Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| - HELP 
50. Manes said:
No one, certainly, who may be able to give a reply to what has just
been alleged by you need fear incurring the guilt of blasphemy, but
should rather be deemed thoroughly worthy of all commendation.
For a true master of his art,2066
when any matters are brought under his notice, ought to prepare his
reply with due care, and make all clearly to understand the points that
are in question or under doubt; and most especially ought he to do so
to uninstructed persons. Now since the account of our doctrine
does not satisfy you, be pleased, like a thorough master of your art,
to solve this question also for me in a reasonable manner. For to
me it seems but pious to say that the Son of God stood in need of
nothing whatsoever in the way of making good His advent upon earth;
and that He in no sense required either the dove, or baptism, or
mother, or brethren, or even mayhap a father,—which father,
however, according to your view, was Joseph; but that He descended
altogether by Himself alone, and transformed Himself, according to His
own good pleasure, into the semblance of a man, in accordance
with that word of Paul which tells us that “He was found in
fashion as a man.”2067
Show me, therefore, what thing He
could possibly need who was able to transform Himself into all manner
of appearances. For when He chose to do so, He again transformed
this human fashion2068
and mien into the likeness of the
sun. But if you gainsay me once more, and decline to acknowledge
that I state the faith correctly, listen to my definition of the
position in which you stand. For if you say that He was only man
as born of Mary,2069
| 2069
Hominem eum tantummodo ex Maria. |
and that He received the Spirit at His baptism, it will follow that He
will be made out to be Son by increase2070
| 2070 Or,
effect, per profectum. | and not by nature. If, however, I
grant you to say that He is Son according to increase,2071
| 2071
Effect. [i.e., progressively.] | and that He was
made as a man, your opinion is that He is really a man, that is to say,
one who is flesh and blood.2072
| 2072 Routh
puts this interrogatively = Is it then your position that He really is
a man, that is to say, one who is flesh and blood? Well, but if
so, then it will follow, etc. | But then it will necessarily follow
that the Spirit also who appeared like a dove was nothing else than a
natural dove. For the two expressions are the same,—namely,
“as a man” and “like2073
a dove;” and consequently whatever
may be the view you take of the one passage which uses the phrase
“as a man,” you ought to hold that same view2074
| 2074
Reading “sicut homo, hac opinione,” for the “sicut
homo ac opinione” of the Codex Casinensis. | also of this
other passage in which the expression “like a dove” is
used. It is a clear matter of necessity to take these things in
the same way, for only thus can we find out the real sense of what is
written concerning Him in the Scriptures. Archelaus
said: As you cannot do so much for yourself, like a thorough
master of your art, so neither should I care to put this question right
and with all patience to make it clear, and to give the evident
solution of the difficulty,2075
| 2075 The
Codex Casinensis reads, “hanc quæstionem diffigenter aptare
tam manifestarem atque manifeste dissolverem.” We follow the
emendation, “hanc quæstionem diligenter aptatam
manifestarem,” etc. |
were it not for the sake of those who are present with us, and who
listen to us. For this reason, therefore, I shall also explain
the answer that ought to be given to this question as it may be done
most appropriately. It does not seem to you, then, to be a pious
thing to say that Jesus had a mother in Mary; and you hold a similar
view on certain other positions which you have now been discussing in
terms which I, for my part, altogether shrink from repeating.2076
| 2076 [A
signum verecundiæ which rebukes the awful
inquisitiveness concerning the conception of Mary which disgraced the
late pontiff, Pius IX. To what blasphemous pruriency of thought
and expression has not such an invasion of decency given rise!
See St. Bernard, Opp. tom. i. p. 392. He rebukes the
heresy as profane.] | Now,
sometimes a master of any art happens to be compelled by the ignorance
of an opponent both to say and to do things which time would make
him decline;2077
| 2077 The
text gives tempus recusat. Routh proposes tempus
requirit = which the occasion requires. | and
accordingly, because the necessity is laid upon me, by consideration
for the multitude present, I may give a brief answer to those
statements which have been made so erroneously by you. Let us
suppose, now, your allegation to be that if we understand Jesus to be a
man made of Mary after the course of nature, and regard him
consequently as having flesh and blood, it will be necessary also to
hold that the Holy Spirit was a real dove, and not a spirit.
Well, then, how can a real dove enter into a real man, and abide in
him? For flesh cannot enter into flesh. Nay rather, it is
only when we acknowledge Jesus to be a true man, and also hold him who
is there said to be like a dove to be the Holy Spirit, that we shall
give the correct account according to reason on both sides. For,
according to right reason, it may be said that the Spirit dwells
in a man, and descends upon him, and abides in him; and these, indeed,
are things which have happened already in all due competence, and the
occurrence of which is always possible still, as even you yourself
admit, inasmuch as you did aforetime profess to be the Paraclete
of God, you flint,2078
| 2078
This is a purely conjectural reading, “ut dicam silex,”
etc. The Codex Casinensis gives, “ut dicam dilere non
homo.” But Routh, in reference to ch. xv., throws out the
idea that we should read delire = thou dotard, or,
lunatic. [P. 190, supra, as if Manes = μανικὸς.] | as I may call you, and no man, so often
forgetful of the very things which you assert. For you declared
that the Spirit whom Jesus promised to send has come upon you; and
whence can He come but by descending from Heaven? And if the
Spirit descends thus on the man worthy of Him, then verily must we
fancy that real doves descended upon you? Then truly should we
rather discover in you the thieving dove-merchant,2079
who lays snares and lines for the
birds. For surely you well deserve to be made a jest of with
words of ridicule. However, I spare you, lest perchance I appear
to offend the auditors by such expressions, and also most especially
because it is beside my purpose to throw out against you all that you
deserve to hear said about you. But let me return to the proper
subject. For I am mindful of that transformation of
thine,2080
| 2080 The
text gives suæ. Routh suggests tuæ. | in virtue of
which you say that God has transformed Himself into the fashion of a man
or into that of the sun, by which position you think to prove
that our Jesus was made man only in fashion and in appearance; which
assertion may God save any of the faithful from making. Now, for
the rest, that opinion of yours would reduce the whole matter to a
dream, so far as we are concerned, and to mere figures; and not that
only,2081
| 2081 The
text is, “non solum autem, sed adventus nomen
delebitur.” It may perhaps be = and not the foundation, but
the name, of an advent would be done away. | but the very
name of an advent would be done away: for He might have done what
He desired to do, though still seated in heaven, if He is, as you say,
a spirit, and not a true man. But it is not thus that “He
humbled Himself, and took the form of a servant;”2082
and I say this
of Him who was made man of Mary. For what? Might not we,
too, have set forth things like those with which you have been dealing,
and that, too, all the more easily and the more broadly? But far
be it from us to swerve one jot or one tittle from the truth. For
He who was born of Mary is the Son, who chose of His own accord to
sustain this2083
| 2083 The
text gives “quo magnum,” etc., for which we adopt
“quod magnum,” etc. | mighty
conflict,—namely, Jesus. This is the Christ of God, who
descended upon him who is of Mary. If, however, you refuse to
believe even the voice that was heard from heaven, all that you can
bring forward in place of the same is but some rashness of your own;
and though you were to declare yourself on that, no one would believe
you. For forthwith Jesus was led by the Spirit into the
wilderness to be tempted by the devil; and as the devil had no correct
knowledge of Him, he said to Him, “If thou be the Son of
God.”2084
Besides,
he did not understand the reason of this bearing of the Son of God
by Mary, who preached the kingdom of heaven, whose was also
indeed a great tabernacle,2085
| 2085 Or
perhaps, = which was also, quod erat tabernaculum, etc. |
and one that could not have been prepared by any other:2086
| 2086 The
Codex Casinensis gives “Ignorabat autem propter qui genuisset
Filium Dei prædicabat regnum cœlorum, qui erat,”
etc. We follow generally the emendations adopted in Migne:
“Ignorabat autem propter quid genuisset Filium Dei, qui
prædicabat regnum cœlorum, quod erat habitaculum
magnum,” etc. Routh would read “genitus esset Filius
Dei,” etc. | whence,
too, He who was nailed to the cross, on rising again from the dead, was
taken up thither where Christ the Son of God reigned; so that when He
begins to conduct His judgment, those who have been ignorant of Him
shall look on Him whom they pierced.2087
But in order to secure your
credence, I propose this question to you: Why was it, that
although His disciples sojourned a whole year with Him, not one of them
fell prostrate on his face before Him, as you were saying a little ago,
save only in that one hour when His countenance shone like the
sun? Was it not by reason of that tabernacle which had been made
for Him of Mary? For just as no other had the capacity
sufficient for sustaining the burden of the Paraclete except only the
disciples and the blessed Paul, so also no other was able to bear the
Spirit who descended from heaven, and through whom that voice of the
Father gave its testimony in these terms, “This is my beloved
Son,”2088
save only He
who was born of Mary, and who is above all the saints,—namely,
Jesus. But now give us your answer to those matters which I bring
forward against you. If you hold that He is man only in mien and
form, how could He have been laid hold of and dragged off to judgment
by those who were born of man and woman—to wit, the
Pharisees—seeing that a spiritual body cannot be grasped by
bodies of grosser capacities? But if you, who as yet have made no
reply to the arguments brought before you, have now any kind of answer
to offer to the word and proposition I have adduced, proceed, I pray
you, and fetch me at least a handful or some fair modicum of your
sunlight.2089
| 2089
Pugillum plenum solis mihi affer aut modium plenum. | But that
very sun, indeed, inasmuch as it is possessed of a more subtle body, is
capable of covering and enveloping you; while you, on the other hand,
can do it no injury, even although you were to trample it under
foot. My Lord Jesus, however, if He was laid hold of, was laid
hold of as a man by men. If He is not a man, neither was He laid
hold of. If He was not laid hold of, neither did He suffer, nor
was He baptized. If He was not baptized, neither is any of us
baptized. But if there is no baptism, neither will there be any
remission of sins, but every man will die in his own sins.
Manes said: Is baptism, then, given on account of the
remission of sins? Archelaus said: Certainly.
Manes said: Does it not follow, then, that Christ has
sinned, seeing that He has been baptized? Archelaus
said: God forbid! Nay, rather, He was made sin for us,
taking on Him our sins.2090
For this reason He was born of a
woman, and for this reason also He approached the rite of baptism, in
order that He might receive the purification of this part,2091
and that thus the
body which He had taken to Himself might be capable of bearing the
Spirit, who had descended in the form of a dove.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
