowned Feast of Tabernacles at the resurrection; when our
tabernacles are put together in the perfect order of immortality and harmony,
and raised up from the dust in incorruption; when the dry bones,(9) according
to the most true prophecy, shall hear a voice, and be brought to their
joints by God, the Creator and Perfect Ar-tificer, who will then renew
the flesh and bind it on, no more with such ties as those by which it was
at first held together, but by such as shall be for ever undecaying and
indissoluble. For I once saw(10) on Olympus, which is a mountain of Lycia,
fire bursting up from the ground spontaneously on the summit of the mountain;
and by it was standing an Agnos tree, so flourishing, green, and shady,
that one might suppose a never-failing stream of water had nourished its
growth, rather than what was really the case. For which cause, therefore,
though the natures of things are corruptible, and their bodies consumed
by fire, and it is impossible for things which are once of an inflammable
nature to remain unaffected by fire; yet this tree, so far from being burnt,
is actually more vigorous and green than usual, though it is naturally
inflammable, and that too when the fire is glowing about its very roots.
I certainly cast some boughs of trees from the adjoining wood on to the
place where the fire burst forth, and they immediately caught fire and
were burnt to ashes. Now, then, tell me why it is that which cannot bear
even to feel the heat of the sun, but withers up under it unless it be
sprinkled with water, is not consumed when beset by such fiery heat, but
both lives and thrives? What is the meaning of this marvel? God appointed
this as an example and introduction to the day that is coming, in order
that we may know more certainly that, when all things are deluged with
fire from heaven, the bodies which are distinguished by chastity and righteousness
will be taken up by Him as free from all injury from the fire as from cold
water. For truly, O beneficent and bountiful Lord, "the creature that
serveth Thee, who art the Maker, increaseth his strength against the unrighteous
for their punishment, and abateth his strength for the benefit of such
as put their trust in Thee;"(1) and at Thy pleasure fire cools, and
injures nothing that Thou determinest to be preserved; and again, water
burns more fiercely than fire, and nothing opposes Thine unconquerable
power and might. For Thou createdst all things out of nothing; wherefore
also Thou changest and transformest all things as Thou wilt, seeing they
are Thine, and Thou alone art God.
XV.
The apostle certainly, after assigning the planting and watering to art
and earth and water,
conceded the growth to God alone, where he says, "Neither
is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth
the increase."(2) For he knew that Wisdom, the first-born of God,
the parent and artificer of all things, brings forth everything into the
world; whom the ancients called Nature and Providence, because she, with
constant provision and care, gives to all things birth and growth. "For," says
the Wisdom of God, "my Father worketh hitherto, and I work."(3)
Now it is on this account that Solomon called Wisdom the artificer of all
things, since God is in no respect poor, but able richly to create, and
make, and vary, and increase all things.
XVI. God, who created all things, and provides and cares for all things,
took dust from the ground, and made our outer man.
PART II.
THE SECOND DISCOURSE ON THE RESURRECTION.(4)
For instance, then, the images of our kings here, even though they be
not formed of the more precious materials--gold or silver--are honoured
by all. For men do not, while they treat with respect those of the far
more precious material, slight those of a less valuable, but honour every
image in the world, even though it be of chalk or bronze. And one who speaks
against either of them, is not acquitted as if he had only spoken against
clay, nor condemned for having despised gold, but for having been disrespectful
towards the King and Lord Himself. The images of God's angels, which are
fashioned of gold, the principalities and powers, we make to His honour
and glory.
PART III.
I. FROM THE DISCOURSE ON THE RESURRECTION.(5)
I.
Read the Book on the Resurrection by St. Methodius, Bishop and Martyr,
of which that which
follows is a
selection, that the body is not the fetter
of the soul, as Origen thought, nor are souls called by the prophet Jeremiah "fettered" on
account of their being within bodies. For he lays down the principle that
the body does not hinder the energies of the soul, but that rather the
body is carried about with it, and cooperates in whatever the soul commits
to it. But how are we to understand the opinion of Gregory(6) the theologian,
and many Others?
II. That Origen said that the body was given to the soul as a fetter after
the fall, and that previously it lived without a body; but that this body
which we wear is the cause of our sins; wherefore also he called it a fetter,
as it can hinder the soul from good works.
III. That if the body was given to the soul after the fall as a fetter,
it must have been given as a fetter upon the evil or the good. Now it is
impossible that it should be upon the good; for no physician or artificer
gives to that which has gone wrong a remedy to cause further error, much
less would God do so. It remains, then, that it was a fetter upon evil.
But surely we see that, at the beginning, Cain, clad in this body, committed
murder; and it is evident into what wickedness those who succeeded him
ran. The body is not, then, a fetter upon evil, nor indeed a fetter at
all; nor was the soul clothed in it for the first time after the fall.
IV. That man, with respect to his nature, is most truly said to be neither
soul without body, nor, on the other hand, body without soul; but a being
composed out of the union of soul and body into one form of the beautiful.
But Origen said that the soul alone is man, as did Plato.
V. That there is a difference between man and other living creatures;
and to them are given varieties of natural form and shape, as many as the
tangible and visible forces of nature produced at the command of God; while
to him was given the form and image of God, with every part accurately
finished, after the very original likeness of the Father and the only-begotten
Son. Now we must consider how the saint states this.
VI. He says that Phidias the statuary, after he had made the Pisaean image
of ivory, ordered oil to be poured out before it, that, as far as he could
secure it, it might be preserved imperishable.
VII. He says, as was said also by Athenagoras,(1) that the devil is a
spirit, made by God, in the neighbourhood of matter, as of course the rest
of the angels are, and that he was entrusted with the oversight of matter,
and the forms of matter. For, according to the original constitution of
angels, they were made by God, in His providence, for the care of the universe;
in order that, while God exercises a perfect and general supervision over
the whole, and keeps the supreme authority and power over all--for upon
Him their existence depends--the angels appointed for this purpose take
charge of particulars. Now the rest of them remained in the positions for
which God made and appointed them; but the devil was insolent, and having
conceived envy of us, behaved wickedly in the charge committed to him;
as also did those who subsequently were enamoured of fleshly charms, and
bad illicit intercourse with the daughters of men.(1) For to them also,
as was the case with men, God granted the possession of their own choice.
And how is this to be taken?
VIII. He says that by the coats of skins is signified death. For he says
of Adam, that when the Almighty God saw that by treachery he, an immortal
being, had become evil, just as his deceiver the devil was, He prepared
the coats of skins on this account; that when he was thus, as it were,
clothed in mortality, all that was evil in him might die in the dissolution
of the body.
IX.
He holds that St. Paul had two revelations. For the apostle, he says,
does not suppose
paradise
to be in the third heaven, in the opinion of
those who knew how to observe the niceties of language, when he says, "I
know such a man caught up to the third heaven; and I know such a man, whether
in the body or out of the body, God knoweth, that was caught up into paradise."(2)
Here he signifies that he has seen two revelations, having been evidently
taken up twice, once to the third heaven, and once into paradise. For the
words, "I know such a man caught up," make it certain that he
was personally shown a revelation respecting the third heaven. And the
words which follow, "And I know such a man, whether in the body or
out of the body, God knoweth, that he was caught up into paradise," show
that another revelation was made to him respecting paradise. Now he was
led to make this statement by his opponent's having laid it down from the
apostle's words that paradise is a mere conception, as it is above the
heaven, in order to draw the conclusion that life in paradise is incorporeal.(3)
X.
He says that it is in our power to do, or to avoid doing, evil; since
otherwise we should
not be
punished for doing evil, nor be rewarded for
doing well; but the presence or absence of evil thoughts does not depend
upon ourselves. Wherefore even the sainted Paul says," For what I
would, that do I not, but what I would not, that I do;"(4) that is
to say, "My thoughts are not what I would, but what I would not." Now
he says that the habit of imagining evil is rooted out by the approach
of physical death,(5)--since it was for this reason that death was appointed
by God for the sinner, that evil might not remain for ever.
But what is the meaning of this statement? It is to be noted that it has
been made by others of our Fathers as well. What is the meaning, seeing
that those who meet death find in it at the time neither increase nor decrease
of sins?
II. A SYNOPSIS OF SOME APOSTOLIC WORDS FROM THE SAME DISCOURSE.(6)
1.
Read a compendious interpretation of some apostolic words from the same
discourse. Let us
see, then, what
it is that we have endeavoured to
say respecting the apostle. For this saying of his, "I was alive without
the law once,"(7) refers to the life which was lived in paradise before
the law, not without a body, but with a body, by our first parents, as
we have shown above; for we lived without concupiscence, being altogether
ignorant of its assaults. For not to have a law according to which we ought
to live, nor a power of establishing what manner of life we ought to adopt,
so that we might justly be approved or blamed, is considered to exempt
a person from accusation. Because one cannot lust after those things from
which he is not restrained, and even if he lusted after them, he would
not be blamed. For lust is not directed to things which are before us,
and subject to our power, but to those which are before us, and not in
our power. For how should one care for a thing which is neither forbidden
nor necessary to him? And for this reason it is said, "I had not known
lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet."(1) For when
(our first parents) heard, "Of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil, thou shall not eat of it; for in the day thou eatest thereof thou
shall surely die,"(2) then they conceived lust, and gathered it. Therefore
was it said, I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt
not covet;" nor would they have desired to eat, except it had been
said, "Thou shalt not eat of it." For it was thence that sin
took occasion to deceive me. For when the law was given, the devil had
it in his power to work lust in me; "for without the law, sin was
dead;"(3) which means "when the law was not given, sin could
not be committed." But I was alive and blameless before the law, having
no commandment in accordance with which it was necessary to live; "but
when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment,
which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death."(4) For after
God had given the law, and had commanded me what I ought to do, and what
I ought not to do, the devil wrought lust in me. For the promise of God
which was given to me, this was for life and incorruption, so that obeying
it I might have ever-blooming life and joy unto incorruption; but to him
who disobeyed it, it would issue in death. But the devil, whom he calls
sin, because he is the author of sin, taking occasion by the commandment
to deceive me to disobedience, deceived and slew me, thus rendering me
subject to the condemnation, "In the day that thou eatest thereof
thou shall surely die."(2) "Wherefore the law is holy, and the
commandment holy, and just and good;"(5) because it was given, not
for injury, but for safety; for let us not suppose that God makes anything
useless or hurtful. What thou? "Was then that which is good made death
unto me?"(6) namely, that which was given as a law, that it might
be the cause of the greatest good? "God forbid." For it was not
the law of God that became the cause of my being brought into subjection
to corruption, but the devil; that he might be made manifested who, through
that which is good, wrought evil; that the inventor of evil might become
and be proved the greatest of all sinners. "For we know that the law
is spiritual;"(7) and therefore it can in no respect be injurious
to any one; for spiritual things are far removed from irrational lust and
sin. "But I am carnal, sold under sin;"(7) which means: But I
being carnal, and being placed between good and evil as a voluntary agent,
am so that I may have it in my power to choose what I will. For "behold
I set before thee life and death;"(8) meaning that death would result
from disobedience of the spiritual law, that is of the commandment; and
from obedience to the carnal law, that is the counsel of the serpent; for
by such a choice "I am sold" to the devil, fallen under sin.
Hence evil, as though besieging me, cleaves to me and dwells in me, justice
giving me up to be sold to the Evil One, in consequence of having violated
the law. Therefore also the expressions: "That which I do, I allow
not," and "what I hate, that do I,"(9) are not to be understood
of doing evil, but of only thinking it. For it is not in our power to think
or not to think of improper things, but to act or not to act upon our thoughts.
For we cannot hinder thoughts from coming into our minds, since we receive
them when they are inspired into us from without; but we are able to abstain
from obeying them and acting upon them. Therefore it is in our power to
will not to think these things; but not to bring it about that they shall
pass away, so as not to come into the mind again; for this does not lie
in our power, as I said; which is the meaning of that statement, "The
good that I would, I do not;"(10) for i do not will to think the things
which injure me; for this good is altogether innocent. But "the good
that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do;" not
willing to think, and yet thinking what I do not will. And consider whether
it was not for these very things that David entreated God, grieving that
he thought of those things which he did not will: "O cleanse Thou
me from my secret faults. Keep Thy servant also from presumptuous sins.
lest they get the dominion over me; so shall I be undefiled, and innocent
from the great offence."(11) And the apostle too, in another place: "Casting
down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the
knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience
of Christ."(12)
II.
But if any one should venture to oppose this statement, and reply, that
the apostle
teaches that we
hate not only the evil which is in thought,
but that we do that which we will not, and we hate it even in the very
act of doing it, for he says," The good which I would, I do not; but
the evil which I would not, that I do;"(1) if he who says so speaks
the truth, let us ask him to explain what was the evil which the apostle
hated and willed not to do, but did; and the good which he willed to do,
but did not; and conversely, whether as often as he willed to do good,
so often he did not do the good which he willed, but did the evil which
he willed not? And how he can say, when exhorting us to shake off all manner
of sin, "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ?"(2)
Thus he meant the things already mentioned which he willed not to do, not
to be done, but only to be thought of. For how otherwise could he be an
exact imitation of Christ? It would be excellent then, and most delightful,
if we had not those who oppose us, and contend with us; but since this
is impossible, we cannot do what we will. For we will not to have those
who lead us to passion, for then we could be saved without weariness and
effort; but that does not come to pass which we will, but that which we
will not. For it is necessary, as I said, that we should be tried. Let
us not then, O my soul, let us not give in to the Evil One; but putting
on" the whole armour of God," which is our protection, let us
have "the breastplate of righteousness, and your feet shod with the
preparation of the Gospel (of peace). Above all, taking the shield of faith,
wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the spirit, which is
the Word of God,"(3) that ye may be able to stand against the wiles
of the devil; "casting down imaginations, and every high thing that
exalteth itself against the knowledge of Christ,"(4) "for we
wrestle not against flesh and blood;"(5) for that which I do, I allow
not; for what I would, that do I not: but what I hate, that do I. If then
I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now
then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know
that in me--that is, in my flesh--dwelleth no good thing."(6) And
this is rightly said. For remember how it has been already shown that,
from the time when man went astray and disobeyed the law, thence sin, receiving
its birth from his disobedience, dwelt in him. For thus a commotion was
stirred up, and we were filled with agitations and foreign imaginations,
being emptied of the divine inspiration and filled with carnal desire,
which the cunning serpent infused into us. And, therefore, God invented
death for our sakes, that He might destroy sin, lest rising up in us immortals,
as I said, it should be immortal. When the apostle says, "for I know
that in me--that is, in my flesh--dwelleth no good thing," by which
words he means to indicate that sin dwells in us, from the transgression,
through lust; out of which, like young shoots, the imaginations of pleasure
rise around us. For there are two kinds of thoughts in us; the one which
arises from the lust which lies in the body, which, as I said, came from
the craft of the Evil Spirit; the other from the law, which is in accordance
with the commandment, which we had implanted in us as a natural law, stirring
up our thoughts to good, when we delight in the law of God according to
our mind, for this is the inner man; but in the law of the devil according
to the lust which dwells in the flesh. For he who wars against and opposes
the law of God, that is, against the tendency of the mind to good, is the
same who stirs up the carnal and sensual impulses to lawlessness.
III.
For the apostle here sets forth clearly, as I think, three laws: One
in accordance with
the good
which is implanted in us, which clearly
he calls the law of the mind. One the law which arises from the assault
of evil, and which often draws on the soul to lustful fancies, which, he
says," wars against the law of the mind."(7) And the third, which
is in accordance with sin, settled in the flesh from lust, which he calls
the "law of sin which dwells in our members;"(7) which the Evil
One, urging on, often stirs up against us, driving us to unrighteousness
and evil deeds. For there seems to be in ourselves one thing which is better
and another which is worse. And when that which is in its nature better
is about to become more powerful than that which is worse, the whole mind
is carried on to that which is good; but when that which is worse increases
and overbalances, man is on the contrary urged on to evil imaginations.
On account of which the apostle prays to be delivered from it, regarding
it as death and destruction; as also does the prophet when he says, "Cleanse
Thou me from my secret faults."(8) And the same is denoted by the
words, "For I delight in the law of God after the inward man; but
I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and
bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O
wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?"(9)
By which he does not mean that the body is death, but the law of sin which
is in his members, lying hidden in us through the transgression, and ever
deluding the soul to the death of unrighteousness. And he immediately adds,
clearly showing from what kind of death he desired to be delivered, and
who he was who delivered him, "I thank God, through Jesus Christ."(1)
And it should be considered, if he said that this body was death, O Aglaophon,
as you supposed, he would not afterwards mention Christ as delivering him
froth so great an evil. For in that case what a strange thing should we
have had from the advent of Christ? And how could the apostle have said
this, as being able to be delivered from death by the advent of Christ;
when it was the lot of all to die before Christ's coming into the world?
And, therefore, O Aglaophon, he says not that this body was death, but
the sin which dwells in the body through lust, from which God has delivered
him by the coming of Christ. "For the law of the Spirit of life in
Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death;" so
that "He that raised up Jesus from the dead shall also quicken your
mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you;" having "condemned
sin" which is in the body to its destruction; "that the righteousness
of the law"(2) of nature which draws us to good, and is in accordance
with the commandment, might be kindled and manifested. For the good which "the
law" of nature "could not do, in that it was weak," being
overcome by the lust which lies in the body, God gave strength to accomplish, "sending
His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh;" so that sin being condemned,
to its destruction, so that it should never bear fruit in the flesh, the
righteousness of the law of nature might be fulfilled, abounding in the
obedience of those who walk not according to the lust of the flesh, but
according to the lust and guidance of the Spirit; "for the law of
the Spirit of life," which is the Gospel, being different from earlier
laws, leading by its preaching to obedience and the remission of sins,
delivered us from the law of sin and death, having conquered entirely sin
which reigned over our flesh.
IV. He(3) says that plants are neither nourished nor increased from the
earth. For he says, let any one consider how the earth can be changed and
taken up into the substance of trees. For then the place of the earth which
lay around, and was drawn up through the roots into the whole compass of
the tree, where the tree grew, must needs he hollowed out; so that such
a thing as they hold respecting the flux of bodies, is absurd. For how
could the earth first enter in through the roots into the trunks of the
plants, and then, passing through their channels into all their branches,
be turned into leaves and fruit? Now there are large trees, such as the
cedar, pines, firs, which annually bear much leaves and fruit; and one
may see that they consume none of the surrounding earth into the bulk and
substance of the tree. For it would be necessary, if it were true that
the earth went up through the roots, and was turned into wood, that the
whole place where the earth lay round about them should be hollowed out;
for it is not the nature of a dry substance to flow in, like a moist substance,
and fill up the place of that which moves away. Moreover, there are fig-trees,
and other similar plants, which frequently grow in the buildings of monuments,
and yet they never consume the entire building into themselves. But if
any one should choose to collect their fruit and leaves for many years,
he would perceive that their bulk had become much larger than the earth
upon the monuments. Hence it is absurd to suppose that the earth is consumed
into the crop of fruits and leaves; and even if they were all made by it,
they would be so only as using it for their seat and place. For bread is
not made without a mill, and a place, and time, and fire; and yet bread
is not made out of any of these things. And the same may be said of a thousand
other things.
V.
Now the followers of Origen bring forward this passage, "For we
know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved,"(4)
and so forth, to disprove the resurrection of the body, saying that the "tabernacle" is
the body, and the "house not made with hands" "in the heavens" is
our spiritual clothing. Therefore, says the holy Methodius, by this earthly
house must metaphorically(5) be understood our short-lived existence here,
and not this tabernacle; for if you decide to consider the body as being
the earthly house which is dissolved, tell us what is the tabernacle whose
house is dissolved? For the tabernacle is one thing, and the house of the
tabernacle another, and still another we who have the tabernacle. "For," he
says, "if our earthly house of this tabernacle be dissolved"--by
which he points out that the souls are ourselves, that the body is a tabernacle,
and that the house of the tabernacle figuratively represents the enjoyment
of the flesh in the present life. If, then, this present life of the body
be dissolved like a house, we shall have that which is not made with hands
in the heavens. "Not made with hands," he says, to point out
the difference; because this life may be said to be made with hands, seeing
that all the employments and pursuits of life are carried on by the hands
of men. For the body, being the workmanship of God, is not said to be made
with hands, inasmuch as it is not formed by the arts of men. But if they
shall say that it is made with hands, because it was the workmanship of
God, then our souls also, and the angels, and the spiritual clothing in
the heavens, are made with hands; for all these things, also, are the workmanship
of God. What, then, is the house which is made with hands? It is, as I
have said, the short-lived existence which is sustained by human hands.
For God said, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread;"(1)
and when that life is dissolved, we have the life which is not made with
hands. As also the Lord showed, when He said: "Make to yourselves
friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may
receive you into everlasting habitations."(2) For what the Lord then
called "habitations,"(3) the apostle here calls "clothing."(4)
And what He there calls "friends" "of unrighteousness," the
apostle here calls "houses" "dissolved." As then, when
the days of our present life shall fail, those good deeds of beneficence
to which we have attained in this unrighteous life, and in this "world" which "lieth
in wickedness,"(5) will receive our souls; so when this perishable
life shall be dissolved, we shall have the habitation which is before the
resurrection--that is, our souls shall he with God, until we shall receive
the new house which is prepared for us, and which shall never fall. Whence
also "we groan," "not for that we would be unclothed," as
to the body, "but clothed upon"(6) by it in the other life. For
the "house in heaven," with which we desire to be "clothed," is
immortality; with which, when we are clothed, every weakness and mortality
will be entirely "swallowed up" in it, being consumed by endless
life. "For we walk by faith, not by sight;"(7) that is, for we
still go forward by faith, viewing the things which are beyond with a darkened
understanding, and not clearly, so that we may see these things, and enjoy
them, and be in them. "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood
cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption."(8)
By flesh, he did not mean flesh itself, but the irrational impulse towards
the lascivious pleasures of the soul. And therefore when he says, "Flesh
and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God," he adds the explanation, "Neither
doth corruption inherit incorruption." Now corruption is not the thing
which is corrupted, but the thing which corrupts. For when death prevails
the body sinks into corruption; but when life still remains in it, it stands
uncorrupted. Therefore, since the flesh is the boundary between corruption
and incorruption, not being either corruption or incorruption, it was vanquished
by corruption on account of pleasure, although it was the work and the
possession of incorruption. Therefore it became subject to corruption.
When, then, it had been overcome by corruption, and was given over to death
for chastisement, He did not leave it to be vanquished and given over as
an inheritance to corruption; but again conquering death by the resurrection,
He restored it to incorruption, that corruption might not inherit incorruption,
but incorruption that which is corruptible. And therefore the apostle answers, "This
corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal immortality."(9)
But the corruptible and mortal putting on incorruption and immortality,
what else is this, but that which is sown in corruption rising in incorruption
?(10) For, "as we have borne the image of the earthly, we shall also
bear the image of the heavenly."(11) For the "image of the earthly" which
we have borne refers to the saying, "Dust thou art, and unto dust
thou shalt return."(12) And the "image of the heavenly is the
resurrection from the dead and incorruption."
VI.
Now Justin of Neapoils,(13) a man not far removed either from the times
or from the
virtues of the
apostles, says that that which is mortal
is inherited, but that life inherits; and that flesh dies, but that the
kingdom of heaven lives. When then, Paul says that "flesh and blood
cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven,"(14) he does not so speak as
seeming to slight the regeneration of the flesh, but as teaching that the
kingdom of God, which is eternal life, is not inherited by the body, but
the body by life. For if the kingdom of God, which is life, were inherited
by the body, it would happen that life was swallowed up by corruption.
But now life inherits that which is mortal, that death may be swallowed
up of life unto victory, and that which is corruptible appear the possession
of incorruption; being made free from death and sin, and become the slave
and subject of immortality, that the body may become the possession of
incorruption, and not incorruption of the body.
VII.
Now the passage, "The dead in Christ shall rise first: then
we which are alive," St. Methodius thus explains: Those are our bodies;
for the souls are we ourselves, who, rising, resume that which is dead
from the earth; so that being caught up with them to meet the Lord, we
may gloriously celebrate the splendid festival of the resurrection, because
we have received our everlasting tabernacles, which shall no longer die
nor be dissolved.
VIII. I saw, he says, on Olympus(1) (Olympus is a mountain in Lycia),
a fire spontaneously arising on the top of the mountain from the earth,
beside which is the plant Puragnos, so flourishing, green, and shady, that
it seemed rather as though it grew from a fountain. For what cause, although
they are by nature corruptible, and their bodies consumed by fire, was
this plant not only not burnt, but rather more flourishing, although in
its nature it is easily burnt, and the fire was burning about its roots?
Then I cast branches of trees out of the surrounding wood into the place
where the fire streamed forth, and, immediately bursting up into flame,
they were converted into cinders. What then is the meaning of this contradiction?
This God appointed as a sign and prelude of the coming Day, that we may
know that, when all things are overwhelmed by fire, the bodies which are
endowed with chastity and righteousness shall pass through it as though
it were cold water.
IX.
Consider, he says, whether too the blessed John, when he says, "And
the sea gave up the dead which were in it: and death and hell delivered
up the dead which were in them,"(2) does not mean the parts which
are given up by the elements for the reconstruction of each one? By the
sea is meant the moist element; by hell,(3) the air, derived from <greek>aeides</greek>,
because it is invisible, as was said by Origen; anti by death, the earth,
because those who die are laid in it; whence also it is called in the Psalms
the "dust of death,"(4) Christ saying that He is brought "into
the dust of death."
X. For, he says, whatever is composed and consists of pure air and pure
fire, and is of like substance with the angelic beings, cannot have the
nature of earth and water; since it would then be earthy. And of such nature,
and consisting of such things, Origen has shown that the body of man shall
be which shall rise, which he also said would be spiritual.
XI.
And he asks what will be the appearance of the risen body, when this
human form, as according
to him useless, shall wholly disappear; since
it is the most lovely of all things which are combined in living creatures,
as being the form which the Deity Himself employs, as the most wise Paul
explains: "For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch
as he is the image and glory of God;"(5) in accordance with which
the rational bodies of the angels are set in order? will it be circular,
or polygonal, or cubical, or pyramidal? For there are very many kinds of
forms; but this is impossible.(6) Well then, what are we to think of the
assertion, that the godlike shape is to be rejected as more ignoble, for
he himself allows that the soul is like the body, and that man is to rise
again without hands or feet?
XII.
The transformation, he says, is the restoration into an impassible and
glorious state. For
now
the body is a body of desire and of humiliation,(7)
and therefore Daniel was called "a man of desires."(8) But then
it will be transfigured into an impassible body, not by the change of the
arrangement of the members, but by its not desiring carnal pleasures.
Then he says, refuting Origen, Origen therefore thinks that the same flesh
will not be restored to the soul, but that the form of each, according
to the appearance by which the flesh is now distinguished, shall arise
stamped upon another spiritual body; so that every one will again appear
the same form; and that this is the resurrection which is promised. For,
he says, the material body being fluid, and in no wise remaining in itself,
but wearing out and being replaced around the appearance by which its shape
is distinguished, and by which the figure is contained, it is necessary
that the resurrection should be only that of the forth.
XIII.
Then, after a little, he says: If then, O Origen, you maintain that the
resurrection
of the
body changed into a spiritual body is to be expected
only in appearance, and put forth the vision of Moses and Elias as a most
convincing proof of it; saying that they appeared after their departure
from life, preserving no different appearance from that which they had
from the beginning; in the same way will be the resurrection of all men.
But Moses and Elias arose and appeared with this form of which you speak,
before Christ suffered and rose. How then could Christ be celebrated by
prophets and apostles as "the first begotten of the dead?"(9)
For if the Christ is believed to be the first begotten of the dead, He
is the first begotten of the dead as having risen before all others. But
Moses appeared to the apostles before Christ suffered, having this form
in which you say the resurrection is fulfilled. Hence then, there is no
resurrection of the form without the flesh. For either there is a resurrection
of the form as you teach, and then Christ is no longer "the first
begotten of the dead," from the fact that souls appeared before Him,
having this form after death; or He is truly the first begotten, and it
is quite impossible that any should have been thought meet for a resurrection
before Him, so as not to die again. But if no one arose before Him, and
Moses and Elias appeared to the apostles not having flesh, but only its
appearance, the resurrection in the flesh is clearly manifested. For it
is most absurd that the resurrection should be set forth only in form,
since the souls, after their departure from the flesh, never appear to
lay aside the form which, he says, rises again. But if that remains with
them, so that it cannot be taken away, as with the soul of Moses and Elias;
and neither perishes, as you think, nor is destroyed, but is everywhere
present with them; then surely that form which never fell cannot be said
to rise again.
XIV. But if any one, finding this inadmissible, answers, But how then,
if no one rose before Christ went down into Hades, are several recorded
as having risen before Him? Among whom is the son of the widow of Sarepta,
and the son of the Shunammite, and Lazarus. We must say: These rose to
die again; but we are speaking of those who shall never die after their
rising. And if any one should speak doubtfully concerning the soul of Elias,
as that the Scriptures say that he was taken up in the flesh, and we say
that he appeared to the apostles divested of the flesh, we must say, that
to allow that he appeared to the apostles in the flesh is more in favour
of our argument. For it is shown by this case that the body is susceptible
of immortality, as was also proved by the translation of Enoch. For if
he could not receive immortality, he could not remain in a state of insensibility
so long a time. If, then, he appeared with the body, that was truly after
he was dead, but certainly not as having arisen from the dead. And this,
we may say, if we agree with Origen when he says that the same form is
given to the soul after death; when it is separated from the body, which
is of all things the most impossible, from the fact that the form of the
flesh was destroyed before by its changes, as also the form of the melted
statue before its entire dissolution. Be cause the quality cannot be separated
from the material, so as to exist by itself; for the shape which disappears
around the brass is separated from the melted statue, and has not longer
a substantial existence.
XV. Since the form is said to be separated in death from the flesh, come,
let us consider in how many ways that which is separated is said to be
separated. Now a thing is said to be separated from another either in act
and subsistence, or in thought; or else in act, but not in subsistence.
As if, for instance, one should separate from each other wheat and barley
which had been mingled together; in as far as they are separated in motion,
they are said to be separated in act in as far as they stand apart when
separated, they are said to be separated in subsistence. They are separated
in thought when we separate matter from its qualities, and qualities from
matter; in act, but not in subsistence, when a thing separated from another
no longer exists, not having a substantive existence. And it may be observed
that it is so also in mechanics, when one looks upon a statue or a brazen
horse melted. For, when he considers these things, he will see their natural
form changing; and they alter into another figure from which the original
form disappears. For if any one should melt down the works formed into
the semblance of a man or a horse, he will find the appearance of the form
disappearing, but the material itself remaining. It is, therefore, untenable
to say, that the form shall arise in nowise corrupted, but that the body
in which the form was stamped shall be destroyed.
XVI. But he says that it will be so; for it will be changed in a spiritual
body. Therefore, it is necessary to confess that the very same forth as
at first does not arise, from its being changed and corrupted with the
flesh. For although it be changed into a spiritual body, that will not
be properly the original substance, bat a certain resemblance of it, fashioned
in an ethereal body. If, however, it is not the same form, nor yet the
body which arises, then it is another in the place of the first. For that
which is like, being different from that which it resembles, cannot be
that very first thing in accordance with which it was made.
XVII. Moreover, he says that that is the appearance or form which shows
forth the identity of the members in the distinctive character of the form.
XVIII.
And, when Origen allegorises that which is said by the prophet Ezekiel
concerning the
resurrection
of the dead, and perverts it to the
return of the Israelites from their captivity in Babylon, the saint in
refuting him, after many other remarks, says this also: For neither did
they(1) obtain a perfect liberty, nor did they overcome their enemies by
a greater power, and dwell again in Jerusalem; and when they frequently
intended to build (the temple), they were prevented by other nations. Whence,
also, they were scarce able to build that in forty-six years, which Solomon
completed from the foundations in seven years. But what need we say on
this subject? For from the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and those who after
him reigned over Babylon, until the time of the Persian expedition against
the Assyrians, and the empire of Alexander, and the war which was stirred
up by the Romans against the Jews, Jerusalem was six times overthrown by
its enemies. And this is recorded by Josephus, who says: "Jerusalem
was taken in the second year of the reign of Vespasian. It had been taken
before five times; but now for the second time it was destroyed. For Asochaeus,
king of Egypt, and after him Antiochus, next Pompey, and after these Sosius,
with Herod, took the city and burnt it; but before these, the king of Babylon
conquered and destroyed it."
XIX.
He says that Origen holds these opinions which he refutes. And there
may be a doubt
concerning
Lazarus and the rich man. The simpler persons
think that these things were spoken as though both were receiving their
due for the things which they had done in life in their bodies; but the
more accurate think that, since no one is left in life after the resurrection,
these things do not happen at the resurrection. For the rich man says: "I
have five brethren; . . . lest they also come into this place of torment, "(1)
send Lazarus, that he may tell them of those things which are here. And,
therefore, if we ask respecting the "tongue," and the "finger," and "Abraham's
bosom," and the reclining there, it may perhaps be that the soul receives
in the change a form similar in appearance to its gross and earthly body.
If, then, any one of those who have fallen asleep is recorded as having
appeared, in the same way he has been seen in the form which he had when
he was in the flesh. Besides, when Samuel appeared, it is clear that, being
seen, he was clothed in a body; and this must especially be admitted, if
we are pressed by arguments which prove that the essence of the soul is
incorporeal, and is manifested by itself.(3) But the rich man in torment,
and the poor man who was comforted in the bosom of Abraham, are said, the
one to be punished in Hades, and the other to be comforted in Abraham's
bosom, before the appearing of the Saviour, and before the end of the world,
and therefore before the resurrection; teaching that now already, at the
change, the soul rises a body. Wherefore, the saint says as follows: Setting
forth that the soul, after its removal hence, has a form similar in appearance
to this sensitive body; does Origen represent the soul, after Plato, as
being incorporeal? And how should that which, after removal from the world,
is said to have need of a vehicle and a clothing, so that it might not
be found naked, be in itself other than incorporeal? But if it be incorporeal,
must it not also be incapable of passion? For it follows, from its being
incorporeal, that it is also impassible and imperturbable. If, then, it
was not distracted by any irrational desire, neither was it changed by
a pained or suffering body. For neither can that which is incorporeal sympathize
with a body, nor a body with that which is incorporeal, if,(4) indeed,
the soul should seem to be incorporeal, in accordance with what has been
said. But if it sympathize with the body, as is proved by the testimony
of those who appear, it cannot be incorporeal. Therefore God alone is celebrated,
as the unbegotten, independent, and unwearied nature; being incorporeal,
and therefore invisible; for "no man hath seen God."(5) But souls,
being rational bodies, are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things
into members which are visible to reason, having received this impression.
Whence, also, in Hades, as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they
are spoken of as having a tongue, and a finger, and the other members;
not as though they had with them another invisible body, but that the souls
themselves, naturally, when entirely stripped of their covering, are such
according to their essence.
XX.
The saint says at the end: The words, "For to this end Christ
both died, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead
and living,"(6) must be taken as referring to souls and bodies; the
souls being the living, as being immortal, and the bodies being dead.
XXI. Since the body of man is more honourable than other living creatures,
because it is said to have been formed by the hands of God. and because
it has attained to be the vehicle of the reasonable soul; how is it that
it is so short-lived, shorter even than some of the irrational creatures?
Is it not clear that its long-lived existence will be after the resurrection?
FRAGMENTS ON THE HISTORY OF JONAH.
FROM THE BOOK ON THE RESURRECTION.(1)
1.
THE history of Jonah(2) contains a great mystery. For it seems that the
whale signifies
Time,
which never stands still, but is always going
on, and consumes the things which are made by long and shorter intervals.
But Jonah, who fled from the presence of God, is himself the first man
who, having transgressed the law, fled from being seen naked of immortality,
having lost through sin his confidence in the Deity. And the ship in which
he embarked, and which was tempest-tossed, is this brief and hard life
in the present time; just as though we had turned and removed from that
blessed and secure life, to that which was most tempestuous and unstable,
as from solid land to a ship. For what a ship is to the land, that our
present life is to that which is immortal. And the storm and the tempests
which beat against us are the temptations of this life, which in the world,
as in a tempestuous sea, do not permit us to have a fair voyage free from
pain, in a calm sea, and one which is free from evils. And the casting
of Jonah from the ship into the sea, signifies the fall of the first man
from life to death, who received that sentence because, through having
sinned, he fell from righteousness: "Dust thou art, and unto dust
shalt thou return."(3) And his being swallowed by the whale signifies
our inevitable removal by time. For the belly in which Jonah, when he was
swallowed, was concealed, is the all-receiving earth, which receives all
things which are consumed by time.
II. As, then, Jonah spent three days and as many nights in the whale's
belly, and was delivered up sound again, so shall we all, who have passed
through the three stages of our present life on earth--I mean the beginning,
the middle, and the end, of which all this present time con-sists--rise
again. For there are altogether three intervals of time, the past, the
future, and the present. And for this reason the Lord spent so many days
in the earth symbolically, thereby teaching clearly that when the fore-mentioned
intervals of time have been fulfilled, then shall come oar resurrection,
which is the beginning of the future age, and the end of this. For in that
age(4) there is neither past nor future, but only the present. Moreover,
Jonah having spent three days and three nights in the belly of the whale,
was not destroyed by his flesh being dissolved, as is the case with that
natural decomposition which takes place in the belly, in the case of those
meats which enter into it, on account of the greater heat in the liquids,
that it might be shown that these bodies of ours may remain undestroyed.
For consider that God had images of Himself made as of gold, that is of
a purer spiritual substance, as the angels; and others of clay or brass,
as ourselves. He united the soul which was made in the image of God to
that which was earthy. As, then, we must here honour all the images of
a king, on account of the form which is in them, so also it is incredible
that we who are the images of God should be altogether destroyed as being
without honour. Whence also the Word descended into our world, and was
incarnate of our body, in order that, having fashioned it to a more divine
image, He might raise it incorrupt, although it had been dissolved by time.
And, indeed, when we trace out the dispensation which was figuratively
set forth by the prophet, we shall find the whole discourse visibly extending
to this.
Back to Volume 6 Index