The Extant Writings of Julius Africanus.
————————————
I.—The Epistle to
Aristides.
————————————
I.
[Africanus on the Genealogy in the Holy
Gospels.1033
| 1033 This
letter, as given by Eusebius, is acephalous. A large portion of
it is supplied by Cardinal Angelo Mai in the Bibliotheca nova
Patrum, vol. iv. pp. 231 and 273. We enclose in
brackets the parts wanting in Gallandi, who copied Eusebius (Hist.
Eccl., i. 7). On this celebrated letter of Africanus to
Aristides, consult especially Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., i. 7); also
Jerome, comm. on Matt. i. 16; Augustine, Retract., ii. 7;
Photius, cod. xxxiv. p. 22; and in addition to these, Zacharias
Chrysopol. in Bibl. P. P. Lugd., vol. xix. p. 751. |
—Some indeed incorrectly allege that
this discrepant enumeration and mixing of the names both of priestly
men, as they think, and
royal, was made properly,
1034
in order that
Christ might be shown
rightfully to be both
Priest and King; as if any one disbelieved this,
or had any other
hope than this, that
Christ is the High
Priest of His
Father, who presents our prayers to Him, and a supramundane King, who
rules by the Spirit those whom He has
delivered, a cooperator in the
government of all things. And this is
announced to us not by the
catalogue of the
tribes, nor by the mixing of the registered
generations, but by the patriarchs and
prophets. Let us not
therefore descend to such
religious trifling as to establish the
kingship and
priesthood of
Christ by the interchanges of the
names. For the priestly
tribe of
Levi, too, was allied with the
kingly
tribe of Juda, through the circumstance that
Aaron married
Elizabeth the sister of Naasson,
1035
and that
Eleazar again
married the
daughter
of Phatiel,
1036
and
begat
children. The
evangelists, therefore, would thus have spoken
falsely, affirming what was not
truth, but a fictitious
commendation. And for this reason the one traced the pedigree of
Jacob the
father of
Joseph from
David through
Solomon; the other traced
that of Heli also, though in a different way, the
father of
Joseph,
from
Nathan the son of
David. And they ought not indeed to have
been ignorant that both orders of the ancestors enumerated are the
generation of
David, the
royal tribe of Juda.
1037
For if
Nathan was a
prophet, so
also was
Solomon, and so too the
father of both of them; and there were
prophets belonging to many of the
tribes, but
priests belonging to none
of the
tribes,
save the
Levites only. To no purpose, then, is
this fabrication of theirs. Nor shall an assertion of this
kind
prevail in the
Church of
Christ against the exact
truth, so as that a
lie should be contrived for the
praise and
glory of
Christ. For
who does not know that most holy word of the
apostle also, who, when he
was
preaching and proclaiming the resurrection of our Saviour, and
confidently affirming the
truth, said with great
fear, “If any
say that
Christ is not risen, and we assert and have believed this, and
both
hope for and
preach that very thing, we are false witnesses of
God, in alleging that He
raised up
Christ, whom He
raised not
up?”
1038
And if he
who
glorifies God the
Father is thus afraid lest he should seem a false
witness in narrating a marvellous fact, how should not he be justly
afraid, who tries to establish the
truth by a false statement,
preparing an untrue opinion? For if the generations are
different, and trace down no genuine
seed to
Joseph, and if all has
been stated only with the view of establishing the position of Him who
was to be
born—to confirm the
truth, namely, that He who was to
be would be king and
priest, there being at the same time no
proof
given, but the
dignity of the words being brought down to a
feeble
hymn,—it is evident that no
praise accrues to God from that,
since it is a falsehood, but rather judgment returns on him who asserts
it, because he vaunts an unreality as though it were reality.
Therefore, that we may expose the ignorance also of him who speaks
thus, and prevent any one from stumbling at this folly, I shall set
forth the true history of these matters.]
E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
