Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| On Infants' Early Deaths. PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP
On Infants’ Early Deaths.1531
1531 This
treatise is written for Hierius, in Gregory’s old age. It has
been thought to be spurious (Oudin, p. 605), because of Fronto
Ducæus’ insertion (p. 374) about the Purgatorial Fire. But
Tillemont, Semler, and Schroeckh have shown that there are no grounds
for this opinion. Anastasius Sinaita mentions it (Quæst.
xvi.). |
————————————
Every essayist and every pamphleteer will have you, most Excellent, to
display his eloquence upon; your wondrous qualities will be a broad
race-course wherein he may expatiate. A noble and suggestive subject in
able hands has indeed a way of making a grander style, lifting it to
the height of the great reality. We, however, like an aged horse, will
remain outside this proposed race-course, only turning the ear to
listen for the contest waged in celebrating your praises, if the sound
of any literary car careering in full swing through such wonders may
reach us. But though old age may compel a horse to remain away from the
race, it may often happen that the din of the trampling racers rouses
him into excitement, that he lifts his head with eager looks, that he
shows his spirit in his breathings, and prances and paws the ground
frequently, though this eagerness is all that is left to him, and time
has sapped his powers of going. In the same way our pen remains outside
the combat, and age compels it to yield the course to the professors
who flourish now; nevertheless its eagerness to join the contest about
you survives, and that it can still evince, even though these stylists
who flourish now are at the height of their powers1532
1532 εἴπερ
ἡβῶσιν οἱ
κατὰ τοὺς νῦν
τοῖς λόγοις
ἀκμάζοντες. The Latin translator Laurent. Sifanus, I. U. Doct.
(Basle, 1562), must have had a different text to this of the Paris
Edit.: “si quidem ita floreret ut qui nunc eloquentiâ
vigent.” | . But none of this display of my enthusiasm
for you has anything to do with sounding your own praises: no style,
however nervous and well-balanced, would easily succeed there; so that
any one, who attempted to describe that embarrassing yet harmonious
mixture of opposites in your character, would inevitably be left far
behind your real worth. Nature, indeed, by throwing out the shade of
the eyelashes before the glaring rays, brings to the eyes themselves a
weaker light, and so the sunlight becomes tolerable to us, mingling as
it does, in quantities proportionate to our need, with the shadows
which the lashes cast. Just so the grandeur and the greatness of your
character, tempered by your modesty and humbleness of mind, instead of
blinding the beholder’s eye, makes the sight on the contrary a
pleasurable one; wherein this humbleness of mind does not occasion the
splendour of the greatness to be dimmed, and its latent force to be
overlooked; but the one is to be noticed in the other, the humility of
your character in its elevation, and the grandeur reversely in the
lowliness. Others must describe all this; and extol, besides, the
many-sightedness of your mind. Your intellectual eyes are indeed as
numerous, it may perhaps be said, as the hairs of the head; their keen
unerring gaze is on everything alike; the distant is foreseen; the near
is not unnoticed; they do not wait for experience to teach expedience;
they see with Hope’s insight, or else with that of Memory; they
scan the present all over; first on one thing, then on another, but
without confusing them, your mind works with the same energy and with
the amount of attention that is required. Another, too, must record his
admiration of the way in which poverty is made rich by you; if indeed
any one is to be found in this age of ours who will make that a
subject of praise and wonder. Yet surely now, if never before, the love
of poverty will through you abound, and your ingotten wealth1533
1533 πλινθότης, playing upon πλίνθων just above; a word seemingly peculiar to Gregory. We cannot help
thinking here of Plato’s definition of the good man, τετράγωνος
ἄνευ ψόγου: though the idea here is that of richness rather than
shape. | will be envied above the ingots of
Crœsus. For whom has sea and land, with all the dower of their
natural produce, enriched, as thy rejection of worldly abundance has
enriched thee? They wipe the stain from steel and so make it shine like
silver: so has the gleam of thy life grown brighter, ever carefully
cleansed from the rust of wealth. We leave that to those who can
enlarge upon it, and also upon your excellent knowledge of the things
in which it is more glorious to gain than to abstain from gain. Grant
me, however, leave to say, that you do not despise all acquisitions;
that there are some which, though none of your predecessors has been
able to clutch, yet you and you alone have seized with both your hands;
for, instead of dresses and slaves and money, you have and hold the
very souls of men, and store them in the treasure-house of your love.
The essayists and pamphleteers, whose glory comes from such laudations,
will go into these matters. But our pen, veteran as it now is, is to
rouse itself only so far as to go at a foot’s pace through the
problem which your wisdom has proposed; namely, this—what we are
to think of those who are taken prematurely, the moment of whose birth
almost coincides with that of their death. The cultured heathen Plato
spoke, in the person of one who had come to life again1534
1534 i.e.Er the Armenian. See Plato,
Repub. x. §614, &c. | , much philosophy about the judgment courts
in that other world; but he has left this other question a mystery, as
ostensibly too great for human conjecture to be employed upon. If,
then, there is anything in these lucubrations of ours that is of a
nature to clear up the obscurities of this question, you will doubtless
welcome the new account of it; if otherwise, you will at all events
excuse this in old age, and accept, if nothing else, our wish to afford
you some degree of pleasure. History1535
1535 An
anecdote resembling what follows, but not quite the same, is told of
Xerxes in Ælian’s Var. Hist. xii. 40. Erasmus also
refers to it in his Adagia. | says that
Xerxes, that great prince who had made almost every land under the sun
into one vast camp, and roused with his own designs the whole world,
when he was marching against the Greeks received with delight a poor
man’s gift; and that gift was water, and that not in a jar, but
carried in the hollow of the palm of his hand. So do you, of your
innate generosity, follow his example; to him the will made the gift,
and our gift may be found in itself but a poor watery thing. In the
case of the wonders in the heavens, a man sees their beauty
equally, whether he is trained to watch them, or whether he gazes
upwards with an unscientific eye; but the feeling towards them
is not the same in the man who comes from philosophy to their
contemplation, and in him who has only his senses of perception to
commit them to; the latter may be pleased with the sunlight, or deem
the beauty of stars worthy of his wonder, or have watched the stages of
the moon’s course throughout the month; but the former, who has
the soul-insight, and whose training has enlightened him so as to
comprehend the phenomena of the heavens, leaves unnoticed all these
things which delight the senses of the more unthinking, and looks at
the harmony of the whole, inspecting the concert which results even
from opposite movements in the circular revolutions; how the inner
circles of these turn the contrary way to that in which the fixed stars
are carried round1536
1536 τῇ ἀπλανεῖ
περιφορᾷ. This is of course the Ptolemaic system which had already been in
vogue two centuries. Sun, and moon, and all, were “planets”
round the earth as a centre: until the 8th sphere, in which the stars
were fixed, was reached; and above this was the crystalline sphere,
under the primum mobile. Cf. Milton, Par. Lost, iii. 481:
“They pass the planets seven, and pass the
fix’d:” and see note p. 257. | ; how those of the
heavenly bodies to be observed in these inner circles are variously
grouped in their approachments and divergements, their disappearances
behind each other and their flank movements, and yet effect always
precisely in the same way that notable and never-ending harmony; of
which those are conscious who do not overlook the position of the
tiniest star, and whose minds, by training domiciled above, pay equal
attention to them all. In the same way do you, a precious life to me,
watch the Divine economy; leaving those objects which unceasingly
occupy the minds of the crowd, wealth, I mean, and luxury1537
1537 Reading τρυφὴν. The
Paris Edit. has τύφον. | and vainglory—things which like
sunbeams flashing in their faces dazzle the unthinking—you will
not pass without inquiry the seemingly most trivial questions in the
world; for you do most carefully scrutinize the inequalities in human
lives; not only with regard to wealth and penury, and the differences
of position and descent (for you know that they are as nothing, and
that they owe their existence not to any intrinsic reality, but to the
foolish estimate of those who are struck with nonentities, as if they
were actual things; and that if one were only to abstract from somebody
who glitters with glory the blind adoration1538 of
those who gaze at him, nothing would be left him after all the inflated
pride which elates him, even though the whole mass of the world’s
riches were buried in his cellars), but it is one of your anxieties to
know, amongst the other intentions of each detail of the Divine
government, wherefore it is that, while the life of one is lengthened
into old age, another has only so far a portion of it as to breathe the
air with one gasp, and die. If nothing in this world happens without
God, but all is linked to the Divine will, and if the Deity is skilful
and prudential, then it follows necessarily that there is some plan in
these things bearing the mark of His wisdom, and at the same time of
His providential care. A blind unmeaning occurrence can never be the
work of God; for it is the property of God, as the Scripture says1539 , to “make all things in wisdom.”
What wisdom, then, can we trace in the following? A human being enters
on the scene of life, draws in the air, beginning the process of living
with a cry of pain, pays the tribute of a tear to Nature1540
1540 ἐλειτούργησε
τὸ δάκρυον | , just tastes life’s sorrows, before
any of its sweets have been his, before his feelings have gained
any strength;
still loose in all his joints, tender, pulpy, unset; in a word, before
he is even human (if the gift of reason is man’s peculiarity, and
he has never had it in him), such an one, with no advantage over the
embryo in the womb except that he has seen the air, so short-lived,
dies and goes to pieces again; being either exposed or suffocated, or
else of his own accord ceasing to live from weakness. What are we to
think about him? How are we to feel about such deaths? Will a soul such
as that behold its Judge? Will it stand with the rest before the
tribunal? Will it undergo its trial for deeds done in life? Will it
receive the just recompense by being purged, according to the Gospel
utterances, in fire, or refreshed with the dew of blessing1541
1541 There
is introduced at these words in the text of the Paris Edition the
following “Explicatio,” in Greek. “Here it is
manifest that the father means by the ‘purging fire’ the
torments and agonies suffered by those who having sinned have not
completed a worthy and adequate repentance, according to the Gospel
parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. For it is clear that he is
thinking of this parable when he says, ‘either purged in
fire’ (i.e. the Rich Man), ‘or refreshed with the
dew of blessing’ (i.e. Lazarus). But that sentence of the
Judgment, ‘They shall go, these into everlasting punishment, but
the just into life everlasting,’ has no place as yet in
these sufferings.” In other words, the commentator sees here the
doctrine of Purgatory, as held by the Roman Church. And when we compare
the other passages in Gregory about the “cleansing fire,”
especially that De Animâ et Resurrectione,
247 B, we shall see that he contemplates the judgment (“the
incorruptible tribunal”) as coming not only after the
Resurrection, but also after the chastising process. Not till the
Judgment will the moral value of each life be revealed; the
chastising is a purely natural process. But then the belief in a
Judgment coming after everything rather contradicts the Universalism
with which he has been charged, for what necessity would there be for
it, if the chastising was successful in every instance? With regard to
the nature of this “fire,” it is spiritual or material with
him according to the context. The invisible natures will be punished
with the one, the visible (i.e. the World) with the other:
although this destruction is not always preserved by him. See E.
Moeller (on Gregory’s Doctrine on Human Nature), p.
100. | ? But I do not see how we can imagine that,
in the case of such a soul. The word “retribution” implies
that something must have been previously given; but he who has not
lived at all has been deprived of the material from which to give
anything. There being, then, no retribution, there is neither good nor
evil left to expect. “Retribution” purports to be the
paying back of one of these two qualities; but that which is to be
found neither in the category of good nor that of bad is in no category
at all; for this antithesis between good and bad is an opposition that
admits no middle; and neither will come to him who has not made a
beginning with either of them. What therefore falls under neither of
these heads may be said not even to have existed. But if some one says
that such a life does not only exist, but exists as one of the good
ones, and that God gives, though He does not repay, what is good to
such, we may ask what sort of reason he advances for this partiality;
how is justice apparent in such a view; how will he prove his idea in
concordance with the utterances in the Gospels? There (the Master)
says, the acquisition of the Kingdom comes to those who are deemed
worthy of it, as a matter of exchange. “When ye have done such
and such things, then it is right that ye get the Kingdom as a
reward.” But in this case there is no act of doing or of willing
beforehand, and so what occasion is there for saying that these will
receive from God any expected recompense? If one unreservedly accepts a
statement such as that, to the effect that any so passing into life
will necessarily be classed amongst the good, it will dawn upon him
then that not partaking in life at all will be a happier state than
living, seeing that in the one case the enjoyment of good is placed
beyond a doubt even with barbarian parentage, or a conception from a
union not legitimate; but he who has lived the span ordinarily possible
to Nature gets the pollution of evil necessarily mingled more or less
with his life, or, if he is to be quite outside this contagion, it will
be at the price of much painful effort. For virtue is achieved by its
seekers not without a struggle; nor is abstinence from the paths of
pleasure a painless process to human nature. So that one of two
probations must be the inevitable fate of him who has had the longer
lease of life; either to combat here on Virtue’s toilsome field,
or to suffer there the painful recompense of a life of evil. But in the
case of infants prematurely dying there is nothing of that sort; but
they pass to the blessed lot at once, if those who take this view of
the matter speak true. It follows also necessarily from this that a
state of unreason is preferable to having reason, and virtue will
thereby be revealed as of no value: if he who has never possessed it
suffers no loss, so, as regards the enjoyment of blessedness, the
labour to acquire it will be useless folly; the unthinking condition
will be the one that comes out best from God’s judgment. For
these and such-like reasons you bid me sift the matter, with a view to
our getting, by dint of a closely-reasoned inquiry, some firm ground on
which to rest our thoughts about it.
For my part, in view of the
difficulties of the subject proposed, I think the exclamation of the
Apostle very suitable to the present case, just as he uttered it over
unfathomable questions: “O the depth of the riches both of the
wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His judgments, and
His ways past finding out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord1542 ?” But seeing on the other hand that
that Apostle declares it to be a peculiarity of him that is spiritual
to “judge all things1543 ,” and
commends those who have been “enriched1544 ” by the Divine grace “in all
utterance and in all knowledge,” I venture to assert that it is
not right to omit the examination which is within the range of our ability, nor to
leave the question here raised without making any inquiries, or having
any ideas about it; lest, like the actual subject of our proposed
discussion, this essay should have an ineffectual ending, spoilt before
its maturity by the fatal indolence of those who will not nerve
themselves to search out the truth, like a new-born infant ere it sees
the light and acquires any strength. I assert, too, that it is not well
at once to confront and meet objections, as if we were pleading in
court, but to introduce a certain order into the discussion and to lead
the view on from one point to another. What, then, should this order
be? First, we want to know the whence of human nature, and the
wherefore of its ever having come into existence. If we hit the answer
to these questions, we shall not fail in getting the required
explanation. Now, that everything that exists, after God, in the
intellectual or sensible world of beings owes that existence to Him, is
a proposition which it is superfluous to prove; no one, with however
little insight into the truth of things, would gainsay it. For every
one agrees that the Universe is linked to one First Cause; that nothing
in it owes its existence to itself, so as to be its own origin and
cause; but that there is on the other hand a single uncreate eternal
Essence, the same for ever, which transcends all our ideas of distance,
conceived of as without increase or decrease, and beyond the scope of
any definition; and that time and space with all their consequences,
and anything previous to these that thought can grasp in the
intelligible supramundane world, are all the productions of this
Essence. Well, then, we affirm that human nature is one of these
productions; and a word of the inspired Teaching helps us in this,
which declares that when God had brought all things else upon the scene
of life, man was exhibited upon the earth, a mixture from Divine
sources, the godlike intellectual essence being in him united with the
several portions of earthly elements contributed towards his formation,
and that he was fashioned by his Maker to be the incarnate likeness of
Divine transcendent Power. It would be better however to quote the very
words: “And God created man, in the image of God created He him1545 .” Now the reason of the making of this
animate being has been given by certain writers previous to us as
follows. The whole creation is divided into two parts; that
“which is seen,” and that “which is not seen,”
to use the Apostle’s words (the second meaning the intelligible
and immaterial, the first, the sensible and material); and being thus
divided, the angelic and spiritual natures, which are among “the
things not seen,” reside in places above the world, and above the
heavens, because such a residence is in correspondence with their
constitution; for an intellectual nature is a fine, clear,
unencumbered, agile kind of thing, and a heavenly body is fine and
light, and perpetually moving, and the earth on the contrary, which
stands last in the list of things sensible, can never be an adequate
and congenial spot for creatures intellectual to sojourn in. For what
correspondence can there possibly be between that which is light and
buoyant, on the one hand, and that which is heavy and gravitating on
the other? Well, in order that the earth may not be completely devoid
of the local indwelling of the intellectual and the immaterial, man
(these writers tell us) was fashioned by the Supreme forethought, and
his earthy parts moulded over the intellectual and godlike essence of
his soul; and so this amalgamation with that which has material weight
enables the soul to live on this element of earth, which possesses a
certain bond of kindred with the substance of the flesh. The design of
all that is being born1546
1546 τῶν
γινομένων. The Latin has overlooked this; “Hæc autem omnia
huc spectant ut,” &c. (Sifanus). | , then, is that the
Power which is above both the heavenly and the earthly universe may in
all parts of the creation be glorified by means of intellectual
natures, conspiring to the same end by virtue of the same faculty in
operation in all, I mean that of looking upon God. But this operation
of looking upon God is nothing less than the life-nourishment
appropriate, as like to like, to an intellectual nature. For just as
these bodies, earthy as they are, are preserved by nourishment that is
earthy, and we detect in them all alike, whether brute or reasoning,
the operations of a material kind of vitality, so it is right to assume
that there is an intellectual life-nourishment as well, by which such
natures1547
1547 ἡ φύσις,
i.e. the intellectual φύσις mentioned
above. If this were translated “Nature,” it would
contradict what has just been said about the body. It is plain
that φύσις contains a
much larger meaning always than our sole equivalent for it;
φύσις is applied even to the Divine essence. | are maintained in existence. But if
bodily food, coming and going as it does in circulation, nevertheless
imparts a certain amount of vital energy to those who get it, how much
more does the partaking of the real thing, always remaining and always
the same, preserve the eater in existence? If, then, this is the
life-nourishment of an intellectual nature, namely, to have a part in
God, this part will not be gained by that which is of an opposite
quality; the would-be partaker must in some degree be akin to that
which is to be partaken of. The eye enjoys the light by virtue of
having light within itself to seize its kindred light, and the finger
or any other limb cannot effect the act of vision because none of this
natural light is organized in any of them. The same necessity requires
that in our partaking of God there should be some kinship in the
constitution of the partaker with that which is partaken of. Therefore,
as the Scripture says, man was made in the image of God; that like, I
take it, might be able to see like; and to see God is, as was said
above, the life of the soul. But seeing that ignorance of the true good
is like a mist that obscures the visual keenness of the soul, and that
when that mist grows denser a cloud is formed so thick that
Truth’s ray cannot pierce through these depths of ignorance, it
follows further that with the total deprivation of the light the
soul’s life ceases altogether; for we have said that the real
life of the soul is acted out in partaking of the Good; but when
ignorance hinders this apprehension of God, the soul which thus ceases
to partake of God, ceases also to live. But no one can force us to give
the family history1548 of this ignorance,
asking whence and from what father it is; let him be given to
understand from the word itself that “ignorance” and
“knowledge” indicate one of the relations of the soul;1549
1549 τῶν πρός τί
πως ἔχειν τὴν
ψυχὴν. | but no relation, whether expressed or not,
conveys the idea of substance; a relation and a substance are quite of
different descriptions. If, then, knowledge is not a substance, but a
perfected1550
1550 περιττή. Sifanus must have had περί τι in
his Cod.; “sed mentis circa aliquam rem actio.” | operation of the soul, it must be
conceded that ignorance must be much farther removed still from
anything in the way of substance; but that which is not in that way
does not exist at all; and so it would be useless to trouble ourselves
about where it comes from. Now seeing that the Word1551 declares that the living in God is the life
of the soul, and seeing that this living is knowledge according to each
man’s ability, and that ignorance does not imply the reality of
anything, but is only the negation of the operation of knowing, and
seeing that upon this partaking in God being no longer effected there
follows at once the cancelling of the soul’s life, which is the
worst of evils,—because of all this the Producer of all Good
would work in us the cure of such an evil. A cure is a good thing, but
one who does not look to the evangelic mystery would still be ignorant
of the manner of the cure. We have shown that alienation from God, Who
is the Life, is an evil; the cure, then, of this infirmity is, again to
be made friends with God, and so to be in life once more. When such a
life, then, is always held up in hope before humanity, it cannot be
said that the winning of this life is absolutely a reward of a good
life, and that the contrary is a punishment (of a bad one); but what we
insist on resembles the case of the eyes. We do not say that one who
has clear eyesight is rewarded as with a prize by being able to
perceive the objects of sight; nor on the other hand that he who has
diseased eyes experiences a failure of optic activity as the result of
some penal sentence. With the eye in a natural state sight follows
necessarily; with it vitiated by disease failure of sight as
necessarily follows. In the same way the life of blessedness is as a
familiar second nature to those who have kept clear the senses of the
soul; but when the blinding stream of ignorance prevents our partaking
in the real light, then it necessarily follows that we miss that, the
enjoyment of which we declare to be the life of the
partaker.
Now that we have laid down these
premisses, it is time to examine in the light of them the question
proposed to us. It was somewhat of this kind. “If the recompense
of blessedness is assigned according to the principles of justice, in
what class shall he be placed who has died in infancy without having
laid in this life any foundation, good or bad, whereby any return
according to his deserts may be given him?” To this we shall make
answer, with our eye fixed upon the consequences of that which we have
already laid down, that this happiness in the future, while it is in
its essence a heritage of humanity, may at the same time be called in
one sense a recompense; and we will make clear our meaning by the same
instance as before. Let us suppose two persons suffering from an
affection of the eyes; and that the one surrenders himself most
diligently to the process of being cured, and undergoes all that
Medicine can apply to him, however painful it may be; and that the
other indulges without restraint in baths1552
1552 For
an explanation of such a restriction, see Bingham, vol. viii. p. 109
(ed. 1720). |
and wine-drinking, and listens to no advice whatever of his doctor as
to the healing of his eyes. Well, when we look to the end of each of
these we say that each duly receives in requital the fruits of his
choice, the one in deprivation of the light, the other in its
enjoyment; by a misuse of the word we do actually call that which
necessarily follows, a recompense. We may speak, then, in this way also
as regards this question of the infants: we may say that the enjoyment
of that future life does indeed belong of right to the human being, but
that, seeing the plague of ignorance has seized almost all now living
in the flesh, he who has purged himself of it by means of the necessary
courses of treatment receives the due reward of his diligence, when he
enters on the life that is truly natural; while he who refuses
Virtue’s purgatives and renders that plague of ignorance, through
the pleasures he has been entrapped by, difficult in his case to cure,
gets himself into an unnatural state, and so is estranged from the
truly natural life, and has no share in the existence which of right
belongs to us and is congenial to us. Whereas the innocent babe has no
such plague before its soul’s eyes obscuring1553 its measure of light, and so it continues to
exist in that natural life; it does not need the soundness which comes
from purgation, because it never admitted the plague into its soul at
all. Further, the present life appears to me to offer a sort of analogy
to the future life we hope for, and to be intimately connected with it,
thus; the tenderest infancy is suckled and reared with milk from the
breast; then another sort of food appropriate to the subject of this
fostering, and intimately adapted to his needs, succeeds, until at last
he arrives at full growth. And so I think, in quantities continually
adapted to it, in a sort of regular progress, the soul partakes of that
truly natural life; according to its capacity and its power it receives
a measure of the delights of the Blessed state; indeed we learn as much
from Paul, who had a different sort of food for him who was already
grown in virtue and for the imperfect “babe.” For to the
last he says, “I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for
hitherto ye were not able to bear it1554 .” But to
those who have grown to the full measure of intellectual maturity he
says, “But strong meat belongeth to those that are of full age,
even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised…1555 ” Now it is not right to say that the
man and the infant are in a similar state however free both may be from
any contact of disease (for how can those who do not partake of exactly
the same things be in an equal state of enjoyment?); on the contrary,
though the absence of any affliction from disease may be predicated of
both alike as long as both are out of the reach of its influence, yet,
when we come to the matter of delights, there is no likeness in the
enjoyment, though the percipients are in the same condition. For the
man there is a natural delight in discussions, and in the management of
affairs, and in the honourable discharge of the duties of an office,
and in being distinguished for acts of help to the needy; in living, it
may be, with a wife whom he loves, and ruling his household; and in all
those amusements to be found in this life in the way of pastime, in
musical pieces and theatrical spectacles, in the chase, in bathing, in
gymnastics, in the mirth of banquets, and anything else of that sort.
For the infant, on the contrary, there is a natural delight in its
milk, and in its nurse’s arms, and in gentle rocking that induces
and then sweetens its slumber. Any happiness beyond this the tenderness
of its years naturally prevents it from feeling. In the same manner
those who in their life here have nourished the forces of their souls
by a course of virtue, and have, to use the Apostle’s words, had
the “senses” of their minds “exercised,” will,
if they are translated to that life beyond, which is out of the body,
proportionately to the condition and the powers they have attained
participate in that divine delight; they will have more or they will
have less of its riches according to the capacity acquired. But the
soul that has never felt the taste of virtue, while it may indeed
remain perfectly free from the sufferings which flow from wickedness
having never caught the disease of evil at all, does nevertheless in
the first instance1556
1556 παρὰ τὴν
πρώτην (i.e. ὥραν). | partake only so far
in that life beyond (which consists, according to our previous
definition, in the knowing and being in God) as this nursling can
receive; until the time comes that it has thriven on the contemplation
of the truly Existent as on a congenial diet, and, becoming capable of
receiving more, takes at will more from that abundant supply of the
truly Existent which is offered.
Having, then, all these
considerations in our view, we hold that the soul of him who has
reached every virtue in his course, and the soul of him whose portion
of life has been simply nothing, are equally out of the reach of those
sufferings which flow from wickedness. Nevertheless we do not conceive
of the employment of their lives as on the same level at all. The one
has heard those heavenly announcements, by which, in the words of the
Prophet, “the glory of God is declared1557 ,” and, travelling through creation,
has been led to the apprehension of a Master of the creation; he has
taken the true Wisdom for his teacher, that Wisdom which the spectacle
of the Universe suggests; and when he observed the beauty of this
material sunlight he had grasped by analogy the beauty of the real
sunlight1558
1558 This
mysticism of Gregory is an extension of Origen’s view that there
are direct affinities or analogies between the visible and invisible
world. Gregory here and elsewhere proposes to find in the facts of
nature nothing less than analogies with the energies, and so
with the essence, of the Deity. The marks stamped upon the Creation
translate these energies into language intelligible to us: just as the
energies in their turn translate the essence, as he insists on in his
treatise against Eunomius. This world, in effect, exists only in order
to manifest the Divine Being. But the human soul, of all that is
created, is the special field where analogies to the Creator are to be
sought, because we feel both by their energies alone; both the soul and
God are hid from us, in their essence. “Since,” he says
(De Hom Opif. c. xi.) “one of the attributes we
contemplate in the Divine nature is incomprehensibility of essence, it
is clearly necessary that in this point ‘the image’ should
be able to show its resemblance to the Archetype. For if, while the
Archetype transcends comprehension, the essence of ‘the
image’ were comprehended, the contrary character of the
attributes we behold in them would prove the defect of ‘the
image’; but since the essence of our Mind eludes our knowledge,
it has an exact resemblance to the Supreme essence, figuring as it does
by its own unknowableness the incomprehensible Being.” Therefore,
Gregory goes to the interior facts of our nature for the actual proof
of theological doctrine. God is “spirit” because of the
spirituality of the soul. The “generation” of the Son is
proved by the Will emanating from the Reason. Gregory follows this line
even more resolutely than Origen. He was the first Father who sought to
explain the Trinity by the triple divisions of the soul which Platonism
offered. Cf. his treatise De eo quod sit ad immutabilitatem,
&c., p. 26. | ; he saw in the solid firmness of this earth the
unchangeableness of its Creator; when he perceived the immensity of the
heavens he was led on the road towards the vast Infinity of that Power
which encompasses the Universe; when he saw the rays of the sun
reaching from such sublimities even to ourselves he began to believe,
by the means of such phenomena, that the activities of the Divine
Intelligence did not fail to descend from the heights of Deity even to
each one of us; for if a single luminary can occupy everything alike
that lies beneath it with the force of light, and, more than that, can,
while lending itself to all who can use it, still remain self-centred
and undissipated, how much more shall the Creator of that luminary
become “all in all,” as the Apostle speaks, and come into
each with such a measure of Himself as each subject of His influence
can receive! Nay, look only at an ear of corn, at the germinating of
some plant, at a ripe bunch of grapes, at the beauty of early autumn,
whether in fruit or flower, at the grass springing unbidden, at the
mountain reaching up with its summit to the height of the ether, at the
springs on its slopes bursting from those swelling breasts, and running
in rivers through the glens, at the sea receiving those streams from
every direction and yet remaining within its limits, with waves edged
by the stretches of beach and never stepping beyond those fixed
boundaries of continent: look at these and such-like sights, and how
can the eye of reason fail to find in them all that our education for
Realities requires? Has a man who looks at such spectacles procured for
himself only a slight power for the enjoyment of those delights beyond?
Not to speak of the studies which sharpen the mind towards moral
excellence, geometry, I mean, and astronomy, and the knowledge of the
truth that the science of numbers gives, and every method that
furnishes a proof of the unknown and a conviction of the known, and,
before all these, the philosophy contained in the inspired Writings,
which affords a complete purification to those who educate themselves
thereby in the mysteries of God. But the man who has acquired the
knowledge of none of these things and has not even been conducted by
the material cosmos to the perception of the beauties above it, and
passes through life with his mind in a kind of tender, unformed, and
untrained state, he is not the man that is likely to be placed amongst
the same surroundings as our argument has indicated that other man,
before spoken of, to be placed; so that, in this view, it can no longer
be maintained that, in the two supposed and completely opposite cases,
the one who has taken no part in life is more blessed than the one who
has taken a noble part in it. Certainly, in comparison with one who has
lived all his life in sin, not only the innocent babe but even one who
has never come into the world at all will be blessed. We learn as much
too in the case of Judas, from the sentence pronounced upon him in the
Gospels1559 ; namely, that when we think of such
men, that which never existed is to be preferred to that which has
existed in such sin. For, as to the latter, on account of the depth of
the ingrained evil, the chastisement in the way of purgation will be
extended into infinity1560
1560 εἰς ἄπειρον
παρατείνεται. Such passages as these must be set against others in
Gregory, such as the concluding part of the De
Animâ et
Resurrectione,in arriving at an exact
knowledge of his views about a Universal ᾽Αποκατάστασις | ; but as for what
has never existed, how can any torment touch it?—However,
notwithstanding that, the man who institutes a comparison between the
infantine immature life and that of perfect virtue, must himself be
pronounced immature for so judging of realities. Do you, then, in
consequence of this, ask the reason why so and so, quite tender in age,
is quietly taken away from amongst the living? Do you ask what the
Divine wisdom contemplates in this? Well, if you are thinking of all
those infants who are proofs of illicit connections, and so are made
away with by their parents, you are not justified in calling to
account, for such wickedness, that God Who will surely bring to
judgment the unholy deeds done in this way. In the case, on the other
hand, of any infant who, though his parents have nurtured him, and have
with nursing and supplication spent earnest care upon him, nevertheless
does not continue in this world, but succumbs to a sickness even unto
death, which is unmistakably the sole cause of it, we venture upon the
following considerations. It is a sign of the perfection of God’s
providence, that He not only heals maladies1561
that have come into existence, but also provides that some should be
never mixed up at all in the things which He has forbidden; it is
reasonable, that is, to expect that He Who knows the future equally
with the past should check the advance of an infant to complete
maturity, in order that the evil may not be developed which His
foreknowledge has detected in his future life, and in order that a
lifetime granted to one whose evil dispositions will be lifelong may
not become the actual material for his vice. We shall better explain what we are
thinking of by an illustration.
Suppose a banquet of very varied
abundance, prepared for a certain number of guests, and let the chair
be taken by one of their number who is gifted to know accurately the
peculiarities of constitution in each of them, and what food is best
adapted to each temperament, what is harmful and unsuitable; in
addition to this let him be entrusted with a sort of absolute authority
over them, whether to allow as he pleases so and so to remain at the
board or to expel so and so, and to take every precaution that each
should address himself to the viands most suited to his constitution,
so that the invalid should not kill himself by adding the fuel of what
he was eating to his ailment, while the guest in robuster health should
not make himself ill with things not good for him1562
1562 Read
with L. Sifanus, μὴ
καταλλήλῳ
τροφῇ. | and fall into discomfort from over-feeding1563
1563 εἰς
πληθωρικὴν
ἀηδίαν
ἐκπίπτων. | . Suppose, amongst these, one of those
inclined to drink is conducted out in the middle of the banquet or even
at the very beginning of it; or let him remain to the very end, it all
depending on the way that the president can secure that perfect order
shall prevail, if possible, at the board throughout, and that the evil
sights of surfeiting, tippling, and tipsiness shall be absent. It is
just so, then, as when that individual is not very pleased at being
torn away from all the savoury dainties and deprived of his favourite
liquors, but is inclined to charge the president with want of justice
and judgment, as having turned him away from the feast for envy, and
not for any forethought for him; but if he were to catch a sight of
those who were already beginning to misbehave themselves, from the long
continuance of their drinking, in the way of vomitings and putting
their heads on the table and unseemly talk, he would perhaps feel
grateful to him for having removed him, before he got into such a
condition, from a deep debauch. If our illustration1564 is understood, we can easily apply the rule
which it contains to the question before us. What, then, was that
question? Why does God, when fathers endeavour their utmost to preserve
a successor to their line, often let the son and heir be snatched away
in earliest infancy1565
1565 Reading ἐν τῷ
ἀτέλει τῆς
ἡλικίας. | ? To those who ask
this, we shall reply with the illustration of the banquet; namely, that
Life’s board is as it were crowded with a vast abundance and
variety of dainties; and it must, please, be noticed that, true to the
practice of gastronomy, all its dishes are not sweetened with the honey
of enjoyment, but in some cases an existence has a taste of some
especially harsh mischances1566
1566 Reading συμπτωμάτων
(for συμπομάτων. Morell). | given to it: just
as experts in the arts of catering desire how they may excite the
appetites of the guests with sharp, or briny, or astringent dishes.
Life, I say, is not in all its circumstances as sweet as honey; there
are circumstances in it in which mere brine is the only relish, or into
which an astringent, or vinegary, or sharp pungent flavour has so
insinuated itself, that the rich sauce becomes very difficult to taste:
the cups of Temptation, too, are filled with all sorts of beverages;
some by the error of pride1567
1567 τύφου (τοῦ
στύφου, Paris
Edit. i.e. “of their astringency”) | produce the vice of
inflated vanity; others lure on those who drain them to some deed of
rashness; whilst in other cases they excite a vomiting in which all the
ill-gotten acquisitions of years are with shame surrendered1568
1568 διὰ τῆς
αἰσχρᾶς
ἀποτίσεως
τὸν ἔμετον
ἀνεκίνησαν | . Therefore, to prevent one who has indulged
in the carousals to an improper extent from lingering over so profusely
furnished a table, he is early taken from the number of the banqueters,
and thereby secures an escape out of those evils which unmeasured
indulgence procures for gluttons. This is that achievement of a perfect
Providence which I spoke of; namely, not only to heal evils that have
been committed, but also to forestall them before they have been
committed; and this, we suspect, is the cause of the deaths of new-born
infants. He Who does all things upon a Plan withdraws the materials for
evil in His love to the individual, and, to a character whose marks His
Foreknowledge has read, grants no time to display by a pre-eminence in
actual vice what it is when its propensity to evil gets free play.
Often, too, the Arranger of this Feast of Life exposes by such-like
dispensations the cunning device of the “constraining
cause” of money-loving1569
1569 τὴν
σεσοφισμένην
τῆς
φιλαργυρίας
ἀνάγκην. | , so that this vice
comes to the light bared of all specious pretexts, and no longer
obscured by any misleading screen1570 . For most
declare that they give play1571 to their cravings
for more, in order that they may make their offspring all the richer;
but that their vice belongs to their nature, and is not caused by any
external necessity, is proved by that inexcusable avarice which is
observed in childless persons. Many who have no heir, nor any hope of
one, for the great wealth which they have laboriously gained, rear a
countless brood within themselves of wants instead of children, and
they are left without a channel into which to convey this incurable
disease, though they cannot find an excuse in any necessity for this
failing1572
1572 οὐκ ἔχοντες
ποῦ τὴν
ἀνάγκην τῆς
ἀ& 207·ῥωστίας
ταύτης
ἐπανενέγκωσι | . But take the case of some who, during
their sojourn in life, have been fierce and domineering in disposition, slaves
to every kind of lust, passionate to madness, refraining from no act
even of the most desperate wickedness, robbers and murderers, traitors
to their country, and, more execrable still, patricides,
mother-killers, child-murderers, mad after unnatural intercourse;
suppose such characters grow old in this wickedness; how, some one may
ask, does this harmonize with the result of our previous
investigations? If that which is taken away before its time in order
that it may not continuously glut itself, according to our illustration
of the banquet, with Life’s indulgences, is providentially
removed from that carouse, what is the special design in so and so, who
is of that disposition, being allowed to continue his revels1573 to old age, steeping both himself and his
boon companions in the noxious fumes of his debauchery? In fine, you
will ask, wherefore does God in His Providence withdraw one from life
before his character can be perfected in evil, and leave another to
grow to be such a monster that it had been better for him if he had
never been born? In answer to this we will give, to those who are
inclined to receive it favourably, a reason such as follows: viz. that
oftentimes the existence of those whose life has been a good one
operates to the advantage of their offspring; and there are hundreds of
passages testifying to this in the inspired Writings, which clearly
teach us that the tender care shown by God to those who have deserved
it is shared in by their successors, and that even to have been an
obstruction, in the path to wickedness, to any one who is sure to live
wickedly, is a good result1574
1574 κεφάλαιον; lit. “a sum total:” cf. below, ἐπὶ κεφαλαί&
251·
συναπτέον, “we must summarize.” | . But seeing that
our Reason in this matter has to grope in the dark, clearly no one can
complain if its conjecturing leads our mind to a variety of
conclusions. Well, then, not only one might pronounce that God, in
kindness to the Founders of some Family, withdraws a member of it who
is going to live a bad life from that bad life, but, even if there is
no antecedent such as this in the case of some early deaths, it is not
unreasonable to conjecture that they would have plunged into a vicious
life with a more desperate vehemence than any of those who have
actually become notorious for their wickedness.
That nothing happens without God
we know from many sources; and, reversely, that God’s
dispensations have no element of chance and confusion in them every one
will allow, who realizes that God is Reason, and Wisdom, and Perfect
Goodness, and Truth, and could not admit of that which is not good and
not consistent with His Truth1575
1575 The
text is in confusion here: but the Latin supplies: “Nothing
reasonable fails in reason; nothing wise, in wisdom; neither virtue nor
truth could admit of that which is not good,” &c. | . Whether, then, the
early deaths of infants are to be attributed to the aforesaid causes,
or whether there is some further cause of them beyond these, it befits
us to acknowledge that these things happen for the best. I have another
reason also to give which I have learnt from the wisdom of an Apostle;
a reason, that is, why some of those who have been distinguished for
their wickedness have been suffered to live on in their self-chosen
course. Having expanded a thought of this kind at some length in his
argument to the Romans1576 , and having
retorted upon himself with the counter-conclusion, which thence
necessarily follows, that the sinner could no longer be justly blamed,
if his sinning is a dispensation of God, and that he would not have
existed at all, if it had been contrary to the wishes of Him Who has
the world in His power, the Apostle meets this conclusion and solves
this counter-plea by means of a still deeper view of things. He tells
us that God, in rendering to every one his due, sometimes even grants a
scope to wickedness for good in the end. Therefore He allowed the King
of Egypt, for example, to be born and to grow up such as he was; the
intention was that Israel, that great nation exceeding all calculation
by numbers, might be instructed by his disaster. God’s
omnipotence is to be recognized in every direction; it has strength to
bless the deserving; it is not inadequate to the punishment of
wickedness1577
1577 This
sentence is not in the Greek of the Paris Edition, and is not
absolutely necessary to the sense. | ; and so, as the complete removal of
that peculiar people out of Egypt was necessary in order to prevent
their receiving any infection from the sins of Egypt in a misguided way
of living, therefore that God-defying and infamous Pharaoh rose and
reached his maturity in the lifetime of the very people who were to be
benefited, so that Israel might acquire a just knowledge of the
two-fold energy of God, working as it did in either direction; the more
beneficent they learnt in their own persons, the sterner by seeing it
exercised upon those who were being scourged for their wickedness; for
in His consummate wisdom God can mould even evil into co-operation with
good. The artisan (if the Apostle’s argument may be confirmed by
any words of ours)—the artisan who by his skill has to fashion
iron to some instrument for daily use, has need not only of that which
owing to its natural ductility lends itself to his art, but, be the
iron never so hard, be it never so difficult to soften it in the fire,
be it even impossible owing to its adamantine resistance to mould it
into any useful implement, his art requires the co-operation even of
this; he will use it for an anvil, upon which the soft workable iron may be
beaten and formed into something useful. But some one will say,
“It is not all who thus reap in this life the fruits of their
wickedness, any more than all those whose lives have been virtuous
profit while living by their virtuous endeavours; what then, I ask, is
the advantage of their existence in the case of these who live to the
end unpunished?” I will bring forward to meet this question of
yours a reason which transcends all human arguments. Somewhere in his
utterances the great David declares that some portion of the
blessedness of the virtuous will consist in this; in contemplating side
by side with their own felicity the perdition of the reprobate. He
says, “The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance;
he shall wash his hands in the blood of the ungodly1578 ”; not indeed as rejoicing over the
torments of those sufferers, but as then most completely realizing the
extent of the well-earned rewards of virtue. He signifies by those
words that it will be an addition to the felicity of the virtuous and
an intensification of it, to have its contrary set against it. In
saying that “he washes his hands in the blood of the
ungodly” he would convey the thought that “the cleanness of
his own acting in life is plainly declared in the perdition of the
ungodly.” For the expression “wash” represents the
idea of cleanness; but no one is washed, but is rather defiled, in
blood; whereby it is clear that it is a comparison with the harsher
forms of punishment that puts in a clearer light the blessedness of
virtue. We must now summarize our argument, in order that the thoughts
which we have expanded may be more easily retained in the memory. The
premature deaths of infants have nothing in them to suggest the thought
that one who so terminates his life is subject to some grievous
misfortune, any more than they are to be put on a level with the deaths
of those who have purified themselves in this life by every kind of
virtue; the more far-seeing Providence of God curtails the immensity of
sins in the case of those whose lives are going to be so evil. That
some of the wicked have lived on1579
1579 ἐπιβιῶναί
τινας τῶν
κακῶν: or,
“That some have lived on in their sins.” | does not upset
this reason which we have rendered; for the evil was in their case
hindered in kindness to their parents; whereas, in the case of those
whose parents have never imparted to them any power of calling upon
God, such a form of the Divine kindness1580
1580 i.e.as letting them live, and
mitigating the evil of their lives. | ,
which accompanies such a power, is not transmitted to their own
children; otherwise the infant now prevented by death from growing up
wicked would have exhibited a far more desperate wickedness than the
most notorious sinners, seeing that it would have been unhindered. Even
granting that some have climbed to the topmost pinnacle of crime, the
Apostolic view supplies a comforting answer to the question; for He Who
does everything with Wisdom knows how to effect by means of evil some
good. Still further, if some occupy a pre-eminence in crime, and yet
for all that have never been a metal, to use our former illustration,
that God’s skill has used for any good, this is a case which
constitutes an addition to the happiness of the good, as the
Prophet’s words suggest; it may be reckoned as not a slight
element in that happiness, nor, on the other hand, as one unworthy of
God’s providing.E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|