Letters
The whole work on one page. Select a passage number to open that passage with its notes, Scripture references, and citation.
Chapter 1
1PL 53
Optabam, piissimi fratres, venerandam vestram synodum in tali rerum statu congregatam fuisse, quo nobis quoque, delectis communi sententia aliquot ex fratribus et coepiscopis nostris, instructam potius legationem mittere licuisset, quam excusationem lamentatione dignam; nisi hanc animi nostri affectionem diversa causæ impedivissent. Primum enim domini et filii nostri religiosissimi Theodosii imperatoris litteræ ad manus nostras perlatæ, ejusmodi erant, quæ beatæ memoriae fratris et coepiscopi nostri Augustini præsentiam peculiari ratione efflagitabant. Verum cum eæ litterae illum jam tum e vivis excessisse comperissent, ego regiam illam significationem, licet ad prædictum Augustinum præcipue destinata videretur, excipiens, missis ad universas Africæ provincias congruis litteris consuetisque sermonibus, synodum cogere volui convenientem; quo nimirum ex fratrum et episcoporum nostrorum numero seligerentur nonnulli, qui ad venerabilem beatitudinis vestræ synodum destinarentur. At omnis hac tempestate viæ aditus praeclusus est. Etenim effusa hostium multitudo, et ingens ubique provinciarum vastatio, quae incolis partim exstinctis, partim in fugam actis, miseram desolationis speciem, quoquoversum longe lateque porrigitur, oculis offert, promptam illam veniendi facultatem reprimit. His itaque impedimentis episcopi quibus propositum id erat, prohibiti, ex Africæ ambitu simul convenire nequiverunt. Hisce incommodis accedebat, litteras imperatoris in diebus paschæ ad nos perlatas esse, quando jam inde usque ad universalem venerandam synodum vix duorum mensium spatium supererat. Quod sane temporis intervallum, etsi nulla impraesentiarum ab hostibus difficultas fuisset objecta, vel ad Africanam synodum cogendam vix satis erat. Hinc factum est, ut licet solemnem aliquam legationem mittere nequaquam voluerimus, attamen propter reverentiam et observantiam quæ ecclesiasticae disciplinae debetur, filium meum Besulam diaconum una cum his excusationis litteris ad vos, venerabiles fratres, destinaverimus. II. Quamobrem vestram sanctitatem iterum atque iterum rogatam cupio (etiamsi fidem catholicam per tantam venerandorum sacerdotum synodum, Dei nostri auxilio in omnibus stabilem ac firmam futuram certo confidam) ut Spiritu sancto cooperante, quem cordibus vestris in omnibus quae acturi estis, præsto futurum non dubito, novas doctrinas, et antehac ecclesiasticis auribus inusitatas, priscae auctoritatis robore instructi e medio profligetis, atque ita quibuscunque novis erroribus resistatis; ne hos quos pridem impugnavit Ecclesia, hisque temporibus repullulantes, apostolicæ sedis auctoritas, sacerdotumque in unum consonans sententia oppressit, secundæ disputationis prætextu vox jam dudum ablata renovare videatur. Nam si quid forte novarum controversiarum inciderit, id discussioni subjiciatur oportet: ut vel recte dictum comprobetur, vel condemnatione dignum explodatur. At vero si quis ea quae jam olim dijudicata sunt, denuo in disputationem vocari sinat; is sane aliud nihil facere censebitur, quam de fide quæ hactenus valuit, ipsemet dubitare. Deinde ad posteritatis exemplum, ut ea quae nunc pro catholica fide definita sunt, perpetuam firmitatem obtinere valeant; oportet ea omnia inconcussa immotaque conservare, quæ superioribus temporibus a sanctis Patribus constituta sunt. Nam qui illam perpetuam stabilitatem retinere voluerit quæ de catholicae fidei ratione statuerit, is non propria auctoritate, sed antiquorum Patrum judicio sententiam suam corroborare debet: ita ut ea ratione partim veterum, partim recentiorum decretis et sententiis placita sua comprobans, unicam Ecclesiæ veritatem jam inde ab initio ad præsens usque tempus simplici puritate invictaque constantia et auctoritate decurrentem, se asserere, docere et tenere ostendat. Hæc pro praesenti Africanorum legatione, quam necessitas superius memorata impedivit, venerabilibus vestris auribus suggerere volui; obnixe interim rogans, ut calamitatibus rerum praesentiumque temporum spectatis, nostram absentiam non superbiæ aut negligentiæ, sed manifestæ huic necessitati ascribere velitis. Cyrillus Ecclesiæ Alexandrinae episcopus dixit: Et hæc reverendissimi piissimique Carthaginis episcopi Capreoli quæ lecta est epistola, cum dilucidam sententiam in se contineat, fidei gestorum inseratur. Vult enim antiqua fidei dogmata confirmari, nova vero et absurde excogitata et impie divulgata reprobari ac proscribi. Omnes episcopi simul exclamaverunt: Hae omnium voces: hæc omnes asserimus: hoc omnium est votum.
I wished, most pious brothers, that your venerable synod had been gathered in such a state of affairs that we too, having chosen by common decision some of our brothers and fellow bishops, might have sent a properly instructed embassy rather than an excuse worthy of lament; but various causes have hindered this desire of our mind. First, the letter of our lord and son, the most religious emperor Theodosius, when it was brought to our hands, was such that it particularly requested the presence of our brother and fellow bishop Augustine of blessed memory. But since that letter found that he had already departed from the living, I received that royal notice, though it seemed to be addressed chiefly to the said Augustine, and, sending suitable letters and the customary messages to all the provinces of Africa, I wished to convene a fitting synod, so that some of the number of our brothers and bishops might be chosen to be sent to the venerable synod of your beatitude. But at this time every approach by road has been closed. For the outpoured multitude of enemies and the vast devastation of the provinces everywhere, which, with the inhabitants partly killed and partly driven to flight, presents to the eyes a miserable sight of desolation stretching far and wide in every direction, prevents the ready possibility of coming. Hindered by these obstacles, the bishops who intended this could not assemble together from the whole circuit of Africa. Added to these difficulties was the fact that the emperor's letter was brought to us in the days of Easter, when scarcely two months remained before the universal venerable synod. That interval of time, even if no difficulty had at present been put in the way by enemies, was scarcely enough even to convene an African synod. Hence it came about that, though we could by no means send a solemn embassy, yet, out of the reverence and observance due to ecclesiastical discipline, we have sent to you, venerable brothers, my son the deacon Besula with this letter of excuse. [II.] Therefore I desire your holiness to be asked again and again (even though I am confident that, with the help of our God, the catholic faith will be stable and firm in all things through so great a synod of venerable bishops) that, with the cooperation of the Holy Spirit, who I do not doubt will be present to your hearts in all that you are to do, you may, armed with the strength of ancient authority, drive out new doctrines hitherto unheard of by the ears of the church, and so resist any new errors whatever; lest those errors which the church long ago attacked, and which, sprouting again in these times, the authority of the apostolic see and the harmonious sentence of the bishops have crushed, should seem to be revived, a voice long since silenced, under the pretext of a second discussion. For if any new controversy should happen to arise, it must be subjected to examination, so that what was rightly said may be approved, or what deserves condemnation may be rejected. But if anyone allows what was judged long ago to be called again into dispute, he will certainly be thought to be doing nothing else than doubting himself of the faith that has prevailed until now. Further, as an example for posterity, so that what has now been defined for the catholic faith may obtain perpetual firmness, all that was established in former times by the holy fathers must be kept unshaken and unmoved. For whoever wishes what he has decided concerning the catholic faith to retain perpetual stability ought to strengthen his sentence not by his own authority but by the judgment of the ancient fathers; so that, approving his decisions in this way by the decrees and sentences partly of the old and partly of the more recent fathers, he may show that he asserts, teaches and holds the one truth of the church, running from the beginning to the present time with simple purity and unconquered constancy and authority. These things I wished to suggest to your venerable ears in place of a present embassy of the Africans, which the necessity mentioned above has prevented; earnestly asking meanwhile that, considering the calamities of affairs and of the present times, you will ascribe our absence not to pride or negligence but to this manifest necessity. Cyril, bishop of the church of Alexandria, said: "Let this letter too of the most reverend and most pious Capreolus, bishop of Carthage, which has been read, be inserted in the Acts, since it contains a clear sentence. For he wishes the ancient dogmas of the faith to be confirmed, and the new ones, absurdly devised and impiously spread, to be rejected and proscribed." All the bishops cried out together: "These are the words of all; this we all assert; this is the wish of all."
Chapter 2
2PL 53
Sumptis atque perlectis litteris vestris, quas per Numinianum religiosum virum, filii dilectissimi, transmisistis, saluti et studio vestro quo fundatæ ac vetustæ catholicae fidei regulam inviolabili pietate tenetis ac defenditis, plurimum gratulatus, adverti Nestorianam haeresim, novam infandamque perniciem, sicut quibusdam locis jam coeperat pullulare, apud vos quoque velle zizaniæ suæ semina in peritorum corda jacere. Verum credo atque confido, perfectum agricolam Dominum nostrum, omnium creatorem, in omni loco dominationis suæ habere ac semper habuisse dignos evangelicæ frugis operarios; qui, licet ante tempus demessionis immunda semina exstirpari non debeant, continuis tamen orationibus ac prædicationibus semper invigilent: ita ut et illa, si fieri dum tempus est potuerit, convertantur et commutentur in triticum: aut certe non usquequaque inimicus humani generis tenera frumentorum genera nascentia per adulterinam intermixtionem valeat suffocare. Jam enim, quod etiam ad vestram notitiam pervenisse non dubito, intra Orientis partes, ubi primum pestis ista surrexit, congregata gloriosa synodo sacerdotum, cui etiam legatio nostra non defuit, in vestibulo cum suo auctore atque assertore compressa et radio apostolicæ lucis exstincta est. Nec mirari debet caritas vestra, si etiam post damnationem suam inter morientes spiritus fetidus adhuc flatus aspiret. Est enim semper pertinax hæreticorum audacia, et in sua male pernicie urgente peccatorum pondere perseverat. Quod si nondum forsitan cognovistis, facili lectione poteritis agnoscere. II. Quamvis igitur Christianis et devotis mentibus ipsa universalis Ecclesiæ auctoritas plene sufficiat, nec vestra, quantum missus a vobis sermo perdocuit, in hac causa minor videatur assertio: ne tamen ego quoque petitioni atque interrogationi sanctæ necessarium videar negare responsum, unam veramque doctrinam hanc esse confitemur, quam evangelica tenet ac tradit antiquitas. Id est: Dei Filium, Deum verum, et hominem verum, unius prorsus atque inseparabilis esse personæ: nec sicut in aliis patriarchis, prophetis, apostolis, cæterisque sanctis et præclarissimis viris habitavit aut habitat Deus, ita in Christum Jesum divinam illam plenitudinem velut extrinsecus credimus advenisse; sed proprio quodam atque ineffabili modo, Filium Dei etiam filium hominis factum: ut qui ingenita Patris substantia unigenitus permanebat ac permanet, mirabiliter suscepto homine, fieret primogenitus in multis fratribus (Rom. VIII, 29): et qui erat in principio Verbum, et Verbum erat apud Deum, et Deus erat Verbum, Verbum caro fieret et habitaret in nobis (Joan. I, I, 14). Ex quo igitur mysterium quod absconditum fuit a sæculis (Col. I, 26) in Deo, coepit per angelum in utero virginis operari, atque in ea sanctus Spiritus supervenit, et illi virtus Altissimi obumbravit (Luc. I, 35); Deus in homine nasci dignatus est, qui semper erat, ut homo nasceretur, qualis ante non fuerat. Qui enim sine matre in cœlis æterne genitus, ipse in terris sine patre in utero virginis homo de Spiritu sancto creatus est. Et ideo in Christo Jesu separari vel subdividi Dei hominisque nullo modo credimus posse personam: ne non jam in divinitate Trinitas, sed quaternitas numeretur. III. Beatus apostolus Paulus dum ad exuendum veterem hominem et induendum novum fideles exhortaretur: Primus, inquit, homo de terra terrenus, secundus homo de coelo coelestis: qualis terrenus, tales et terreni; et qualis coelestis, tales et coelestes: quomodo portavimus imaginem terreni, portemus et imaginem ejus qui de cœlo est (I Cor. xv, 47-49). Rogo dicant, quomodo est homo iste de coelo, si non est Deus conceptus in utero? aut quæ discretio est carnis et sanguinis in homine Adam, et in homine Christo, si non homo iste plenus est Deo? Quid enim sibi vult secundus homo de caelo? Nunquid caro transmissa descendit, ac non, sicut scriptum est, Spiritus sanctus in virginem supervenit? Sed quia Verbum caro factum est (Joan. I, 14), ideo coelestis homo appellatus est. Nec propterea carnem veram non habuit, quia de coelo descendit; quia carnem Deus accepit. Merito de se ipso idem Dominus dixit: Nemo ascendit in coelum, nisi qui de cœlo descendit, filius hominis qui est in cœlo (Joan. III, 13). Certe adhuc loquebatur in terra, nec ad Patrem post victoriam passionis et gloriam resurrectionis ascenderat: et tamen filium hominis jam in cælo esse dicebat. Hoc utique omni veritate testificans, quia et propter hominem Deus conversabatur in terra, et propter Deum homo habitabat in cælo. Unde etiam Apostolus: Qui descendit, inquit, ipse est et qui ascendit super omnes coelos, ut adimpleret omnia (Ephea. IV, 10). Item alibi, cum de carnis suæ cibo et potu sanguinis Salvator ipse mystice loqueretur, sciens quod offensi ex hoc ejus discipuli murmurarent dicentes: Durus est hic sermo, quis potest eum audire (Joan. vi, 61)? sic ait: Hoc vos scandalizat? Si ergo videritis filium hominis ascendentem ubi erat prius (Ibid., 63)? Ecce et hic advertitis quemadmodum propter unitatem Dei hominisque personæ, filium hominis ubi erat prius perhibet ascensurum, quem in utero virginis constat esse formatum, ut ex eo humanæ nativitatis sumpsisset principium. IV. Nemo itaque sacrilego spiritu audeat separare quod videt in coelo et in terra unitate inseparabili permanere. Sicut enim ab omnipotentia Deitatis homo Christus Jesus esse non potest alienus; ita et ab his quæ in hominem vel circa hominem gesta sunt, separari non potest Deus. Natus ergo est homo qui nondum fuerat, quia Verbum caro factum est, et inhabitavit in nobis (Joan. i, 14). Simili modo passus est impassibilis per passibilem quem suscepit, et immortalis mortuus est, et qui nunquam moritur resurrexit. Neque enim vel in passione defuit illi homini Deus: alioquin non est Dominus gloriæ crucifixus (1 Cor. II, 8). An dicimus Deum in suscepto homine etiam apud inferos non fuisse? aut vero metuendum est, ne divinitas ibi quasi pœnaliter fuerit, quam nulla qualitas afficit, nulla demensio circumscribit? cujus magnitudinem nemo capit, præsentiam nemo fugit, secretum nemo invenit, splendorem nullus attingit? Times includi immensum? teneri omnipotentem abscondi ubicunque diffusum? Resolvere, sicut scriptum est, inferorum parturitiones, in quibus voluit et qualiter voluit rerum Dominus, subjici hujusmodi conditioni non potuit (Act. II, 24), Audi eum ante tot annorum millia, dum beato Job mirabilium suorum opera per nubem velut improperanti similis prædicaret, hoc quoque inter innumeras sui potentias cumulantem: Nunquid tu abstulisti impiis lucem, aut brachium superborum comminuisti? aut venisti ad fines maris aut in vestigiis abyssi ambulasti? aut tibi, inquit, aperientur metu portæ mortis, aut janitores inferni videntes te timuerunt? aut cognovisti latitudinem sub cœlo (lob XXXVIII, 15-18, sec. LXX)? Si Patris hæc vox est, nihil ergo est omnipotenti difficile, quoniam ubique est, nusquam non est. Quando ei etiam propheta ex persona cujusdam dicti: Quo ibo a spiritu tuo, et a facie tua quo fugiam? si ascendero in cælum, tu ibi es; si descendero in infernum, ades (Psal. CXXXVIII, 7, 8). Hoc omnino testificans ac demonstrans, Deum cujus majestate plena sunt omnia, quodam incomprehensibili utique et inexplicabili modo etiam inferis interesse. Si autem, quod magis probabile est, in his quæ de eo tanto ante in prophetia praedicta sunt, et impleta Filii Dei vox est, quoniam per ipsum facta sunt omnia, et sine ipso factum est nihil (Joan. I, 3): ipse in homine est visitare inferorum dignatus obstrusa, et prepositos mortis præsentia invictæ majestatis exterruit, et propter liberandos quos voluit, inferorum portas reserari præcepit. V. De ipso siquidem Joannes apostolus in Apocalypsi sic loquitur: Posuit manum dexteram super me dicens: Noli timere: ego sum primus et novissimus; et vivens, qui fueram mortuus; et ecce sum vivens in specula sæculorum: et habeo clavem mortis et inferorum (Apoc. I, 17, 18). Propter deitatem quippe primus, quoniam principium est quod et loquitur nobis (Joan. VIII, 25): propter humanitatem vero novissimus, quia suscipere crucem non dedignatus est et mortem pro nobis. Et ideo cui in Divinitate nu<b sunt omnia creaturarum, etiam in homine suscepto habet claves mortis et inferorum. Tantum igitur abest, Deum Dei Filium, incommutabilem atque incomprehensibilem, ab inferis potuisse concludi; ut nec ipsam assumptionis animam credamus, aut exitiabiliter susceptam, aut tenaciter derelictam. Sed nec carnem ejus credimus contagione alicujus corruptionis infectam. Ipsius namque vox est in psalmo, sicut Petrus interpretatur apostolus: Non derelinques animam meam apud inferos, neque sanctum tuum videre corruptionem (Psal. xv, 40; Act. n, 27). Ipse propter culpam nostram factus est velut homo sine adjutorio (Psal. LXXXVII. 5): propter innocentiam vero ac potentiam suam inventus est inter mortuos liber. Tunc enim vere quæ non rapuerat, sicut scriptum est (Ps. LXVIII, 5) exsolvebat. Non itaque mirum, si Deum locus aliquis recipit, nec tamen capit: præsentiam sentit, majestatem non impedit: expavescit omnipotentiam, substantiam non includit. Siquidem illa summa et perfecta beatitudo ei inexstinguibilis lucis [forte lux], nec obscurari tenebris, nec variari locis, nec passionibus affici, nec conditionibus minui, nec temporibus valeat commutari. Deus ergo filium proprium hominem nec in inferis deseruit, nec apud inferos dereliquit. Cujus autem virtute ac majestate antiqua sanctorum corpora visa sunt resurrexisse (Matth. XlVII, i i, 52), si Deus inferos minime visitavit? Quis ille est qui petras scindi, terram commoveri, solem obscurari, diem fugere, velum templi in duas dividi partes effecit? Nunquid homo tantum? nonne etiam Deus? Ergo ei nec in cruce, nec in morte, nec in sepulcro, nec in inferis defuit. Nec aliter, aut de alio solet intelligi quod in psalmo dictum est: Auferte portas, principes, vestras, et elevamini, portæ æternales, et introibit rex gloriæ (Psal. XXIII, 7). Unde expavescentibus atque interrogantibus, Quis est iste rex gloriæ (Ibid., 8)? respondetur, Dominus fortis et potens, Dominus potens in proelio (Ib.). Quo prælio? nisi in quo mortem morte calcavit, peccatum innoceDI occisua extinxit, et tropæum victoriæ de diabolo et angelis ejus reportavit. VI. At enim ipse in cruce dixit: Deus, Deus meus, quare me dereliquisti (Psal. XXI, 2)? Sed ista suscepti hominis vox est. Attende unde assumpta est, et illic vide quid sequitur: Longe, inquit, a salute mea verba delictorum (Ibid.). Similis est hæc vox etiam illi qua dicitur: Tristis est anima mea usque ad mortem (Matth. xxvi, 38). Nonne paulo ante ipse discipulis dixerat: In hoc contristati estis, quoniam dixi, Eo ad Patrem meum, et jam non videbitis me (Joan. XVI, 6); et, Si diligeretis me, gauderetis quia eo ad Patrem, quia Pater major me est (Joan. xiv, 28). In quo ergo jubet gaudere discipulos suos? Qualiter creditur contristari magister, nisi ut in homine veri hominis passiones et fluctuationes ostenderet? Qui enim propter nos redimendos, instituendos, confirmandosque venerat, omnia in se infirmitatis nostræ genera sustinebat. Non enim habemus sacerdotem, qui non possit compati infirmitatibus nostris (Hebr. iv, 15): etenim, sicut Apostolus ait, Expertus est omnia secundum similitudinem sine peccato. Similis huic est etiam illa vox: Pater, si fieri potest, transeat a me calix iste: verum non quod ego volo, sed quod tu vis (Motth. XXVI, 39). Nonne in hoc venerat, ut pro nobis hunc calicem biberet, et venenum a serpente propinatum tali antidoto salutis expelleret? Nonne potestatem habebat ponendi animam suam, et potestatem habebat iterum sumendi eam (Joan. x, 18)? Nonne ipse dixerat: Nemo tollit eam a me, sed ego a me ipso pono eam (Ibid.)? Et tamen nunc velut dubitans loquitur et recusans: ut et illic divina potestas appareat, et hic se conditio humana cognoscat. Nonne hoc mysterium ante tempora aeterna in Deo fuisse absconditum clamat Apostolus (Col. i, 26)? Num vero velut repentinum aliquid Christus expavit, quod certo tempore faciendum in aeternitate cum Patre disposuit? Hæc ergo et talia cum dicuntur aut fiunt, sicut sæpe dictum est, veram hominis infirmitatem fragilitatemque demonstrant, nec ideo praesentiam divinae majestatis evacuant. VII. Hic homo quisquis es, qui putas Deum Christum ab homine Christo passionis tempore separatum, non recordaris eum passuris discipulis suam praesentiam fideliter pollicentem, qui dicit: Cum vos tradiderint, nolite cogitare quomodo aut quid loquamini; dabitur enim vobis in illa hora quid loquamini. Non enim vos estis qui loquimini, sed spiritus Patris vestri qui loquitur in vobis (Matth. X, 19, 20). Itane ille qui servis facientibus Domini voluntatem suam divinam presentiam promisit, donavit. exhibuit; in quo nullo existente peccato, pro nostra salute mortem subiit innoxiam, ut Patris faceret voluntatem, divinum auxilium sibi carnis tempore denegavit? Et Deus hominem quem ob hæc sustinenda nulla compulsus necessitate suscepit, in hac perfunctione destituit? Loquitur inter tormenta martyrum præsens, nec eos aliquid meditari permittit, et se ipsum in crucis patibulo dereliquit? Ipse est enim, quod sepe ac semper et repetendum: nec distingui potest Dei hominisque persona, quamvis sit in eo diversa substantia. Absit aliud credere, absit aliter de omnipotente sentire. Nec nasci æternus, nec crescere perfectus, nec impassibilis pati, nec immortalis mori, sine ulla sui mutatione vel corruptione, sicut jam dictum est, formidavit. Sed quia hæc pati non posset sola Divinitas, hominem per quem tanti muneris mysterio perfungeretur, accepit. Nam et in coelum receptus, illuc eum levavit unde nunquam ipse discessit. Audiamus Apostolum prædicantem Christum crucifixum, Judæis quidem scandalum, gentibus autem stultitiam: ipsis vero vocatis Judæis et Græcis, eumdem ipsum Christum Dei virtutem et Dei sapientiam (1 Cor. i, 23, i4). Advertite, filii dilectissimi, et quod jam nostis agnoscite; ipsum Christum, qui propter humilitatem suscepti hominis Judaeis dicitur fuisse scandalum, gentibus autem stultitia, ipsum esse Dei virtutem et Dei sapientiam. Nunquid vel hic separata aut discreta est ab Apostolo divinitatis humanitatisque persona? aut erubuit eamdem dicere Dei sapientiam, quam factam dixerat gentium stultitiam? aut eumdem asserere Dei virtutem, quem scandalum dixerat Judæorum? Quid ergo nos erubescimus confiteri Deum propter hominem atque in homine natum et passum; cum non negamus donante Deo factum eumdem ipsum hominem Deum? Quod utique per divinam gratiam, non per humanam substantiam accepisse cognoscitur. VIII. Adhuc paulo infra subsequitur: Ex ipso autem vos estis in Christo Jesu, qui factus est nobis a Deo sapientia et justitia et sanctificatio et redemptio: ut quemadmodum scriptum est: Qui gloriatur, in Domino glorietur (Ibid., 50, 31). Certe Christus Jesus hominis tantum nomen est, ait hæreticus. Sed Paulus, qui sciebat et dixerat non esse in homine gloriandum, Christum Jesum non tantum hominem, sed Deum quoque cognoverat; quem sapientiam et justitiam et sanctificationem et redemptionem nobis a Deo factum esse credebat; et in eo credentes gloriari docebat: quoniam Christus Jesus et homo et Deus est. Et ad haec consequenter non elatione verbi aut sapientiae, mysterium Dei annuntians addit et dicit: Nihil me judicavi scire in vobis, nisi Jesum Christum, et hunc crucifixum (I Cor. II, 2). Ac ne Judæorum iniquus populus parvum se asserat admisisse peccatum, si se intelligat nudum tantum hominem persecutum; mysterium in Dei sapientia dicit absconditum, nulli principum hujus saeculi revelatum testificans (Ibid.7). Quod si cognovissent, nunquam Dominum gloriæ crucifixissent (Ibid. 8) Ecce et hic Christum Jesum quem Dominum gloriæ confitetur, ipsum prædicare non metuit sæculi principibus crucifixum. Omnem hujus lectionis continentiam consideretis exhortor; et videbitis quanto molimine atque conatu, sanctus Apostolus hominum mentes a terrenæ tantum intelligentiae vilitate ad divina in hoc mysterio et coelestia consideranda sustollat. Breviter enim cuncta transeo, quæ ipsi plenius et latius poteritis advertere. Nam et ad Corinthios secunda (v, 13, 14) quodam loco sic loquitur: Sive, inquit, mente excessimus, Deo; sive temperantes sumus, vobis: caritas enim compellit nos: judicantes hoc, quoniam unus pro omnibus mortuus est. Et paulo post: Omnia, inquit, ex Deo, qui reconciliavit nos sibi per Christum: et dedit nobis mysterium reconciliationis, quia Deus erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi (Ibid., 18, 19). IX. Quaero quemadmodum: non aliter quam nascendo, patiendo, moriendo, resurgendo atque in coelum ascendendo? Quæro etiam quod sit mysterium reconciliationis nostrae? Num aliud quam sacrificium quod per suum sanguinem summus sacerdos obtulit Christus? Videamus ergo utrumnam solus homo perfecerit: quoniam, sicut illi putant, Deus ab eo in passione discessit. Sed huic opinioni Paulus apostolus evidentissime contradicit: Deus, inquit, erat in Christo. Erat in Christo, non discesserat a Christo. Deus erat in Christo, mundum reconcilians sibi. Quemadmodum reconcilians? non reputans illis delicta eorum. An forte hoc stultis placet, ut per hominem tantum fiat remissio peccatorum? Quod cum etiam Judæi respuerent dicendo: Blasphemat: quia potest dimittere peccata, nisi solus Deus (Marc. n, 7) i ipse Dominus, Dei hominisque Filius, volens manifestare incredulis non esse solum hominem quem videbant, sed Deum etiam in quem credere contemnebant, et potestatem divinam homini quoque propter unitatem personæ ejus ac præsentiæ contributam evidenter ostendere: Ut sciatis, ait, quoniam potestatem habet filius hominis super terram dimittere peccata, tunc dixit paralytico: Surge, tolle lectum tuum, et vade in domum tuam (Matth. IX, 6). Ita Deus et homo, unus et verus animarum corporumque salvator, et exteriorem hominem morbo carnali, et interiorem peccati onere levavit. Deus ergo erat in Christo mundum reconcilians sibi: nusquam et nunquam deserens hominem, quem propria dignatione, nulla prorsus necessitate, suscepit. X. Ad Hebræos quoque idem apostolus in ipsius Epistolæ prima fronte testatur: Postremo, inquit, in his diebus locutus est nobis in Filio, quem constituit hæredem universorum, per quem fecit et sæcula. Qui cum sit splendor gloriæ, et figura substantiæ ejus, gerens quoque omnia verbo virtutis suæ, purgatione peccatorum a se facta, sedit in dextera majestatis in excelsis (Hebr. I, 2, 3). Ipse ergo Filius Dei et filius hominis, unus est atque idem, qui propter æternitatem cum Patre fecit saecula, propter incommutabilem lucem splendor est gloriæ, propter æqualitatem figura est substantiae, propter majestatem gerit omnia verbo virtutis. Ipse etiam propter suscepti hominis passionem, peccatorum nostrorum fecit purgationem; et propter remunerationem, habet in Patris dextera sessionem. Quomodo autem purgationem fecit peccatorum, nisi delens chirographum, quod adversum nos fuerat (Col. II, 14), diabolo accusante conscriptum? quomodo delevit, nisi cruci affigens, et sanguine innocente diluens? Quod ergo olim Deus locutus est patribus in prophetis, et postremo est testificatus in Filio (Hebr. i, i, 2), hoc credamus, hoc teneamus, hoc omnibus viribus defendamus. Accedit ad causam, quod tunc principatus et potestates exspoliavit fiducialiter, triumphans eos in semetipso (Col. II, 15). Quod opus non est omnino solius hominis, sed divinæ in homine majestatis. Neque enim homo fortis et potens, sed Dominus potens in bello (Psal. XXIII, 8). XI. Item illic post multa, quibus Apostolus mysterium Novi Testamenti a Veteris figura discrevit, sic ait: Refragans legi Moysi, sine miseratione moritur in duobus aut tribus testibus: quanto magis videtur deteriore pœna dignus, qui Filium Dei conculcavit, et qui sanguinem Novi Testamenti immundum æstimavit, in quo sanctificatus est, et spiritui gratiæ Dei contumeliam fecit? Novimus enim eum qui dixit: Mihi vindicta, ego retribuam, dicit Dominus (Hebr. x, 28-30). Quaero qualiter possit Deus Dei Filius conculcari. Videtis etiam hic quemadmodum nec dubitet, nec metuat, nec erubescat asserere Dei Filium conculcatum. Sed quoniam si quis sanguinem in quo sanctificatus est, immundum existimat, utique Filium Dei conculcat: ideo non discrevit hominis passionem a Dei majestate, cujus reum vult esse illum, qui pro nihilo existimaverit pro se sanguinem fusum. Non enim Filius Dei conculcatur, nisi in eo quod mortis quam in homine sustinuit, beneficium spernitur. Ipse quoque Salvator ac Dominus fidem remuneraturus interrogat. Videte quid dixerit: Quem me, inquit, dicunt esse filium hominis (Matth. xvi, 13)? Atque cum diversas aliorum opiniones illi suggererent: Vos autem, inquit, quem me dicitis esse (Ibid., 15)? me utique filium hominis. Ad hæc Petrus, ab eodem inspiratus, et in hac confessione ad rectam fidem forma sui universis gentibus profuturus, adverte quanta et quam plena integritate responderit: Tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi (Matth. XVI, 16). Tu tu, o ille, qui te filium hominis dicis, tu es Christus Filius Dei vivi. Nunquid non etiam hic, sive interrogatione Domini seu in responsione apostoli, utriusque substantiæ una monstratur ostenditurque persona; dum et ille se hominis filium, quod in aperto videbatur, edicit, et Petrus eum Christum Dei Filium, quod in occulto gerebatur, donata sibi confessione monstravit? Unde laudatus a Domino et beatus est dictus (Ibid.. i7); quoniam non ei caro et sanguis revelaverit, sed Pater qui in coelis est. Quod ergo credere debeamus, Deus Pater per Deum Filium revelet, non caro et sanguis insinuet. XII. Post resurrectionem quoque, cum Dominum Maria minime cognovisset, et ille proprio nomine appellando viam illi recognitionis aperiret, ac se tangere volentem ne faceret prohiberet; quid ei nuntiandum discipulis delegare dignatus fuerit, audiamus. Vade, inquit, ad fratres meos, et dic eis: Ascendo ad Patrem meum et patrem vestrum; ad Deum meum et ad Deum vestrum (Joan. xx, 17). Age nunc, eligat hæreticus utrum putat, et cujus voce malit hanc esse, ipse discernat: utraque parte acuto spiritali gladio ferietur. Ascendo, inquit, ad Patrem meum et ad patrem vestrum; ad Deum meum, et ad Deum vestrum. Si hominis vox est, ergo Filius Dei est homo ille: ad Patrem meum, dixit, ascendo. Si Dei vox est, ergo homo est Deus ille: ad Deum meum enim dixit, ascendo. Nec enim ait, Ascendo ad Patrem meum, et Deum hominis mei: aut, Ascendo ad Deum meum, et ad Patrem Dei loci. Qui igitur personam divinitatis humanitatisque discernit, utroque intellectu convincitur. Aut homo dixit, et idem ipse est Dei Filius: aut Deus dixit, et idem ipse est etiam homo susceptus. Qui enim dicit, Ascendo ad Patrem meum et ad Deum meum; repetendo meum et meum, unam probat polliceturque personam, quamvis distinguat utramque substantiam. Quod enim ait, Ascendo ad Patrem meum, pertinere quidem videtur ad unigenitum Filium: quod autem ait, ad Deum meum, pertinere videtur ad hominem factum. Sed in Christo Jesu nec homo creatus potest dici, nec unigenitus Deus negari homo poterit natus. Atque ideo nec Dei tantum, nec hominis tantum, vox ista esse convincitur: quam Deus et homo, unus atque unicus ipse filius, ad suos discipulos perferendam inseparabili omnino atque indivisibili mandavit affectu. Denique ut noveritis, et plenius advertatis ita esse quod dicitur, ad dissolvenda omnium hæreticorum machinamenta et universas calumnias refellendas; ubi opus fuit naturam creatoris a creatura discernere, videte qualiter pro nobis pietas divina vigilavit. Vade, inquit, ad fratres meos, et dic eis: Ascendo ad Patrem meum et ad Patrem vestrum; ad Deum meum et ad Deum vestrum: Ecce hic evidenter ipsius Domini, id est Dei et hominis, a famulorum suorum persona distinguitur, et a natura vocatio separatur. Quamvis enim id quod mandatur, jam amicis mandetur et fratribus: ostenditur tamen quid Domino debeatur, quid servis cæteris tribuatur. Potuit namque dicere, Ascendo ad Patrem nostrum, et ad Deum nostrum; quia multum distat inter dominationem et conditionem, inter generationem et adoptionem, inter substantiam et gratiam. Ideoque hic non permixte nec passim dicitur, Ascendo ad Patrem nostrum et ad Deum nostrum: sed ad Patrem meum et patrem vestrum, ad Deum meum et ad Deum vestrum. Aliter enim illi Deus pater est, aliter nobis. Illum siquidem natura coæquat, misericordia humiliat: nos vero natura prosternit, misericordia erigit. Hoc enim egit ista divina humanitas et humana divinitas, tali ac tanto miraculo, ut hujusmodi gratiam indigna mortalium meruisset infirmitas. XIII. Et quis poterit, vel cui sufficiat paginarum sanctarum omnia uno in tempore documenta congerere, quibus sincera hæc et mera veritas perdocetur? Sed et modus sermonis qui jam dudum excessit, aliquando tenendus est, nec mihi diutius laborandum cum eis, quos instruente Domino eruditos agnovi. Instate itaque, sicut Apostolus (II Tim. IV, 2) præcepit, opportune atque importune; et doctrina sana universos errantes arguite, revocate, instruite, roborate: non mea, quæ nulla aut parva sunt, habentes in hac fidei regula documenta; sed Scripturarum divinarum, ac magnorum et doctissimorum virorum, qui hæc ante nos et firmissime tenuerunt, et multiplicibus libris eloquentissime docuerunt.
Having received and read your letter, dearest sons, which you sent by the devout man Numinianus, I greatly congratulated you on your soundness and zeal, by which you hold and defend with inviolable piety the rule of the long-founded catholic faith; and I perceived that the Nestorian heresy, a new and unspeakable ruin, as it had already begun to sprout in certain places, wishes among you too to cast the seeds of its tares into the hearts of the unwary. But I believe and trust that our Lord, the perfect farmer, creator of all, has and always has had in every place of his dominion worthy labourers of the gospel harvest, who, though the unclean seeds must not be rooted out before the time of reaping, yet always keep watch with continual prayers and preaching, so that either these may, if it can be done while there is time, be converted and changed into wheat, or at least the enemy of the human race may not everywhere be able to choke the tender kinds of grain as they spring up by an adulterous intermixture. For already, as I do not doubt has also come to your notice, in the regions of the East, where this pestilence first arose, a glorious synod of bishops was gathered, to which our embassy too was not lacking, and in its very entrance it was crushed together with its author and champion, and extinguished by the ray of apostolic light. Nor should your charity wonder if even after its condemnation its fetid spirit still breathes out its breath among the dying. For the boldness of heretics is always obstinate and, under the pressing weight of its sins, perseveres in its own ruin. If perhaps you do not yet know this, you will be able to learn it by an easy reading. [II.] Although, then, for Christian and devout minds the authority of the universal church itself fully suffices, and your own assertion in this case, as far as the letter you sent has shown, seems no less, nevertheless, lest I too should seem to refuse a necessary answer to your holy request and question, we confess that this is the one and true teaching which the antiquity of the Gospel holds and hands down: that is, that the Son of God, true God and true man, is of one wholly inseparable person; and we do not believe that the divine fullness came into Christ Jesus as it were from outside, in the way that God dwelt or dwells in the other patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and the rest of the holy and most illustrious men; but that in a proper and ineffable way the Son of God was made also the son of man; so that he who remained and remains only-begotten in the unbegotten substance of the Father, having wonderfully taken man, might become the firstborn among many brothers; and he who was in the beginning the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, the Word, might become flesh and dwell among us. From the time, then, that the mystery which had been hidden for ages in God began to be accomplished through the angel in the womb of the virgin, and the Holy Spirit came upon her and the power of the Most High overshadowed her, God, who always was, deigned to be born in man, so that a man was born such as he had not been before. For he who was eternally begotten in heaven without a mother was himself created man on earth without a father in the womb of the virgin from the Holy Spirit. And therefore we believe that in Christ Jesus the person of God and man can in no way be separated or subdivided, lest there be counted in the Godhead not a Trinity but a quaternity. [III.] The blessed apostle Paul, when exhorting the faithful to put off the old man and put on the new, says: "The first man was from the earth, earthly; the second man from heaven, heavenly. As was the earthly, such are the earthly; and as is the heavenly, such are the heavenly. Just as we have borne the image of the earthly, let us bear also the image of him who is from heaven." Let them tell me, I ask, how this man is from heaven, if God was not conceived in the womb? Or what distinction is there of flesh and blood between the man Adam and the man Christ, if this man is not full of God? For what does "the second man from heaven" mean? Did flesh come down, sent from above, and did not, as is written, the Holy Spirit come upon the virgin? But because the Word became flesh, he was therefore called the heavenly man. Nor, because he came down from heaven, did he therefore not have true flesh, since God took flesh. Rightly the same Lord said of himself: "No one has ascended into heaven except he who came down from heaven, the son of man who is in heaven." Certainly he was still speaking on earth and had not yet ascended to the Father after the victory of the passion and the glory of the resurrection; and yet he said that the son of man was already in heaven. In this he bore witness with all truth that, on account of the man, God was living on earth, and on account of God, the man was dwelling in heaven. Hence also the apostle says: "He who descended is the same who also ascended above all the heavens, that he might fill all things." Likewise elsewhere, when the Saviour himself was speaking mystically of the food of his flesh and the drink of his blood, knowing that his disciples, offended by this, murmured, saying, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?", he said this: "Does this offend you? What then if you see the son of man ascending where he was before?" See, here too you notice how, on account of the unity of the person of God and man, he declares that the son of man will ascend where he was before, though it is certain that he was formed in the womb of the virgin, so as to take from her the beginning of his human birth. [IV.] Let no one, then, with a sacrilegious spirit, dare to separate what he sees remain in heaven and on earth in an inseparable unity. For as the man Christ Jesus cannot be a stranger to the omnipotence of the Godhead, so too God cannot be separated from the things that were done in the man or concerning the man. So the man was born who had not yet been, because the Word became flesh and dwelt among us. In like manner the impassible suffered through the passible man whom he took, and the immortal died, and he who never dies rose again. For God was not absent from that man even in the passion: otherwise the Lord of glory was not crucified. Or do we say that God, in the man he had taken, was not also among the dead? Or is it to be feared that the Godhead was there as though under punishment, which no quality affects, no measure circumscribes, whose greatness no one grasps, whose presence no one escapes, whose secret no one finds out, whose splendour no one reaches? Do you fear that the immeasurable is shut in, that the almighty is held, that he who is spread everywhere is hidden? To loose, as it is written, the pangs of the underworld, to which he willed, and in the way he willed, the Lord of all things could not be subjected in such a condition. Hear him, so many thousands of years before, when, speaking to blessed Job through the cloud as though reproaching him, he proclaimed the works of his wonders and added this too among his countless powers: "Have you taken away light from the wicked, or broken the arm of the proud? Or have you come to the ends of the sea, or walked in the tracks of the abyss? Or are the gates of death opened to you in fear, and have the gatekeepers of hell, seeing you, been afraid? Or have you known the breadth under heaven?" If this is the Father's voice, then nothing is difficult for the almighty, since he is everywhere and there is nowhere he is not; seeing that the prophet too says to him, in the person of a certain speaker: "Where shall I go from your Spirit, and where shall I flee from your face? If I ascend into heaven, you are there; if I descend into hell, you are present." In this he bears witness and shows that God, of whose majesty all things are full, is in some incomprehensible and inexplicable way present even in the underworld. But if, as is more probable, in these things that were foretold of him so long before in prophecy and have been fulfilled, it is the voice of the Son of God, since all things were made through him and without him nothing was made, then he himself, in the man, deigned to visit the closed places of the underworld, and by the presence of his unconquered majesty terrified the overseers of death, and, for the sake of setting free those whom he willed, commanded the gates of the underworld to be opened. [V.] Indeed, the apostle John speaks thus of him in the Apocalypse: "He laid his right hand upon me, saying: Do not fear; I am the first and the last, and the living one, who was dead; and behold, I am alive for ages of ages; and I have the key of death and of hell." First, of course, on account of his deity, since he is the beginning, who also speaks to us; but last on account of his humanity, because he did not disdain to take up the cross and death for us. And therefore he, at whose nod all created things exist in his Godhead, holds also, in the man he took, the keys of death and hell. So far, then, is God the Son of God, unchangeable and incomprehensible, from having been able to be shut in by the underworld, that we do not believe even the soul he assumed was either taken to its destruction or held fast and abandoned there. Nor do we believe that his flesh was infected by the contagion of any corruption. For his is the voice in the psalm, as the apostle Peter interprets it: "You will not abandon my soul in hell, nor let your holy one see corruption." He himself, for our guilt, became like a man without help; but on account of his innocence and power he was found free among the dead. For then he truly paid back, as it is written, what he had not taken. It is no wonder, then, if some place receives God and yet does not contain him: it feels his presence but does not hinder his majesty; it dreads his omnipotence but does not shut in his substance. For that supreme and perfect blessedness of unquenchable light can neither be darkened by darkness, nor varied by places, nor affected by sufferings, nor diminished by conditions, nor changed by times. God, then, did not desert his own Son, the man, in death, nor abandon him in the underworld. By whose power and majesty were the bodies of the ancient saints seen to have risen, if God did not visit the underworld at all? Who is it that caused the rocks to be split, the earth to be shaken, the sun to be darkened, the day to flee, the veil of the temple to be divided in two? Was it a man only? Was it not also God? Therefore he was not absent from him on the cross, nor in death, nor in the tomb, nor in the underworld. Nor is that saying of the psalm usually understood otherwise or of another: "Lift up your gates, O princes, and be lifted up, eternal gates, and the King of glory shall come in." Hence, to those who are terrified and ask, "Who is this King of glory?", the answer is given: "The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle." In what battle, if not the one in which he trampled down death by death, extinguished sin by the slaying of the innocent, and carried off the trophy of victory over the devil and his angels? [VI.] But, it is said, he himself said on the cross: "God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" But this is the voice of the man he had taken. Look where it is taken from, and see there what follows: "Far from my salvation," it says, "are the words of my transgressions." This voice is like that one too where it is said: "My soul is sorrowful even to death." Had he not, a little before, said to his disciples: "You are saddened because I said, I go to my Father, and you will no longer see me"; and, "If you loved me, you would rejoice that I go to the Father, for the Father is greater than I"? In what, then, does he bid his disciples rejoice? How is the master believed to be saddened, unless to show in the man the sufferings and agitations of a true man? For he who had come to redeem, instruct and strengthen us bore in himself every kind of our weakness. "For we do not have a priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses"; indeed, as the apostle says, "he was tested in all things in the same likeness, without sin." Like this is that voice too: "Father, if it can be, let this cup pass from me; yet not what I will, but what you will." Had he not come for this, to drink this cup for us, and with such an antidote of salvation to drive out the poison offered by the serpent? Did he not have power to lay down his life, and power to take it again? Had he not himself said: "No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of myself"? And yet now he speaks as though doubting and refusing, so that there the divine power might appear, and here the human condition might recognize itself. Does not the apostle cry out that this mystery was hidden in God before eternal times? Surely Christ did not take fright at something sudden, which he had arranged in eternity with the Father to be done at a fixed time? These and such things, then, when they are said or done, as has often been said, show the true weakness and frailty of man, and do not on that account empty out the presence of the divine majesty. [VII.] Here, O man, whoever you are, who think that Christ as God was separated from Christ as man at the time of the passion: do you not remember him faithfully promising his presence to his disciples who were to suffer, saying: "When they hand you over, do not think how or what you are to speak; for what you are to speak will be given you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father who speaks in you"? Did he who promised, gave and showed his divine presence to servants doing their Lord's will, he in whom there was no sin, who underwent an innocent death for our salvation in order to do the Father's will, deny himself divine help at the time of the flesh? And did God, who took man, compelled by no necessity, to endure these things, abandon him in this performance? Is he present speaking amid the torments of the martyrs, not allowing them to prepare anything, and did he abandon himself on the gibbet of the cross? For he is the same, which must be repeated often and always; nor can the person of God and of man be distinguished in him, although there is in him a diverse substance. Far be it to believe otherwise; far be it to think otherwise of the Almighty. He did not shrink from being born though eternal, from growing though perfect, from suffering though impassible, from dying though immortal, without any change or corruption of himself, as has already been said. But because the Godhead alone could not suffer these things, he took a man through whom he might perform the mystery of so great a gift. For when he was received into heaven, he raised the man there, whence he himself never departed. Let us hear the apostle preaching Christ crucified, a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the gentiles, but to those who are called, Jews and Greeks, the same Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. Notice, dearest sons, and recognize what you already know: that the same Christ who, on account of the lowliness of the man he took, is said to have been a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the gentiles, is himself the power of God and the wisdom of God. Is the person of the divinity and humanity separated or divided by the apostle even here? Or was he ashamed to call the same one the wisdom of God whom he had said had become foolishness to the gentiles? Or to assert that the same one is the power of God whom he had called a stumbling block to the Jews? Why, then, are we ashamed to confess that God was born and suffered on account of the man and in the man, when we do not deny that, by God's gift, this same man was made God? This, certainly, he is known to have received through divine grace, not through human substance. [VIII.] A little further on still it follows: "But from him you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us from God wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption; so that, as it is written, Let him who boasts, boast in the Lord." "Certainly Christ Jesus is the name of a man only," says the heretic. But Paul, who knew and had said that one must not boast in man, had known Christ Jesus to be not only a man but also God; whom he believed to have become for us from God wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption; and he taught believers to boast in him, since Christ Jesus is both man and God. And consistently with this, announcing the mystery of God not with loftiness of speech or wisdom, he adds and says: "I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and him crucified." And lest the wicked people of the Jews assert that they committed a small sin, if they understood that they had persecuted a mere man only, he says that the mystery was hidden in the wisdom of God, testifying that it was revealed to none of the rulers of this age; "for if they had known it, they would never have crucified the Lord of glory." See, here too he does not fear to proclaim that Christ Jesus, whom he confesses as the Lord of glory, was crucified by the rulers of this age. I urge you to consider the whole content of this reading, and you will see with what great effort and endeavour the holy apostle lifts human minds from the cheapness of a merely earthly understanding to the consideration of divine and heavenly things in this mystery. I pass over all things briefly, which you yourselves will be able to notice more fully and widely. For in the second letter to the Corinthians he speaks thus in one place: "If we are beside ourselves, it is for God; if we are of sound mind, it is for you. For love compels us, judging this, that one died for all." And a little later: "All things are from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ, and gave us the mystery of reconciliation; for God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself." [IX.] I ask: how? In no other way than by being born, suffering, dying, rising again and ascending into heaven? I ask also what the mystery of our reconciliation is? Is it anything other than the sacrifice which Christ the high priest offered through his own blood? Let us see, then, whether the man alone accomplished it, since, as they think, God departed from him in the passion. But the apostle Paul contradicts this opinion most plainly: "God," he says, "was in Christ." He was in Christ; he had not departed from Christ. "God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself." How reconciling? "Not counting their trespasses against them." Or perhaps fools are pleased that the remission of sins should come about through a man only? When the Jews too rejected this, saying, "He blasphemes: who can forgive sins but God alone?", the Lord himself, the Son of God and of man, wishing to make plain to the unbelieving that he whom they saw was not a man only, but also God, in whom they refused to believe, and to show clearly that divine power was conferred on the man too because of the unity of his person and presence, said: "That you may know that the son of man has power on earth to forgive sins," then he said to the paralytic, "Rise, take up your bed, and go to your house." So God and man, the one and true saviour of souls and bodies, relieved both the outer man of the bodily disease and the inner man of the burden of sin. God, then, was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, nowhere and never deserting the man whom he took by his own condescension, under no necessity at all. [X.] To the Hebrews too the same apostle testifies at the very opening of the letter: "Lastly, in these days he has spoken to us in the Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom he also made the ages. He, being the brightness of glory and the figure of his substance, and bearing all things by the word of his power, having made purification of sins by himself, sat down at the right hand of the majesty on high." He, then, the Son of God and son of man, is one and the same: on account of his eternity with the Father he made the ages; on account of the unchangeable light he is the brightness of glory; on account of his equality he is the figure of the substance; on account of his majesty he bears all things by the word of power. He also, on account of the passion of the man he took, made purification of our sins; and on account of his reward he has his seat at the Father's right hand. How did he make purification of sins, except by blotting out the handwriting that was against us, drawn up at the devil's accusation? How did he blot it out, except by nailing it to the cross and washing it away with innocent blood? What God once spoke to the fathers in the prophets, then, and lastly testified in the Son, this let us believe, this let us hold, this let us defend with all our strength. Add to the case that he then confidently despoiled the principalities and powers, triumphing over them in himself. This work is not at all of the man alone, but of the divine majesty in the man. For it is not "a man strong and mighty," but "the Lord mighty in war." [XI.] Likewise there, after much in which the apostle distinguished the mystery of the New Testament from the figure of the Old, he says this: "Whoever sets aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses; how much worse punishment do you think he deserves who has trampled on the Son of God, and has thought unclean the blood of the New Testament, by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of the grace of God? For we know him who said: Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." I ask how God, the Son of God, can be trampled on. You see here too how he neither hesitates, nor fears, nor blushes to assert that the Son of God was trampled on. But since anyone who thinks unclean the blood by which he was sanctified certainly tramples on the Son of God, he therefore did not distinguish the man's passion from the majesty of God, of which he wants that person to be guilty who has counted as nothing the blood shed for him. For the Son of God is not trampled on except in this, that the benefit of the death which he endured in the man is despised. The Saviour and Lord himself too, when about to reward faith, asks a question. See what he said: "Who do people say that I, the son of man, am?" And when they suggested to him the various opinions of others, he said: "But you, who do you say that I am?", that is, I, the son of man. To this Peter, inspired by him, and in this confession to be of benefit to all nations as a model of right faith, answered (notice with what great and full integrity): "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." You, you, O you who call yourself the son of man, you are the Christ, the Son of the living God. Is not here too, whether in the Lord's question or the apostle's answer, the one person of both substances shown and displayed, while he calls himself the son of man, which was seen openly, and Peter, by the confession given him, showed him to be the Christ, the Son of God, which was borne in secret? Hence he was praised by the Lord and called blessed, since flesh and blood had not revealed it to him, but the Father who is in heaven. What we ought to believe, then, let God the Father reveal through God the Son, not flesh and blood suggest. [XII.] After the resurrection too, when Mary did not recognize the Lord and he, by calling her by her own name, opened to her the way of recognition, and forbade her to touch him when she wished to, let us hear what he deigned to give her to announce to the disciples. "Go," he says, "to my brothers, and say to them: I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." Come now, let the heretic choose which he thinks, and let him decide whose voice he would rather this be: on either side he will be struck by the sharp spiritual sword. "I ascend," he says, "to my Father and to your Father; to my God and to your God." If it is the man's voice, then that man is the Son of God: "I ascend," he said, "to my Father." If it is God's voice, then that God is man: for he said, "I ascend to my God." For he did not say, "I ascend to my Father and the God of my man," or "I ascend to my God and to the Father of my God." Whoever, then, separates the person of divinity and humanity is refuted by either understanding. Either the man said it, and he is the Son of God; or God said it, and he is also the man taken. For he who says, "I ascend to my Father and to my God," by repeating "my" and "my" proves and promises one person, although he distinguishes both substances. For his saying "I ascend to my Father" seems to belong to the only-begotten Son, while his saying "to my God" seems to belong to the man made. But in Christ Jesus neither can the man be said to be merely created, nor can the only-begotten God be denied to have been born man. And therefore that voice is shown to be neither of God only nor of man only: the voice which God and man, the one and only Son himself, commanded to be carried to his disciples with an affection wholly inseparable and indivisible. Finally, so that you may know and notice more fully that what is said is so, for the destruction of all the machinations of the heretics and the refutation of all their slanders: where it was necessary to distinguish the nature of the creator from the creature, see how the divine goodness kept watch for us. "Go," he says, "to my brothers, and say to them: I ascend to my Father and to your Father, to my God and to your God." See, here the person of the Lord himself, that is, of God and man, is plainly distinguished from the person of his servants, and the calling is separated from the nature. For although what is commanded is commanded to those who are now friends and brothers, yet it is shown what is owed to the Lord and what is granted to the other servants. For he could have said, "I ascend to our Father and to our God"; but there is a great difference between lordship and condition, between generation and adoption, between substance and grace. And therefore it is not said here in a mingled or indiscriminate way, "I ascend to our Father and to our God," but "to my Father and your Father, to my God and to your God." For God is Father to him in one way, to us in another. For nature makes him equal, mercy humbles him; but nature lays us low, mercy raises us up. For this is what that divine humanity and human divinity accomplished by such and so great a miracle, that the unworthy weakness of mortals should obtain such grace. [XIII.] And who could, or for whom would it suffice, to gather at one time all the proofs of the holy pages by which this pure and unmixed truth is taught? But the measure of my discourse, which has long since been exceeded, must at some point be kept, and I need not labour longer with those whom I know to be learned by the Lord's instruction. Press on, then, as the apostle commanded, in season and out of season, and with sound doctrine refute, call back, instruct, and strengthen all who err, having in this rule of faith not my proofs, which are nothing or little, but those of the divine Scriptures, and of the great and most learned men who before us both held these things most firmly and taught them most eloquently in many books.