Novatian: On the Trinity, Letters to Cyprian of Carthage, Ethical Treatises (Corpus Christianorum in Translation Series) 9782503544915, 2503544916

Citation preview

NOVATIAN ON THE TRINITY, LETTERS TO CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE, ETHICAL TREATISES

CORPVS CHRISTIANORVM IN TRANSLATION

22

CORPVS CHRISTIANORVM Series Latina IV

NOVATIANI OPERA

G. F. DIERCKS

TURNHOUT

FHG

NOVATIAN ON THE TRINITY, LETTERS TO CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE, ETHICAL TREATISES

Introduction, translation, and notes by James L. PAPANDREA

H

F

©2015, Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout, Belgium All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher.

D/2015/0095/84 ISBN 978-2-503-54491-5 Printed on acid-free paper.

Novatiano, Beatissimo Marturi, Papandreus Doctor Fecit

CONTENTS

Introduction The Life of Novatian The Legacy of Novatian The Works of Novatian The Rule of Truth (On the Trinity) The Two Natures The Relationship of the Son to the Father The Christology of Descent Notes on the Translation The Letters to Cyprian of Carthage The Ethical Treatises

9 10 16 18 20 22 24 26 27 29 32

Acknowledgements

34

Bibliography

35

De Trinitate – On the Trinity The Rule of Truth (On the Trinity) Novatianus, Priest of Rome, c. 240 ce

49 51

Epistulae – The Letters of Novatian to Cyprian of Carthage, on Behalf of the Church of Rome Letter One (Letter 30 in the Correspondence of Cyprian) Letter Two (Letter 31 in the Correspondence of Cyprian) Letter Three (Letter 36 in the Correspondence of Cyprian)

7

141 143 153 161

Contents

Ethical Treatises De Bono Pudicitiae – On the Benefit of Purity (AKA: In Praise of Purity) Novatianus, as “Anti-Pope,” c. 253 – 257 ce De Spectaculis – On the Shows (AKA: The Spectacles, On the Public Shows) Novatianus, as “Anti-Pope,” c. 253 – 257 ce De Cibis Iudaicis – On the Jewish Foods (AKA: Jewish Foods, On the Jewish Meats) Novatianus, as “Anti-Pope,” c. 253 – 257 ce

167

Index of Biblical Citations

209

8

169 183 195

INTRODUCTION

The importance of Novatian for the development of doctrine in the pre-Nicene period is usually underestimated. However, since he was the spokesman for the church of Rome for over a year in the middle of the third century, it is safe to assume that his magnum opus, known to us as De Trinitate, is representative of Roman orthodoxy at that time. In fact, it is forward looking, anticipating the conclusions of the ecumenical councils of the fourth and fifth centuries.1 Novatian’s theology, and especially his christology, thus bridges the gap from Tertullian to the likes of Athanasius and Augustine. The document has earned Novatian the title of Father of Roman Latin Theology, a kind of second founder of Latin Theology after Tertullian. Novatian was the first to understand and emphasize the importance of the Christ hymn in Philippians 2 for Logos-Kenosis christology, and used this text to argue for the two natures of Christ against the favorite texts of the adoptionists (such as John 14:28) and the modalists (such as John 10:30, 14:6–9).2 In solving the apparent paradox of Christian monotheism, Novatian was consciously advocating the middle way between the two extreme

Papandrea, James L. Novatian of Rome and the Culmination of Pre-Nicene Orthodoxy, Princeton Theological Monograph Series, 175 (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2011). 2  For the theology of adoptionism and modalism, see Papandrea, James L. Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2012), 139–147, and Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 15–19. 1 

9

Introduction

alternative solutions to the problem.3 He argued that Christ was being crucified again, between the two “thieves” of adoptionism on one side and modalism on the other. The former threatened to steal his divinity, while the latter threatened to steal his humanity. However, in the actual practice of his ecclesiology he did not take the middle way, but rather led the faction of the rigorists in the wake of the Decian persecution, and the schism that bore his name would ensure that his writings would only survive under the names of other authors, such as Tertullian and Cyprian, so that those who read the De Trinitate could be influenced by it only when they thought they were reading Tertullian.4

The Life of Novatian Novatianus, or Novatian, was probably a native Roman, born around the turn of the third century.5 He was not from a Christian family, and probably had a traditional Roman education, possibly trained for a career in Stoic philosophy or rhetoric. Converted to the faith as an adult, it may be assumed that he had planned to postpone his baptism as many upwardly mobile men of the empire did.6 Illness intervened, however, and Novatian received an emergency baptism, which was done by pouring rather than immersion. His enemies would later claim that this baptism Papandrea, James L. Trinity 101: Father, Son, Holy Spirit (Liguori, MO: Liguori Publications, 2012), 64–84. 4  Jerome, Apology Against Rufinus 2.19. 5  On the life of Novatian, see Papandrea, James L. The Trinitarian Theology of Novatian of Rome: A Study in Third Century Orthodoxy (New York, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2008), Papandrea. Novatian of Rome, 47–70, as well as DeSimone, Russell J. The Treatise of Novatian the Roman Presbyter on the Trinity: A Study of the Text and the Doctrine. Vol. 4 Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum. (Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 1970), and DeSimone, Russell J. Novatian in The Fathers of the Church, 67 (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1974). See also Favazza, Joseph A., The Order of Penitents: Historical Roots and Pastoral Future (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1988), 178–186. 6  One alternative possibility is that he was a catechumen, planning to be baptized at the end of his catechumenate, when a serious illness led the clergy to believe that it was better to baptize him immediately. 3 

10

Introduction

was never confirmed and that in any case anything less than full immersion should disqualify Novatian from the priesthood. It is clear, however, that any perceived barriers to ordination were overcome, as he was ordained a priest by bishop Fabian of Rome (bishop 236–250). He turned his rhetorical skills to writing theology, and penned the De Trinitate, probably in the 240s. In the year 249 ce, the emperor Decius took the throne, attempting to solve the many problems of the empire with a return to traditional Roman religion.7 He issued an edict in December of 249 that demanded all inhabitants of the empire sacrifice to the Roman gods and in the name of the emperor. Refusal to make the sacrifice would be considered an act of treason, punishable by torture and execution. The edict was enforced across the empire by means of local commissions, who issued a kind of receipt, called a libellus, to those who made the sacrifice.8 The libellus served as proof that one was a good citizen, and failure to present one on demand could result in arrest.9 One of the first Roman casualties of the persecution was the bishop of Rome himself, Fabian, who died on January 20th, 250 ce. To make matters worse, the persecution prevented the election of a new bishop.10 The church of Rome was without a bishop for over a year, from January of 250 to March of 251. During that time, Novatian was apparently the chair of the council of priests, the spokesman for the Roman Christians, as evidenced by the fact that he was the one to write letters to bishop Cyprian on behalf of the clergy and confessors of Rome.11 There are three letters of Novatian extant, all apparently from the year 250 ce. They are numbered 30, 31 and 36 in the correspondence of Cyprian, but are known as Novatian’s For a more detailed treatment of the situations of the empire and the church in the third century, see Brent, Allen. Cyprian and Roman Carthage (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 117–249, Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 47– 68, and Papandrea, The Trinitarian Theology of Novatian of Rome, chapter 2. 8  For a more detailed treatment of the persecution, see Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 47-52, and Papandrea, Reading the Early Church Fathers, 10–17, 156–175. 9  Cf. Papandrea, James L., The Wedding of the Lamb: A Historical Approach to the Book of Revelation (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 156-158, 160. 10  Novatian, Epistle 1.5, 8. 11  Novatian, Epistle 2.1, 6. 7 

11

Introduction

Epistles 1, 2 and 3, respectively. The letters all deal with the situation that arose out of the persecution, that is, what to do with the people who denied the faith to save their lives (or their livelihoods) and then wanted to return to the church? Denial of the faith (which usually included an act of idolatry of some kind) resulted in the excommunication of the church member. To be in a state of excommunication meant that the person was barred from communion, but it also meant that the person could not receive a Christian burial, or be buried in the catacombs near the martyrs. To die in a state of excommunication was to risk damnation. In 251 ce, the emperor Decius was drawn into a war on one of the frontier borders and was killed in battle. Although this did not completely stop the persecution, it did give the church of Rome enough of a reprieve to elect a new bishop. Cyprian claimed that Decius had said he would rather confront a rival for his throne than see a new bishop installed in Rome.12 In a way, Decius got his wish, since he did not live to see the next bishop of Rome elected. The election was held in March of 251. Certainly many, possibly including Novatian himself, must have expected that Novatian would be elected. However, by this time it was clear that Novatian was a rigorist, and given the chance, he would permanently excommunicate all of the lapsed. So a more pastoral choice was made, and a man named Cornelius was elected.13 One of Cornelius’s first acts as the new bishop of Rome was to convene a synod which decided to reconcile a group of lapsed en masse, which in turn only resulted in alienating those who tended toward a stricter point of view. A  rigorist faction developed around Novatian, and included the Roman confessors. They, too, apparently wondered why they were in prison for refusing to deny the faith when those who did deny the faith were not only sleeping in their own beds, but were Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 55.9. There may be other reasons why Novatian was not elected, but if there are, we do not know about them. The later accusations of his enemies are not plausible. See Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 56, note 31. Certainly the De Trinitate and the fact that Novatian was chosen to write on behalf of the Roman council of clergy would make him a front runner in the election. 12  13 

12

Introduction

now also being welcomed back to communion. At this point, a North African priest named Novatus appeared in Rome, and seems to have agitated the rigorists to action.14 After spreading a rumor that Cornelius himself had lapsed by purchasing a libellus, he gathered a group of rigorist bishops from the Italian countryside and convinced them to consecrate Novatian as a rival bishop of Rome.15 Thus Novatian has gained the title, “anti-pope.” Novatian began writing letters to the bishops of other cities, in the hope that they would side with him against Cornelius, and affirm him as the true bishop of Rome. The letter-writing campaign was not to succeed, however, and in fact bishop Dionysius of Alexandria would conduct a letter-writing campaign of his own, warning other bishops not to side with Novatian. In April of 251, Cyprian held a synod in Carthage to decide on a policy for dealing with the lapsed. The decision was that the lapsed could be reconciled, but each person would be judged on a case-by-case basis. This implicitly rejected the rigorist notion that all types of lapsed (apostates, as well as those who only purchased a libellus) were equally guilty.16 Rather, it affirmed the practice of penance determined by the severity of the sin, so that some of the lapsed could be reconciled sooner rather than later, but others might have to wait until death was imminent to be reconciled. In any case, the lapsed might have hope for reconciliation, but the rigorists were excommunicated. The following month, in May, Cornelius convened a synod in Rome, which came to the same conclusions about the lapsed, and excommunicated Novatian and his followers.17 At this point, the Roman confessors realized they

Some of the primary sources confuse Novatian and Novatus. Even Eusebius thought they were the same person, and later sources simply call Novatian by the name Novatus. 15  Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 55.10. See Daly, C.  B. “Novatian and Tertullian: A Chapter in the History of Puritanism,” Irish Theological Quarterly 19 (1952), 34–35. 16  Epistle 1.3. See also Daly, 36. 17  Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 6.43.1-3. Eusebius tells us that the Roman synod was attended by sixty bishops from around Italy. See also Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 53, 55.6, 57.1. 14 

13

Introduction

were outside the Church, and left Novatian, accepting the authority of Cornelius. In July of 251, Novatian sent representatives to Cyprian, in one last attempt to get Carthage on his side. The representatives were rejected by Cyprian, so by the following year, in May of 252, Carthage got its own rigorist bishop and rival to Cyprian, one Maximus. Thus Novatian’s schism spread, with its own bishops outside of Rome. The Novatianists rebaptized those who came over to their faction from the Catholics, though it may be that they only rebaptized those who had been baptized after the persecution, a kind of provisional baptism in case a Catholic bishop had lapsed, assuming that therefore his baptisms would be invalid.18 Novatian himself received a letter from Dionysius of Alexandria, implying that perhaps Novatian was not the original instigator of the schism, but nevertheless begs Novatian to abandon it and accept Cornelius as his bishop.19 In 253, it became clear that a renewal of intense persecution was on the horizon. Another synod in Carthage decreed that even those guilty of voluntarily making a pagan sacrifice to save themselves could be reconciled immediately, to help them stand firm in the coming persecution and prevent them from making the sacrifices again. Some time in 253, Cornelius and (probably) Novatian were arrested and exiled. Cornelius would die in exile. Novatian would write his ethical treatises from his place of exile, for the benefit of his followers, from whom he was now removed. In 258, the persecution escalated again under the emperor Valerian. Exiled church leaders, including Novatian, were recalled and executed. According to tradition, Novatian was martyred on June 29th, 258  ce. There is a story that he was reconciled to the church just before his death, though that seems unlikely, given the continuance of the schism after his death.20 For an explanation of the controversy over baptism in the aftermath of persecution, see Papandrea, Reading the Early Church Fathers, 156-175, and Brent, 59–61. 19  The letter is preserved in Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 6.45, 7.7-8. See also Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 128-129, and Reading the Early Church Fathers, 144-147. 20  Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History 4.28. 18 

14

Introduction

In 1932, the tomb of a martyr named Novatianus was discovered in a catacomb on the outskirts of Rome. There has been some debate whether this could be the tomb of our Novatian, however there is no compelling reason to doubt it, especially since the name Novatianus does not appear to be very common.21 The inscription says, NOVATIANO BEATISSIMO MARTURI – GAUDENTIUS DEAC. FEC. It means, “Novatian the Most Blessed Martyr – (the inscription placed here) by the Deacon Gaudentius”.22 The catacomb itself is one that seems to have been used by those on the fringe of the church (including some gnostics), yet the grave marker was put in place by one who called himself a deacon. The catacomb was in use at precisely the right time, and yet a century later the tomb seems to have been embellished, perhaps by the followers of Novatian.23 It is possible that this catacomb was used by the Novatianists in Rome in the third and fourth centuries.24 The story of Novatian is presented in the sources as conflicting accounts by his friends and enemies. His most sympathetic biographer was the historian Socrates,25 though the list of his enemies was Some would later refuse Novatian the title Martyr since they said he died outside the true Church, however this would not prevent his own followers from putting the title on his grave marker. See Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 55.29, 57.4, 60.4, 73.21, On the Unity of the Catholic Church 14, 19, and Pacian of Barcelona, Epistle 2.14-15. 22  Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 68, 72 (photo). 23  I have visited the tomb myself, which is in a catacomb not open to the public. It appears to be originally a modest burial in a common loculus, but at some time after the initial burial, perhaps in the fourth century, the tombs above it were removed to make room for a shrine, complete with painted plaster and a makeshift arcosolium. The marble loculus cover with inscription is intact, but the tomb had been opened from above and no relics remain. It is clear that the plaster was applied after the marble inscription was in place, so it is likely that the inscription is from the time of the burial. On the tomb, see Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 68, especially note 82, as well as Fitzgerald, Allan. Conversion through Penance in the Italian Church of the Fourth and Fifth Centuries: New Approaches to the Experience of Conversion from Sin (Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1988), 27–28, and Rocco, Anita. “La tomba del martire Novaziano a Roma,” in Vetera Christianorum 45 (2008), 323–341. 24  See Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 68. 25  Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History 1.10, 4.28, 5.10, 7.7. Some have speculated that Socrates himself was a Novatianist, however a close examination of his text demonstrates that this was not the case. 21 

15

Introduction

longer, and include his rival Cornelius, whose letter against Novatian is preserved in Eusebius.26 Here Novatian is painted as unmerciful in his rigorism and motivated by arrogance. Cornelius said that Novatian’s emergency baptism was not simply the result of an illness, but the result of a demon possession. He charges that when the demon was exorcised, Novatian was hastily baptized in case he might die, but that the baptism was never confirmed. Cornelius claimed that all the other clergy of Rome had objected to Novatian’s ordination, which seems impossible given the fact that he would later be chosen to write as the representative of the church of Rome. Other accusations include the allegation that Novatian had denied he was a priest to escape persecution, and that he had refused to visit the confessors in prison out of fear. These also seem impossible, since the confessors had originally sided with Novatian in the controversy. One accusation that may have a grain of truth in it is the claim that Novatian had required his followers to swear an oath to him and to promise not to go back to the church of Cornelius. It may be that the Novatianists had some sort of rigorist statement of faith that was recited before receiving the Eucharist. In any case, it is significant that in all the attacks on Novatian, no one ever attacked his theology, which must already have been accepted as orthodox by the Roman church before the schism.

The Legacy of Novatian In terms of his rigorism, Novatian continues the ecclesiology of those whose theology had influenced him, specifically Tertullian and Hippolytus.27 Both were morally strict, and Hippolytus, and possibly also Tertullian, had criticized the bishops of Rome for what they perceived as leniency toward sin. Coming from a tradition that questioned whether post-baptismal sin could be forgiven at all, Novatian would prefer to err on the side of excommunication, believing that to reconcile an insufficiently repentant sinner 26  27 

Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 6.43, 45. Daly, 33–43.

16

Introduction

could give that person a false sense of security, and in the end condemn him. Novatian believed that apostasy was the unforgivable sin, and he accepted no distinctions between the different ways one might lapse, whether by making an animal sacrifice, the offering of incense or libation (seen as a less serious form of idolatry by many), denial of Christ under torture, or the purchase of a libellus. In fact, he thought that anyone who had convinced a sympathetic non-Christian to make the sacrifices in his or her name was twice guilty, since that person both pretended to have sacrificed, and caused someone else to sacrifice.28 When push came to shove, Novatian declared that all the lapsed should be excommunicated with the expectation of life-long penance and no sure hope of reconciliation.29 The apostate’s best hope was renewed persecution, in which he might be given another chance to stand up for the faith at the risk of his life. For that matter, if the lapsed were forgiven, would they not lapse again (and by example encourage others to do so) in the next wave of persecution? As Novatian interpreted Hebrews 6:4–6, once a person had been initiated into the mysteries of the Church, he could not be reconciled again if he should abandon Christ. Furthermore, Novatian interpreted I Corinthians 12:3 to say that anyone who denied Christ had never really had the Holy Spirit in the first place, and was never a Christian.30 Later followers of Novatian would say that apostasy could not be forgiven even by God, and they would compile an ever growing list of other sins that could not be forgiven. It is ironic that in the mainstream church it was schism that became the unforgivable sin.31 The lapsed were reconciled but the rigorists were the ones excommunicated. The schism itself forced the question of the legitimacy of rebaptism, which ultimately implied the deeper question of the nature of the Church.32 After Novatian, Novatian, Epistle 1.3. Favazza, 183. 30  Novatian, De Trinitate 14.10, 29.24-25. See also Epistle 1.7, referring to Matthew 10:33 and Luke 12:9. 31  Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 6.45 (the letter of Dionysius of Alexandria). 32  Papandrea, Reading the Early Church Fathers, 168-175. 28 

29 

17

Introduction

the schism continued with the Novatianists controlling their own churches, even in Rome and eventually in Constantinople.33 In the east, the followers of Novatian were called “Purists” (Katharoi). The Novatianists had bishops in both the west and the east, and at least one Novatianist bishop attended the Council of Nicaea. This bishop, one Ascesius, signed the creed of Nicaea, confirming that Novatianist theology was orthodox, and earning an official status with regard to the mainstream Church.34 Nevertheless, the Novatianists were suppressed by the Catholic bishops, and persecuted (along with the rest of the Nicenes) by the Arian emperor Constantius. In the west, Innocent  I (bishop 401/402–417) declared the Novatianists heretics in the year 412 ce and closed their churches, and Celestine I (bishop 422–432) confiscated Novatianist churches and banished the Novatianists from Rome. Later bishops of Rome also suppressed the Novatianists, including Leo I (bishop 440–461) and Simplicianus (bishop 468–483), so that the Novatianists did not survive past the fifth century in the west. In the east, the emperor Theodosius II (reigned 401–450) also declared the Novatianists heretics by including them in his anti-heresy laws. In spite of this, the Novatianists of the east continued as a separated body through the seventh century.

The Works of Novatian With the dust of schism and controversy cleared by the passage of time, Novatian’s true legacy is his theology. The theological Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History 4.28, 7.11. Socrates would say that the difference between the Catholics and the Novatianists was no more than the differenced between Catholics of different cities. Socrates Scholasticus, Ecclesiastical History 2.38, 7.11. Others would also acknowledge that it was possible to be Christian, but not Catholic (for example, see Pacian of Barcelona, Epistle 2.3-4) but most Catholic bishops denied that this was the case. See Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 55.24, and On the Unity of the Catholic Church 6. Many, like Eusebius, simply believed on principle that there is no difference between schism and heresy. The Council of Nicaea implicitly declared that heresy is worse than schism, however in the aftermath of the baptismal controversy, the later Church would conclude that schism is a form of heresy. 33 

34 

18

Introduction

problem that the early Church had to solve was to reconcile monotheistic faith with the worship of Christ.35 The solution to the problem is, of course, the doctrine of the Trinity, and in Novatian’s explanation of the Trinity, he made an advance from Tertullian and Hippolytus and set the stage for the Council of Nicaea. Therefore his significance is in the way he develops the understanding of the relationship between the three divine persons, as well as the understanding of the two natures of Christ, all of which will be outlined in the introduction to his De Trinitate, below. In addition to De Trinitate, we have the three letters to Cyprian of Carthage, as well as three ethical treatises that can be attributed to Novatian with sufficient confidence. These are: De Bono Pudicitiae (On the Benefit of Purity), De Spectaculis (On the Shows), and De Cibis Iudaicis (On the Jewish Foods).36 Other documents have at one time or another been attributed to Novatian, including an Adversus Iudaeos, and although it is included among the Latin texts of Novatian in the Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, it will not be included in the present volume due to the scholarly consensus that it is not by Novatian. The anonymous document known as Ad Novatianum will also not be included here. The major studies on Novatian’s work are by D’Ales (1925),37 DeSimone (1970),38 and more recently my own doctoral dissertation (1998),39 published as The Trinitarian Theology of Novatian Papandrea, Trinity 101, 64–73. Jerome, Illustrious Men 70. Jerome lists nine documents that he attributed to Novatian, including De Trinitate and On Jewish Foods. On the Spectacles and On the Benefit of Purity are not on Jerome’s list. Jerome knew that De Trinitate was circulating under Tertullian’s name. Jerome, Apology Against Rufinus 2.19. On the Spectacles and On the Benefit of Purity survived because they were attributed to Cyprian. 37  D’Alès, Adhémar. Novatien: Étude sur la théologie romaine au milieu du iiie Siècle. (Paris: Institut catholique de Paris, 1925). 38  DeSimone, Russell J. The Treatise of Novatian the Roman Presbyter on the Trinity: A Study of the Text and the Doctrine. Vol. 4 Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum. (Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 1970). 39  Papandrea, James L. ““Between Two Thieves”: The Christology of Novatian as “Dynamic Subordination,” Influenced by His Historical Context and His New Testament Interpretation.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University, 1998. 35 

36 

19

Introduction

of Rome (2008),40 as well as a chapter entitled, “Between Two Thieves: Novatian of Rome and Kenosis Christology” (2009),41 and a monograph, Novatian of Rome and the Culmination of PreNicene Orthodoxy (2011).42 The standard English translation of Novatian’s works has been the Fathers of the Church series, vol. 67 (1972) by Russell J. DeSimone. DeSimone provided a solid, straightforward translation, though with some limitations. Specifically, a detailed study of Novatian’s work and thought reveals that even almost a half century after Tertullian, there is as yet no standardized theological terminology. This means that many times Novatian uses a variety of more or less synonymous terms to try to get to the nuance he is trying to convey. At other times Novatian is left to resort to using a limited set of Latin terms to refer to different concepts. For example, in his text the term natus (“born”) can refer to Christ’s generation, his incarnation, or his nativity. More care is needed with this and other terms to convey a clearer sense of Novatian’s meaning in the English, and in a few cases it will mean that the same Latin word must be translated by different English words in different contexts. It is only after more intensive study of Novatian’s christology that this could be done, and this, I trust, will be evident in the present translation.

The Rule of Truth (On the Trinity) Since the word Trinitas does not appear in the document, the title The Rule of Truth (the phrase with which Novatian begins 40  Papandrea, James L. The Trinitarian Theology of Novatian of Rome: A Study in Third-Century Orthodoxy (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2008). 41  Papandrea, James L. “Between Two Thieves: Novatian of Rome and Kenosis Christology.” In Studies on Patristic Texts and Archaeology: If These Stones Could Speak… Essays in Honor of Dennis Edward Groh. Edited by George Kalantzis and Thomas F. Martin. (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2009). 42  Papandrea, James L. Novatian of Rome and the Culmination of Pre-Nicene Orthodoxy, Princeton Theological Monograph Series, vol. 175 (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2011).

20

Introduction

his treatise) is more accurate than the traditional On the Trinity.43 The traditional title is descriptive enough, though, since the document is basically a commentary on the Roman creed. In addition to explaining the Rule of Faith, Novatian intended to refute the heresies of his day, which he saw as two extreme christologies: adoptionism on the one hand, and modalism on the other. Pope Victor (bishop 189–199) had excommunicated the Theodosian adoptionists by the turn of the century.44 Pope Callistus (bishop 217–222) had excommunicated Sabellius, whom Novatian mentioned by name in De Trinitate 12.7, 9. Therefore, the document must have been written after Sabellius came to Rome, in about 220. On the other hand, Novatian does not mention the persecution, or the controversy over the lapsed – and there are at least a few places where he speaks of relevant issues such as reconciliation, and presumably would not have missed an opportunity to speak his mind on the controversy.45 Therefore, the document must have been written before 250 at the latest, giving us a range for its creation from the late 220s through the 240s. Within that range, the latter decade seems most likely, especially if we assume that Novatian wrote it as a priest, since he was probably not ordained before the late 230s. Novatian demonstrates how the two extreme heresies cancel each other out, and he implies that the arguments of each can be used against the other.46 The true faith, however, is in the middle between the two extremes, as Christ was once crucified “between two thieves.”47 On one side, the adoptionists steal his divinity.48 On the other side, the Marcionites, gnostics, and modalists steal his humanity.49 The Marcionites, in particular, steal the human Dunn, Geoffrey D. “The Diversity and Unity of God in Novatian’s De Trinitate,” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 78.4 (2002), 390. 44  Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 5.28. 45  See, for example, De Trinitate 1.12, 29.24 (cf. 1 Corinthians 12:3). 46  In chapter 23, Novatian shows how the arguments of modalism can be used against adoptionism. 47  De Trinitate 11.5, 23.1, 30.6. See also Epistle 1.8, where Novatian claims to advocate for the middle way in the controversy over the lapsed as well. 48  De Trinitate 21.1 (intercipere). 49  De Trinitate 23.5 (detrahere). 43 

21

Introduction

body’s hope of resurrection, thereby attempting to steal us away from the true Christ.50 Furthermore, the Marcionites and gnostics steal away the Old Testament, while the adoptionists steal away the New.51 The point is that each heresy steals something from Christ, calling him human only (as the adoptionists did) or divine only (as the Marcionites, gnostics, and modalists did), and each tries to steal salvation from those who would believe in the true Christ.52 In addition, modalism circumscribes the Father, robbing from him the personal property of uncircumscribability and his divine attribute of omnipresence.53 All of this is contrasted with the real Christ, who did not steal, when he did not cling to equality with God, but rather voluntarily humbled himself in his incarnation.54 Beyond dismantling the heresies, Novatian’s purpose was to explain what a Christian should believe about Christ, in other words, to explain the orthodox position and describe the real Christ between the two thieves. Novatian’s exposition of christology turns on three main points: the two natures of Christ, the relationship of the Son to the Father, and the christology of descent, or the kenosis.

The Two Natures Against the adoptionists, Novatian argued that Christ must be divine, since only the Creator can be the Savior, and the Creator is divine.55 In fact, Novatian anticipated Nicaea when he said that the Son “is God in the same way that the Father is God,” in other words, the Son is fully God, and consubstantial with the Father.56 The Son is “God the Word… generated from God the Father,” and De Trinitate 10.3 (eripere), cf. Tertullian, Against Marcion 1.23. De Trinitate 17.5. 52  De Trinitate 11.3, 16.10 (tollere, auferre), 19.5 (subtrahere). 53  De Trinitate 12.7. 54  Philippians 2:6-8. 55  De Trinitate 10.4. Note that Novatian often uses the word “God” to mean the Divine, so to say that “Jesus is God” is to say that he is divine, it does not imply a modalist identification of the Son with the Father. 56  De Trinitate 22.4, 23.3. Novatian does not have a Latin equivalent to the Greek word homoousios. 50  51 

22

Introduction

“God from God the Father.”57 And this generation of the Son from the Father assures that the Son is of the same divinity as the Father. Against the Marcionites (docetics), gnostics, and modalists, Novatian affirmed the true humanity of Christ as well. Just as the divine nature of Christ is the substance of divinity, the humanity of Christ is called the “substance of flesh.”58 And just as the Savior must be divine, so he must also be human, or he cannot save humans. Novatian paraphrased the maxim, “what is not assumed is not saved,” when he said, “for we could not realize our salvation in him if we could not recognize our solid body in him.”59 Thus both natures are required for salvation, and any christology that has one nature only, whether human or divine, could not save. Furthermore, the two natures are united in a way that anticipates the Chalcedonian hypostatic union, which affirms a real personal unity while maintaining the integrity and distinction of the individual natures. As I have shown elsewhere, Novatian uses a variety of terms normally associated with marriage to speak of the union of the two natures.60 However, he is still in the early years of Latin theology, and there is as of yet no consensus on terminology, so Novatian sometimes falls back on his habit of throwing out as many synonyms as he can to capture the meaning he intends to convey. Therefore, he does use some terms that would probably not be acceptable after Chalcedon, such as permiscere, which can imply a “confounding” of two things mixed into one.61 Interestingly, though, Novatian used this word to describe both the kind of union the two natures have,62 and the kind of union they do not De Trinitate 18.17, 22.5. De Trinitate 24.2, 5. 59  De Trinitate 10.6. 60  Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 115–118. For example, Novatian describes the two natures as joined (iungere) and connected (copulare), De Trinitate 15.4. The union is a coniunctionem, De Trinitate 10.5. For Novatian on marriage, see On the Benefit of Purity 5. 61  De Trinitate 11.1. Dunn, 398–399. Novatian also uses some Word-flesh terminology, probably quite traditional in his day, but which would not be acceptable after the controversy over Apollinarius. See, for example, De Trinitate 14.4, 21.12. However, when taken with his other statements, it is clear that the language he has to work with has not yet caught up with his thought on the two natures. 62  De Trinitate 24.8. 57  58 

23

Introduction

have.63 Here he was struggling to say what the Chalcedonian Definition would later say, but without the precision of fifth century terminology. We can see this in the way that the union of natures is described in almost Leonine terms, when Novatian described the person of Christ as, “one harmony of both substances” (eadem utriusque substantiae concordia).64

The Relationship of the Son to the Father The union of natures in the one person of Christ parallels the union of persons in the one Triune God – a unity with distinction. So, for Novatian, the relationship of the Father and the Son can be described using some of the same terminology that he used to describe the union of natures in the person of Christ.65 Novatian maintains that the generation (begetting/begottenness) of the Son requires that the Son must be divine, that is, he must be God as the Father is God. The one who is from God, is God.66 Therefore, generation implies consubstantiality.67 In turn, this means that the Logos is not pre-existent simply by predestination (in the mind of the Father), but is substantially preexistent, and what is more, he is eternally pre-existent.68 At this point, Novatian’s understanding of consubstantiality leads him to affirm – and to be the first to affirm – the doctrine of eternal generation.69 There was never a time when the Son did De Trinitate 24.9. De Trinitate 24.11, see also 13.3. One might speculate that Leo had read Novatian’s De Trinitate, and that it influenced the way he articulated the union of natures. However, he could have received this through Augustine as well. See Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 127–128. 65  See, for example, De Trinitate 16.4, where Novatian used the term coniunctio to speak of consubstantiality. 66  De Trinitate 15.10, 18.9. 67  De Trinitate 11.7. 68  De Trinitate 16.7. 69  There is some debate over whether Novatian did, in fact, understand the generation of the Son as eternal generation. He does not use the phrase as such, however as I have argued at length elsewhere, it is clear that he did understand it, 63 

64 

24

Introduction

not exist, for as Novatian pointed out, if the generation of the Son were not eternal, there would be a time when the Father was not a Father (and the Trinity was not a Trinity).70 Novatian even anticipated the Nicene phrase, “Always a Father, always a Son,” when he said, “Truly he was always in the Father, otherwise the Father would not always be a Father.”71 Novatian is, in fact, the first Christian theologian to conceive of the generation of the Son as an eternal state of being, rather than an event. If the unity of the Trinity is in the consubstantiality of the three persons, the distinction of persons is in those personal properties that make each divine person unique, and in the internal relationships between them. In terms of personal properties, Novatian nuanced the concept of omnipresence to make a distinction between the Father and the Son, in which the Father must always be uncircumscribable, but the Son may be circumscribed (localized in time and space) in his incarnation, and in the Old Testament theophanies. By the same token, the Father must always be invisible, but the Son may become visible.72

and articulate it in a way no one before him had. See Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 85–92. See also Dunn, 407. For a recent dissenting voice, see Lloyd, Daniel. “Ontological Subordination In Novatian Of Rome’s Theology Of The Son,” (Ph.D. Dissertation, Marquette University, 2012). 70  De Trinitate 31.3. The possibility that the First Person of the Trinity could go from not being a Father to being a Father, or that God could go from not being a Trinity to being a Trinity, would compromise divine immutability. 71  De Trinitate 31.3. 72  De Trinitate 14.7, 17.7, 18.1–6, 13. These distinctions are evident in Novatian’s predecessors, however Novatian has, in a way, made omnipresence a personal property, rather than an attribute of divine substance. In this way, the Son can temporarily relinquish the personal property of omnipresence without being any less divine in his incarnation. The Father, on the other hand, is never circumscribed, and his omnipresence prevents him from descending or ascending, as the Son does. Thus uncircumscribability is a personal property of the Father (and presumably the Holy Spirit), whereas the corresponding personal property of the Son allows him to be circumscribed in his incarnation. This implies that divinity does not require uncircumscribability, and that divinity can be circumscribed and still be divine. This is important for the doctrine of Mary as Theotokos, Mother of God, since this doctrine assumes that the divine nature of Christ was circumscribed within the womb of Mary.

25

Introduction

When it comes to the relationships between the persons of the Trinity, Novatian describes a dynamic subordination, or a subordination of power (authority) of the Son to the Father.73 This cannot be an ontological subordination, however, since Novatian’s affirmation of consubstantiality and inseparable operation requires equal divinity.74 Nevertheless, although the unity of the Trinity is in the equal (identical) divinity of the three persons, there is a hierarchy within the Trinity which ensures the distinction of persons against modalism.75 Just as the generation of the Son shows that the Son is God, it also demonstrates that the Son is not the Father, since no one could generate himself. So the generation implies that the one who is generated is consubstantial with the one who generates, but it also implies that the one who is generated is subordinate to the one who generates in a certain way. That is, both the divinity and the authority of the Son are derived from the Father, which means that the Son will defer to the Father in obedience.76 This hierarchy of authority, then, is described as a relationship of Sender and Messenger, in which the Father is the Sender and the Son is the Messenger, or the Father’s ambassador.77

The Christology of Descent Finally, with regard to the christology of descent, the Son descends to his incarnation as the Father’s Messenger. It is clear that Novatian is arguing against adoptionism when he says that Christ first De Trinitate 27.2. De Trinitate 27.5. See Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 96–105, and Dunn, 398, 400. However, see Lloyd, “Ontological Subordination In Novatian Of Rome’s Theology Of The Son,” for a dissenting view. 75  De Trinitate 16.3–4. 76  De Trinitate 26.21. Just as the Father is “greater than” the Son (John 14:28), the Son is “greater than” (maior) the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit is “less than” (minor) the Son. However, “greater than” cannot mean an ontological superiority, since in De Trinitate 19.9 Novatian says that the Jews were superior to Christ. In fact, the divinity of the Holy Spirit is assumed, and this proves the divinity of the Son, since the Son is “greater than” the Spirit. 77  De Trinitate 27.12–13. 73 

74 

26

Introduction

descended from heaven, only later to ascend back to where he came from.78 In other words, the adoptionists claimed that Jesus Christ was a man who ascended (was elevated to a new position as the adopted son of God), but Novatian speaks for mainstream orthodoxy when he says it was actually the other way around – Christ started out divine and exalted, and descended to become a man. The incarnation is the kenosis, or emptying, of the Son described in Philippians 2:6–11.79 This Pauline passage (which some believe to be a pre-pauline hymn80) is central to Novatian’s christology. For Novatian, the kenosis proves Christ’s divinity, because he was “in the form of God,” and Novatian assumes that form equals substance. But it also proves Christ’s humanity, since he was temporarily humbled by taking on the “form of a servant” (that is, a human nature). Therefore, for Novatian, this one passage in Philippians affirms both natures of Christ. In the incarnation/kenosis, the Logos set aside divine power – not divinity itself, but the divine powers of omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence – since the Savior could hardly experience the human condition while exercising such divine powers.81

Notes on the Translation When translating Novatian’s major treatise, it was important to keep the overall thrust of his theology and christology in mind. This allows one to sort through the thesaurus-like array of synonyms (all with their own range of meaning) and render each of them as the context demands. For example, it is clear that for Novatian, the concepts of power and authority are synonymous.82 We 78  De Trinitate 11.8, 13.4. Cf. John 3:13. Note that Christ’s ascension is a restoration to his rightful place. 79  Note that for Novatian, the incarnation would have taken place even if humanity had not experienced the fall. De Trinitate 23.8. 80  See Papandrea, Trinity 101, 33–45. 81  De Trinitate 22.8. 82  The English word “power” normally translates virtus (1.13), potestas (2.1), and “authority” normally translates auctoritas. However, on occasion the terms are

27

Introduction

can see this in the way he uses them in parallel.83 This means that Novatian understands divine power/authority in terms of the hierarchy within the Trinity, not as something that is one with the divine substance (as his predecessors did).84 Therefore Novatian can speak of a hierarchy of authority in the Trinity, in which the Son is obedient to the Father, without compromising the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, or the full divinity of the Son. As noted above, the term natus is used in different ways by Novatian. When it refers to Christ’s birth, it will generally be translated as “nativity,” “birth,” or “incarnation.”85 However, Novatian also uses the word to refer to Christ’s “begetting,” in which cases I have translated it as “generation.”86 On the other hand, Novatian does use the terms genitus/generare, however these words can also mean both generation and birth.87 Other terms that are often synonymous for Novatian are verbum/sermo and caro/corpus. Novatian uses the word “substance,” which is not yet an established technical term. Sometimes it means something that is “real,” as when he affirms that Christ has a real human body against the Marcionites (docetics), or affirms that Christ was preexistent “in substance” as opposed to by predestination only.88 Other times Novatian uses the concept in the sense that he might interchangeable depending on the context and the point that Novatian is making. See for example 22.4, where potestas is translated “authority.” 83  De Trinitate 17.5. See also 20.8–9. 84  De Trinitate 27.2. Novatian makes no distinction between what we might call the immanent and economic Trinity (nor did anyone in the early Church). For him, as for his predecessors, the economy of the Trinity is the hierarchy within the Trinity. However, it is safe to assume that Novatian understands the hierarchy to be entirely internal to the Trinity, and that in the works of the Trinity ad extra all three persons are unified in all divine activity (inseparable operation). From the perspective of humanity, it may be said that divine power is an attribute of divinity, since “power is in the divine name” (19.5). 85  For example, see De Trinitate 21.12. In 4.5, 7 it means to begin to exist. 86  For example, see De Trinitate 23.3, 26.20. 31.3, 31.16. Note that in 31.2, the word refers to the procession of the Logos, see Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 92– 94. 87  It is clear that natus and genitus can be synonymous from De Trinitate 24.5, and 31.12. Generare is translated as generation in 11.12 and 18.17, but as birth in 11.8. 88  De Trinitate 11.1, 16.7.

28

Introduction

have inherited from Tertullian – that is, substances are natures.89 The divine nature of Christ is one with the substance of the Father, and the human nature of Christ is the “substance of flesh.”90 Likewise, the word “angel” is used in the traditional sense, as a created spiritual being, but it is also used to mean “messenger,” when Novatian wants to call the Son the “angel” of the Father. However, it is clear that he did not think Christ was a created angel, since he refutes that very position.91 Therefore, when the context demands, I have translated the word angelus as “messenger.”92

The Letters to Cyprian of Carthage After the martyrdom of Pope Fabian in January of 250, Novatian was selected to correspond with other sees on behalf of the church at Rome. Three letters to Cyprian of Carthage survive. All three of them were probably written in the year 250, but certainly before the election of Cornelius in March of 251. The primary purpose of the letters seems to be to deal with the problem of the lapsed.93 Epistles 1 and 3 (letters 30 and 36, respectively, in the correspondence of Cyprian) were written on behalf of the clergy in Rome. Since Novatian was chosen to speak for Rome, many scholars (including myself) have concluded that this effectively made him the chair of the council of priests and “acting bishop” of Rome from the time of Fabian’s death until the election.94 Of course we do not know exactly what that would mean, however it must be true that the orthodoxy of the De Trinitate and his role as spokesman for the Roman church go hand in hand. In other words, the choice of Novatian as the one to write on behalf of the council For example, De Trinitate 13.3. De Trinitate 22.2, 24.2, 5. 91  De Trinitate 20.1–8, 22.3. 92  De Trinitate 18.7–19.19. 93  Epistle 1.3 mentions the libellateci, those who bought a libellus or convinced pagan friends to make the sacrifices in their place. Novatian says that the one who orders a crime to be committed is as guilty as the one who commits it. 94  For example, see Favazza, 179. 89 

90 

29

Introduction

proves the acceptability of the content of his theology. Epistle 2 (letter 31 in the correspondence of Cyprian) is a letter which appears on the surface to be written on behalf of the confessors in Rome, however it is unlikely that it was written and sent without the affirmation of the council of priests. The Novatian authorship of this letter is now generally accepted, though perhaps with less certainty than the other two.95 In Epistle 1, Novatian counsels patience. He wants to defer the question of reconciliation of the lapsed to the bishop of Rome, which means the decision must wait until a bishop could be elected. To reconcile the apostates while the persecution continues would be premature. In the meantime, the penitent lapsed should demonstrate the sincerity of their repentance by their tears of regret. In fact, Novatian felt that the lapsed were not showing the appropriate humility or sufficient repentance, and for the time being what they needed most is the medicine (distasteful though it may be) of indefinite excommunication and penance. It might be possible to reconcile them later, but not while Rome is without a bishop.96 In Epistle 2, Novatian greets Cyprian in the names of some Roman confessors. Here he addresses the theological rationale that will later undergird his rigorism. Apostasy is the unforgivable sin (cf. Matthew 12:31–32), and to reconcile apostates would dishonor the confessors who languish in prison, not to mention the martyrs.97 The Roman confessors followed Novatian for a while after his illegitimate consecration as bishop, but eventually went over to Cornelius when it became clear that Cyprian and the other metropolitans acknowledged Cornelius as the true bishop of Rome. By the time Novatian wrote Epistle 3, the lapsed were becoming bolder in demanding reconciliation. Some were claiming to have been absolved by the confessors themselves. Here Novatian’s rigorism comes out in response to their demands, and he begins to reveal more of his personal beliefs on the matter. Based on Favazza, 179, note 27. Novatian, Epistle 1.1-4. 97  Novatian, Epistle 2.6, 8. See also Epistle 1.1-4, 7. 95 

96 

30

Introduction

Hebrews 6:4–6, he says the only thing to do (and the only hope of salvation for the lapsed) is to council patience and penance.98 He holds out the hope that God might forgive the lapsed, but maintains that the Church cannot, and advises that the lapsed not be reconciled. Before the election of Cornelius, Novatian and Cyprian seemed to be united against the common enemy of the laxists, the faction that advocated easy reconciliation of the lapsed, with little or no consequences. However, Novatian would eventually go to the other extreme and become the figurehead of the rigorist party.99 Novatian came to believe that apostasy was not only a sin against God, it was an offense against the confessors and martyrs, implying that easy reconciliation would mean that the martyrs died for nothing.100 Using Matthew 10:33, Novatian would lead the rigorists in their conviction that Christ would deny any who had denied him, and so the Church did not have the authority to reconcile the lapsed. Even if God might forgive the lapsed, reconciliation might actually be dangerous to salvation, since it would give the penitent a false sense of peace.101 In the end, it is not at all clear that Novatian changed his mind. Early on, when he was speaking for the Roman council, he only advocated waiting until the election of a bishop in Rome, and that none of the lapsed should be readmitted to communion until then. However, the pressure of the lapsed (supported by the laxists) and other circumstances eventually forced him to reveal his true beliefs. After the schism, when he found himself at the head of the rigorist party, he revealed his personal conviction that although God might forgive the lapsed, they could not be reconciled to the Church.

Papandrea, Novatian of Rome, 64–65. As early as Pacian of Barcelona (bishop 365 to 391 ce), Novatian was being accused of having gone back on his word and contradicted himself. See DeSimone, 181–182. For a detailed treatment of the application of penance to the lapsed in the context of the Decian persecution, see Brent, 8-14. 100  Epistle 2.8.1, 3.2.2. 101  Epistle 1.3.3, 1.8, 2.6.2–7.2, 3.3.1–3. 98 

99 

31

Introduction

The Ethical Treatises Novatian’s works are really one major treatise and six letters. The latter three letters were written after the schism, and were written as episcopal letters to his followers, probably from his place of exile, most likely between 253 and 257.102 They are considered ethical treatises because they deal with matters of morality, although the last one is as much about the proper interpretation of the Old Testament as it is about Christian behavior. Two of them, On the Benefit of Purity and On the Shows survived among the writings of Cyprian of Carthage, and for a while they were thought to be by Cyprian. The third, On the Jewish Foods, has been attributed to Novatian even more recently. Novatian’s moral standards are influenced by Platonic and Stoic ethics, and it is clear that Novatian has read Tertullian and Cyprian, and is at least indirectly influenced by Clement of Alexandria.103 Novatian sounds quite Stoic when he says, “The greatest pleasure is to conquer pleasure, and there is no greater victory than the victory of being rescued from passion.”104 However, although many have speculated that Novatian was himself a Stoic, or even that he had been a Stoic philosopher or a teacher of rhetoric before his conversion to Christianity, there is nothing in his writings that demands this conclusion. He may only have been imbued with the ambient Stocism that affected most educated Romans. It is clear that a significant number of Novatian’s followers were going to the shows and dressing in fashions that he thought were immodest, and that is the reason for the first two treatises. Some of them were apparently even using Scripture to justify 102  DeSimone agrees that they are episcopal letters, but dates them earlier. DeSimone, 115. 103  For On the Benefit of Purity, cf. Tertullian, De Pudicitia, De Cultu Feminarum, De Virginibus Velandis, and Cyprian of Carthage, De Habitu Virginum. For On the Shows, cf. Tertullian, De Spectaculis, and Cyprian of Carthage, Ad Donatum. For On the Jewish Foods, cf. Seneca, Epistle 94, 122, Dialogues 12, 14, Philo, De Plantatione 43, Barnabas 10, Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 5.8.3, and Tertullian, De Ieiunio, De Pudicitia. 104  Novatian, On the Benefit of Purity 11.1.

32

Introduction

their actions.105 Novatian rants with all the energy of a preacher who cannot change the behavior of his flock, no matter how passionate his homilies are. Nevertheless, Novatian wants to impress upon them the idolatrous nature of the “spectacles” and games, and he introduces a concept of “ocular adultery” when he says that Christians are forbidden to watch whatever they are forbidden to do.106 However, when “faithful Christians” attend the shows, they participate in adultery and idolatry by watching it enacted on the stage, or they participate in the murder of a man by watching a gladiator kill him. For Novatian, the shows are the devil’s attempt to sugar coat these sins and make them palatable to Christians who would otherwise not be tempted by them. His rigorism reaches a peak when he implies that whatever is not expressly condoned in Scripture is therefore not allowed.107 In On the Jewish Foods, Novatian uses allegory to interpret the Hebrew dietary laws as having nothing really to do with food, but everything to do with the character of Christians. He argues that the prohibited animals cannot really be unclean, since that would reflect badly on their Creator. Instead, Novatian maintains that all creation is good and useful, but that what God really prohibits is acting in ways that were thought to be associated with certain animals. The only real food prohibition is food sacrificed to idols. This allegorical interpretation was already standard in the Church, along with the harsh criticisms and negative characterizations of Jews and Judaism that Novatian exhibits. It should go without saying that these generalizations and the anti-semitism that they breed could not be condoned today.

Novatian, On the Shows 3.2. Novatian, On the Shows, chapters 4, 6, and 8. 107  Novatian, On the Shows 3.3. 105 

106 

33

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank my friends in academia, sources of support and encouragement: especially Graziano Marcheschi, George Kalantzis, David Eastman, Helen Rhee, and Peter Steiger. I also want to thank my colleagues and students at Garrett-Evangelical Theological Seminary, especially my conversation partners, Mark Teasdale, Brooke Lester, and Anna Johnson. I must express my gratitude to my research assistant, Christine  M. Olfelt, who helped proofread the translation, and worked on the bibliography and index, and to John Petruccione, who provided helpful feedback on the original version of the translation.

34

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Altaner, Berthold, and A. Stubier. Patrology. Translated by Hilda C. Graef. Freiburg: Herder, 1960. Amann, Émile. “Novatien et novatianisme.” Dictionnaire de théologie catholique 11 (1931): 33. Ayres, Lewis. Nicaea and Its Legacy: an Approach to Fourth-Century Trinitarian Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. Bakker, Henk “Towards a Catholic Understanding of Baptist Congregationalism: Conciliar Power and Authority” Journal of Reformed Theology 5 (2011): 159–183. Barbel, J. Christos Angelos. Vol. 3 Theophaneia. Bonn: Hanstein, 1941. Bardenhewer, Otto. Geschichte der Altkirchlichen Literatur. Vol. 2. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1962. Barnes, Timothy D. Tertullian: A Historical and Literary Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985 (corr. ed.). —. “Legislation against the Christians.” The Journal of Roman Studies 58 (1968): 32–50. Baumstark, Anton. “Die Evangelienzitate Novatians und das Diatessaron.” Oriens Christianus 5 (1930): 1–14. Bethune-Baker, J. F. The Meaning of Homoousios in the “Constantinopolitan” Creed. Texts and Studies 7.1. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1901. Bettenson, Henry ed. Documents of the Christian Church. London: Oxford University Press, 1963 (2nd. ed.).

35

Bibliography

Bévenot, M. “Coetus Sanctorum: Der Kirchenbegriff des Novatian und die Geschichte seiner Sonderkirche” Journal of Theological Studies 20 (1969): 630–633. —. “A Bishop is Responsible to God Alone (St. Cyprian),” in Recherches de science religieuse 39 (1951/52): 397–415. Blumell, Lincoln. “A Note on Dionysius of Alexandria’s Letter to Novatian in Light of Third-Century Papyri.” Zeitschrift für Antikes Christentum 14/2 (2010): 357–361. Boeft, J. den. “Vergil im frühen Christentum: Untersuchungen zu den Vergilzitaten bei Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Novatian, Cyprian Und Arnobius.” Vigiliae christianae 56/3 (2002): 316–319. Brent, Allen. Hippolytus and the Roman Church in the Third Century: Communities in Tension before the Emergence of a Monarch-Bishop. Supplements to Vigiliae christianae, 31. Leiden: Brill, 1995. —. Cyprian and Roman Carthage.  Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Burns, J. Patout. “On Rebaptism: Social Organization in the Third Century Church.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 1/4 (1993) 367–403. Cantalamessa, Raniero. La Cristologia di Tertulliano. Paradosis, Studi Di Letteratura E Teologia Antica, 18. Fribourg: Edizioni Universitarie, 1962. Cary, M., and H. H. Scullard. A History of Rome down to the Reign of Constantine. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1975 (3rd ed.). Cayré, F. Manual of Patrology and History of Theology. Translated by H. Howitt. Vol. 1. Paris: Desclée & Co., 1936. Chadwick, Henry. “The Church of the Third Century in the West.” In The Roman West in the Third Century. Edited by A. and M. Henig King. Vol. 1. Oxford: Biblical Archaeology Review, 1981. Chin, Catherine M. “Rufinius of Aquileia and Alexandrian Afterlives: Translation as Origenism.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 18/4 (2010): 630. D’Alès, Adhémar. “Le Corpus de Novatien.” Recherches de Science Religieuse 10 (1919): 293–323.

36

Bibliography

—. Novatien: Étude sur la théologie romaine au milieu du iiie Siècle. Paris: Institut catholique de Paris, 1925. Daly, C. B. “Novatian and Tertullian: A Chapter in the History of Puritanism.” Irish Theological Quarterly 19 (1952): 33–43. Daniélou, Jean. “Novatien et le De Mundo d’Apulée.” In Romantas et Christianitas. Edited by Jan Hendrik Waszink and Willem den Boer, 71–80. London: North Holland Publishing Co., 1973. De Labriolle, Pierre. The History and Literature of Christianity from Tertullian to Boethius. Translated by Herbert Wilson. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1968 (reprint). de Ste. Croix, G. E. M. “Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?” Past and Present 26 (1963): 6–38. —. “Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?: An Amendment.” Past and Present 27 (1964): 23–27. —. “Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted?: A Rejoinder.” Past and Present 27 (1964): 28–33. DelCogliano, Mark. “The Interpretation of John 10:30 in the Third Century: Antimonarchian Polemics and the Rise of Grammatical Reading Techniques” Journal of Theological Interpretation 6/1 (2012): 117–138. DeSimone, Russel J. “Novatiantists.” Encyclopedia of the Early Church. Edited by Angelo Di Berardino. Translated by Adrian Walford. Vol. 2:604–5. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. —. “Christ the True God and True Man According to Novatian De Trinitate.” Augustinianum 10 (1970): 42–117. —. “The Holy Spirit According to Novatian De Trinitate.” Augustinianum 10 (1970): 360–387. —. The Treatise of Novatian the Roman Presbyter on the Trinity: A Study of the Text and the Doctrine. Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum, 4. Rome: Institutum Patristicum Augustinianum, 1970. Diercks, G. F. “Note sur le Traité De Trinitate de Novatien.” Sacris Erudiri 19 (1969–1970): 27–32. —. “Novatien et son Temps.” In Novatiani Opera. Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 4. Turnhout: Brepols, 1972.

37

Bibliography

Dölger, Franz Josef. “Die Taufe des Novatian.” Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 2 (1930): 258–67. —. “Zum Oikiskos des Novatianus: Klausnerhäuschen oder Versteck?” In Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum 6 (1940): 61–64. Dunn, Geoffrey D. “The Diversity and Unity of God in Novatian’s De Trinitate.” Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses 78/4 (2002): 385–409. Eusebius of Caesarea. Ecclesiastical History. II: Books 6–10. Translated by J. E. L. Oulton. Loeb Classical Library, 265. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932; repr., 1980. Favazza, Joseph A.,  The Order of Penitents: Historical Roots and  Pastoral Future. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1988. Favre, Raphaël. “La Communication des idiomes dans l’ancienne tradition latine.” Bulletin de littérature ecclésiastique 37 (1936): 130–145. Fernandez, Damian. “Cipriano de Cartago y la autoridad en la Iglesia del siglo iii.” Cuadernos de teologia 18 (1999): 211–224. Ferrua, A. “Novaziano martire.” La civiltà cattolica 95/4 (1944): 232-39. Fitzgerald, Allan. Conversion through Penance in the Italian Church of the Fourth and Fifth Centuries: New Approaches to the Experience of Conversion from Sin. Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1988. Frutaz, A. Pietro. “Novaziano, cimitero detto di.” Enciclopedia Cattolica 8 (1952): 1974-76. Ganszyniec, Ricardus. “Novatiana, Animadversiones Criticae in Novatiani De Trinitate.” Eos: Commentarii Societatis Philolgae Polonorum 28 (1925). —. “Novatianea, Animadversiones Criticae in Novatiani De Trinitate.” Eos: Commentarii Societatis Philolgae Polonorum 32 (1929): 42, 82, 90, 120, 142, 245–246, 254, 314, 346, 388, 534. —. “Novatianea, Animadversiones Criticae in Novatiani De Trinitate.” Eos: Commentarii Societatis Philolgae Polonorum 31  (1928): 296, 304, 368, 438, 452, 473–474, 484, 494, 536, 552–556. —. “Novatianea, Animadversions Criticae in Novatiani De Trinitate.” Eos: Commentarii Societatis Philolgae Polonorum 25 (1921–1922). Geweiss, Josef. “Zum altkirchlichen Verständnis der Kenosisstelle (Philippians 2:5–11).” Theologische Quartalschrift 128 (1948): 463-87.

38

Bibliography

Ginoulhiac, J. Histoire du dogme catholique: Pendant les trois premiers siècle de l' église et jusqu'au Concile de Niceé. Vol. 2. Paris: Auguste Durande Libraire, 1866. Goodspeed, Edgar J. A  History of Early Christian Literature. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1966. Gregory, Caspar René. “The Essay Contra Novatianum.” American Journal of Theology 3 (1899): 566-70. Grillmeier, Aloys. Christ in Christian Tradition: From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon (451). Translated by John Bowden. Vol. 1. Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1975 (2nd, rev. ed.). Hagemann, H. “Novatians Angebliche Schrift Van Der Trinitat.” In Die Römische Kirche und ihr Einfluss auf Disziplin und Dogma in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten. Freiburg: Herber’sche Berlagsbandlung, 1864. Hallman, Joseph M. The Descent of God: Divine Suffering in History and Theology. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Press, 1991. Harman, Allan M. “Speech about the Trinity: With Special Reference to Novatian, Hilary and Calvin.” Scottish Journal of Theology 26/4 (1973): 385–400. Harnack, Adolf, The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge. 1953. —. History of Dogma. Translated by Neil Buchanan. Vol. 2. Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1897 (reproduction ed.). Hatch, Edwin. The Organization of the Early Christian Churches. London: Rivingtons, 1882 (2nd edition, rev. ed.). Heckel, Hartwig. “Vergil Im Frühen Christentum: Untersuchungen Zu Den Vergilzitaten Bei Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Novatian, Cyprian Und Arnobius.” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 115/1–2 (2004): 207– 209. Heine, Ronald E. “Articulating Identity.” In Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, 200–221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. —. “Cyprian and Novatian.” In Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature, 152–160. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

39

Bibliography

Hultgren, Arland J., and Steven A. Haggmark, eds. The Earliest Christian Heretics: Readings from Their Opponents. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996. Hurtado, Larry W. Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to Jesus in Earliest Christianity. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003. —. One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient Jewish Monotheism. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988. Janin, R. “Les Novatiens orientaux.” Échos d'Orient 28 (1929): 385-97. Jeffers, James S. Conflict at Rome: Social Order and Hierarchy in Early Christianity. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991. Jerome. De Martyrologi Hieronymiani Fonte, Quod Dicitur Martyrologium Syryacum. Edited by Ian Fernhout. Groningen: Wolters, 1922. —. De Viris Inlustribus. Edited by Carl Albrecht Bernoulli. Frankfurt: Minerva, 1968 (reprint). Jordan, H. “Die Novatian zugeschrieben Schriften.” In Rhythmische Prosa in der altchristlichen Lateinischen Literatur. Leipzig: Dieterichsche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1905. —. “Melito und Novatian.” Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie 13 (1904): 59-68. Kearsley, Roy. Tertullian’s Theology of Divine Power. Rutherford Studies in Historical Theology. Carlisle: Pasternoster, 1988. Keilbach, G. “Divinitas Filii Eiusque Patri Subordinatio in Novatiani Libro De Trinitate.” Bogoslovska Smotra 21 (1933): 193-244. Kelly, D. F. “Novatian of Rome.” (doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh, 1975). Kelly, Douglas F. “The Beneficial Influence of Stoic Logic and Epistemology on Early Christian Theology: with Particular Reference to Novatian of Rome.” Sprache und Erkenntnis im Mittelalter, 2: 817–825. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1981. Kelly, J.  N.  D. Early Christian Doctrines. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1977 (5th, rev. ed.). Keresztes, Paul. “Two Edicts of the Emperor Valerian.” Vigiliae christianae 29 (1975): 81-95

40

Bibliography

Kereszy, Roch. Jesus Christ: Fundamentals of Christology. Rev. ed. New York: Alba House, 2002. Knipfing, John R. “The Libelli of the Decian Persecution.” Harvard Theological Review 16 (1923): 345-90 Koch, Hugh. “Il martire Novaziano.” Religio 14 (1938): 192-98. —. “La lingua e lo stilo di Novaziano.” Religio 13 (1937): 278-94. —. “Novatianus. Römischer Priester und Gegenbischof.” Pauly-Wissowa 17 (1936): 1138-56. —. “Novaziano, Cipriano e Plinio il Giovane.” Religio 11 (1935): 1321-32 —. “Zum Ablativgebrauch bei Cyprian von Karthago und andern Schriftstellern (Novatian).” Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 78 (1929): 42732. —. Cyprianische Untersuchungen. Bonn: A. Marcus und E. Weber, 1926. Kriebel, M. “Studien zur älteren Entwicklung der abendländischen Trinitätslehre bei Tertullian und Novatian.” (dissertation, Universität Marburg, 1932). Kydd, Ronald. “Novatian’s De Trinitate, 29: Evidence of the Charismatic?” Scottish Journal of Theology, 30/4 (1977): 313–318. Labriolle, Pierre Champagne de. The History and Literature of Christianity from Tertullian to Boethius. Translated by Herbert Wilson. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1968. Lambert, William. Canons of the First Four General Councils of the Church, and Those of the Early Local Greek Synods; Codex Canonum Ecclesia Universae. London: R. D. Dickinson, n.d. Lampe, Peter. Die Stadtrömischen Christen in Den Ersten Beiden Jahrhunderten. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck), 1987. Langen, Joseph. “Die Kirchentrennug Novatians.” In Geschichte Der Römischen Kirche Bis Zum Pontifikate Leo's I, 1. Bonn: M. Cohen, 1881. LaPenna, A. “De Quodam Nouatiani Codice, Qui in Bibliotheca Perisiensi Sanctae Genouefae Adseruatur.” Maia. Rivista di letterature classiche 7 (1955): 137-40 LaPiana, George. “The Roman Church at the End of the Second Century.” The Harvard Theological Review 18 (1925): 201-77.

41

Bibliography

Laurentin, A. “Jean 17:5, et la prédestination du Christ à la glorie chez S. Augustin et ses Prédécesseurs.” In L'Évangile de Jean. Études et problèmes. Edited by M. E. Boismard. Vol. 3. Bruges: Desclée de Brouwer, 1958. Lietzmann, Hans. “Ein Gnostiker in der Novatianuskatakombe.” Rivista di archeologia cristiana 11 (1934): 359-62. Lloyd, Daniel. “Ontological Subordination in Novatian of Rome’s Theology of the Son.” (doctoral dissertation, Marquette University, 2012). Loi, Vincenzo. “La latinità cristiana nel De Trinitate di Novaziano.” Rivista di cultura classica e medioevale 13 (1971): 136-77. —. “Origini e caratteristiche della latinità cristiana.” In Bollettino dei classici, Supplement No. 1. Rome: Academia Nazionale Dei Lincei, 1978. —. Novaziano, La Trinità. Torino: Società Editrice Internazionale, 1975. Loofs, Friedrich. “Das altkirchliche Zeugnis gegen die herrschende Auffassung Der Kenosisstelle (Philippians 2:5–11).” Theologische Studien und Kritiken 100 (1927): 1-102. Lunn-Rockliffe, Sophie. “Bishops on the Chair of Pestilence: Ambosiaster’s Polemical Exegesis of Psalm 1:1” Journal of Early Christian Studies 19/1 (2011): 79–99. Lupiere, Edmundo F. “Contributo per un’analisi delle citazioni veterotestamentarie nel De Trinitate di Novaziano.” Augustinianum 22 (1982): 211–227. —. “Novatien et les Testimonia d’Isaie.” In Studia Patristica. Edited by Elizabeth A. Livingstone. Vol. 17. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 1982. MacMullen, Ramsay. The Second Church: Popular Christianity A.D. 200– 400. Writings from the Greco-Roman World. Supplemental Series, 1. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2009. Marucchi, Orazio. Christian Epigraphy: An Elementary Treatise with a Collection of Ancient Christian Inscriptions Mainly of Roman Origin. Translated by J. Armine Willis. Cambridge: The University Press, 1912. Mattei, Paul. “Novatien précurseur à la fois d’Apollinaire et de Nestorius? Équivoques rétrospectives et portée réelle de la formule christologique dans le De Trinitate.” In Chartae Caritatis, 449–466. Paris: Institut d’Études Augustiniennes, 2004.

42

Bibliography

—. “Novatien, De Trinitate 31. Texte et Traduction. Commentair philologique et doctrinal.” Memoire dell’Accademia delle scienze di Torino 20 (1996): 159–257. Melin, B. Studia in Corpus Cyprianeum. Uppsala, 1946. Mohlberg, L. C. “Osservazioni storico-critiche sulla iscrizione tombale di Novaziano.” Ephemerides Litugicae 51 (1937): 242–249. Mohrmann, Christine. “Les origines de la latinité chrétienne à Rome.” In Études sur le latin des Chrétiens, 3: 103. Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1965. —. “Les origines de la latinité chrétienne à Rome.” Vigiliae christianae 3 (1949): 163–183. —.“Novatianus.” In Encyclopedia Britannica, 571. Chicago: Britannica, 1960. Moreschini, Claudio, and Enrico Norelli. Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature: a Literary History. Peabody, Mass: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005. Nautin, Pierre. “Lettres et écrivains chrétiens des iie et iiie siècles.” In Patristica, 2. Paris: Les Éditions Du Cerf, 1961. Novatian. On the Trinity. Novatian the Presbyter. Translated by Russell J. DeSimone. The Fathers of the Church, 67. Washington D. C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1974. —. “De Trinitate.” In Nouatiani Presbyteri Romani Opera Quae Extant Omnia. Edited by E. Welchman. Oxonii, 1724. —. “De Trinitate.” In Nouatiani Presbyteri Romani Opera Quae Super Sunt Omnia. Edited by J. Jackson. London, 1728. —. “De Trinitate.” In Novantianus, "De Trinitate": Über Den Dreiflatigen Gott. Text Und Übersetzung Mit Einleitung Und Kommentar. Edited by Hans Weyer. Testamonia, 2. Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1962. —. “De Trinitate.” In Novatiani Opera. Edited by G. F. Diercks, Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 4. Turnhout: Brepols, 1972. —. “De Trinitate.” In Novatiani Romanae Urbis Presbyteri “De Trinitate” Liber. Edited by W. Yorke Fausset. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1909.

43

Bibliography

—. “De Trinitate.” In Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Edited by J. P. Migne, 3. Paris, 1886. —. “De Trinitate: Über den ddreifaltigen Gott.” Edited by Hans Weyer. Testimonia 2. Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1962. —. “On the Trinity.” In Ante-Nicene Christian Library. Edited by R.  E. Wallis. Vol. 13. Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1880. —. “On the Trinity.” In Ante-Nicene Fathers. Edited by R. E. Wallis. Vol. 5. Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1926. —. “On the Trinity.” In Novatian the Presbyter, the Fathers of the Church. Edited by T. P. Halton. Vol. 67. Washington, D. C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1974. —. “On the Trinity.” In The Treatise of Novatian “On the Trinity”. Edited by Herbert Moore. London: MacMillan, 1919. —. La Trinità. Edited and translated by Vincenzo Loi. Corona Patrum, 2. Torino: Società Editrice Internazionale, 1975. —. On the Trinity. In Ante-Nicene Christian Library: Translations of the Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325. Edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Vol. 13 Edinburgh: T.&T. Clark, 1880. —. The Trinity, the Spectacles, Jewish Foods, in Praise of Purity, Letters. Translated by Russell J. DeSimone, O.S.A. The Fathers of the Church, 67. Rome, Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1974. Orbe, Antonio. Hacia la primera teología de la processión del Verbo. Estudios Valentinianos, 1. Rome: Pontificia Universitatis, 1958. Osborn, Eric Francis. “Tertullian, First Theologian of the West.” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Papandrea, James Leonard. “‘Between Two Thieves’: The Christology of Novatian as ‘Dynamic Subordination,’ Influenced by His Historical Context and His New Testament Interpretation.” (doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, 1998). —. “Between Two Thieves: Novatian of Rome and Kenosis Christology.” In Studies on Patristic Texts and Archaeology: If These Stones Could Speak… Essays in Honor of Dennis Edward Groh. Edited by George Kalantzis and Thomas F. Martin. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2009.

44

Bibliography

—. “Novatian.” The Encyclopedia of Ancient History. Edited by Roger S. Bagnall. Vol. 9: 4818–9. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013. —. Novatian of Rome and the Culmination of Pre-Nicene Orthodoxy. Eugene, OR: Pickwick, 2011. —. Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2012. —. The Trinitarian Theology of Novatian of Rome: A Study in Third-Century Orthodoxy. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 2008. —. Trinity 101: Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Ligouri, MO: Ligouri Publications, 2012. Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine. Volume 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition 100–600. Edited by J. Pelikan. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1971. Pelland, Gilles. “Un passage difficile de Novatien sur I Cor. 15:27–28 De Trinitate.” Gregorianum 66/1 (1985): 25–52. Pellegrino, Michele. Letteratura latina cristiana. Rome: Editrice Studium, 1963. Peper, Bradley M. “The Development of Mater Ecclesia in North African Ecclesiology.” (doctoral dissertation, Vanderbilt University, 2011). Peterson, Erik. “Novaziano e Novazianismo,” in Enciclopedia cattolica. Volume 8:1976–1980. 1952. Petitmengin, Pierre. “Une Nouvelle édition et un ancien manuscrit de Novatien.” Revue des études augustiniennes 21 (1975): 256–272. Pharr, Clyde. The Theodosian Code. Translated by Clyde Pharr. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1952. Photius of Constantinople. “The Ecclesiastical History of Philostorgius, as Epitomized by Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople”, in The Ecclesiastical History of Sozomen and Philostorgius. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1855. Pollard, T. E. “The Exegesis of John 10:30 in the Early Trinitarian Controversies.” New Testament Studies 3 (1956–1957): 334-49. Pollmann, Karla. “Vergil im frühen Christentum: Untersuchungen zu den Vergilzitaten bei Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Novatian, Cyprian und Arnobius.” Zeitschrift für antikes Christentum 7/1 (2003): 167–168.

45

Bibliography

Prete, Serafino. “L’antico Testamento in Novaziano: De Spectaculis.” Augustinianum 22 (1982): 229-37. Quarry, J. “Nouatiani De Trinitate Liber: It’s Probable History.” Hermanthena 10 (1899): 36-70. Quasten, Johannes. “Patrology.” In The Ante-Nicene Literature after Irenaeus. Volume 2. Westminster, MD: Newman Press, 1953. Rocco, Anita. “La tomba del martire Novaziano a Roma.” Vetera Christianorum 45 (2008): 323–341. Rusch, William G. “The Trinitarian Controversy.” In Sources of Early Christian Thought. Edited by William G. Rusch. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1980. Sage, Michael M. “Cyprian.” In Patristic Monograph Series. Volume  1. Cambridge, MA: The Philadelphia Patristic Foundation, 1975. Saller, Richard P. Personal Patronage under the Early Empire. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982. Schaff, Philip. The Creeds of Christendom. 3 vols. New York: Harper, 1877. Scheidweiler, Felix. “Novatianstudien.” Hermes 85 (1957): 58-86. —. “Novatian und die Engelchristologie.” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 66 (1954/1955): 126–139. Sherwin-White, A. N. “The Early Persecutions and Roman Law Again.” Journal of Theological Studies 3 (1952): 199-213. Simonetti, Manlio. “Alcune osservazioni sul De Trinitate di Novaziano.” In Studi in onore di Angelo Monteverdi. Volume  2. Modena: Società Tipografica Editrice Modenese, 1959. —. “Ilario e Novaziano.” Rivista di cultura classica e medioevale 7 (1965): 1034-47. Smith, R. Scott and Christopher Francese, eds. Ancient Rome: An Anthology of Sources. Indianapolis: Hackett, University of Illinois at UrbanaChampaign, 2014. Socrates, Scholasticus. “Ecclesiastical History.” In The Ecclesiastical History of Socrates. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1853.

46

Bibliography

Song, John B. “An Exploration of Novatian’s Hermeneutic on Divine Impassibility and God’s Emotions in Light of Modern Concerns.” Journal of Reformed Theology 6 (2012): 3–23. Stelzenberger, Johannes. Die Beziehungen der frühchristlichen Sittenlehre zur Ethik der Stoa. München: Max Huebner, 1933. Stevenson, James ed. A New Eusebius: Documents Illustrating the History of the Church to AD 337. Cambridge: SPCK, 1987. Tertullian. Adversus Praxean Liber: Tertullian’s Treatise against Praxeas. Edited and translated by Ernest Evans. London: SPCK, 1948. Thistleton, Anthony. “The Holy Spirit in the Latin Fathers with Special Reference to Their Use of 1 Corinthians 12 and this Chapter in Modern Scholarship.” Communio viatorum 53/3 (2011): 7–24. Vagaggini, Cipriano, Enciclopedia cattolica. 1953. Van den Eynde, D. “L’Inscription sépulcrale de Novatien.” Revue d' histoire ecclésiastique 33/1 (1937): 792-94. Vogt, Hermann Josef. “Novatian.” Encyclopedia of the Early Church. Edited by Angelo Di Berardino and translated by Adrian Walford, 603–4. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. —. Αθετεω im Brief des Dionys von Alexandrien über Novatianus (Eusebius H.E. 7.8). Studia Patristica, 10. 195-9. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1970: 195–9. —. Coetus Sanctorum. Der Kirchenbergriff des Novatian und die Geschichte seiner Sonderkirche. Theophaneia, 20. Bonn: Peter Hanstein, 1968. Vööbus, Arthur. The Didascalia Apostolorum in Syriac. 2  vols. Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium, 401. Leuven: Peeters, 1979. Walker, G. S. M. The Churchmanship of St. Cyprian. Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1968. Wallraff, Martin. “Markianos – ein prominenter Konvertit vom Novatianismus zur Orthodoxie.” Vigiliae christianae 52/1 (1998): 1–29. Weedman, Mark. The Trinitarian Theology of Hilary of Poitiers. Supplements to Vigiliae christianae 89. Leiden: Brill, 2007. Wehofer, Thomas. “Sprachliche Eigenthümlichkeiten des classischen Juristenlateins in Novatians Briefen.” Wiener Studien 23 (1901): 269-75.

47

Bibliography

—. “Zur decischen Christenvervolgung und zur Charakteristik Novatians: ein Beitrag zur Kirchengeschichte des 3 Jahrunderts.” In Ephemeris Salonitana. Split: Arheoloski Muzej, 1993. Reprint, Zara. Weyer, Hans. “Novatian and Novatianism.” In New Catholic Encyclopedia, 10: 534–535. New York: McGraw Hill, 1967. Weyman, Carl. “Die Tractatus Origenis De Libris Ss. Scriptararum. Ein Werk Novatians.” Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik 11 (1900): 545–76. —. “Neue Traktate Novatians.” Archiv für lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik 11 (1900) 467–468. —. “Novatian und Seneca über den Früghtrunk.” Philologus 52 (1893): 72830. White, Llyod Michael. “Domus Ecclesiae – Domus Dei: Adaptation and Development in the Setting for Early Christian Assembly.” New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982. Williams, Rowan. Arius: Heresy and Tradition. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002 (rev. ed.). Young, Frances M., Lewis Ayres, and Andrew Louth. The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

48

DE TRINITATE ON THE TRINITY

THE RULE OF TRUTH (ON THE TRINITY) NOVATIANUS, PRIEST OF ROME, C. 240 ce

Chapter 1 1. First of all, the Rule of Truth demands that we believe in God the Father, the Lord almighty, who is the most perfect author of all things. It was he who hung the highest heavens, and he who poured the earth into its mold. It was he who released the flowing seas, and he who abundantly distributed everything according to a perfect and beautiful order. 2. In the vault of the heavens he called forth the light of the rising sun. He filled the gleaming sphere of the moon in monthly phases, and he kindled the sparkling rays of the stars in varying brilliance, all for the sake of comfort at night. He willed all of these heavenly lights to orbit the whole earth in their proper courses, creating days, months, years, signs and useful seasons for the human race.a 3. On the earth, he raised up the mountains to the highest summit, and cast down the valleys into the depths. He leveled the fields, and established the different species of animals to serve the various needs of humanity. 4. He also made the forests, and the a 

I Corinthians 15:41.

51

11

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 1, 4-10

12

hard wood of the trees, to be useful for humanity. He called forth the fruits of the earth for nourishment, and opened the mouths of the springs, pouring them out in flowing streams. 5. After this, so he should not neglect to provide delights for the eyes as well, he clothed everything in the various colors of flowers for the pleasure of sight. 6. And though the sea was wonderful both in its expanse and in its benefits, here he also created many kinds of creatures, from the insignificant to the enormous, showing the wisdom of the Creator by the diversity of his creation.a 7. However, he was not yet content, because of the danger that the roaring and rushing of the water might overflow and threaten those who live on the land, so he enclosed the seas with boundaries of shorelines. Now when the roaring wave and the foaming water should come up from the deep, it would be prevented from overflowing its prescribed limits, and would return back onto itself. Thus humanity, seeing that even the elements obey divine laws, should themselves keep them all the more.b 8. After all these things had been created, he put a man in charge of the world, a man created in the image of God, with thought and reason and judgment, so that he might imitate God. Although the origins of his body were earthly, nevertheless his substance was filled with heavenly breath from God.c 9. Although all the other creatures were subjected to servitude, God willed that the man alone should be free. Yet to avoid the danger that his freedom might become unrestrained, God gave him a command. Not that evil was in the fruit of the tree, but that evil would result if the man used his freedom of will to show contempt for the given law.d 10. On the one hand, humanity must be free, since slavery is inconsistent with the dignity of the image of God. But on the other hand, a law was given to prevent unrestrained freedom from breaking out into contempt for the Lawgiver, and so that each

Psalm 104:25. Psalm 104:9. c  Genesis 1:26-27, 2:7. d  Genesis 2:17. a 

b 

52

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 1, 10-14

person’s decisions might result in worthy rewards and just punishments, since in each case he might have chosen the alternative.a 11. As it happened, the first man brought cursed mortality upon himself, though he might have escaped it by obedience. Instead, in a self-destructive decision, he could not wait to make himself God.b 12. Nevertheless, God patiently tempered his punishment, so that it was not so much the man himself as his labors on earth which were cursed.c In fact, when God searched for the man in the garden, it was not because of any ignorance in God, but it foreshadowed humanity’s future hope in Christ, who came to seek us out and to reveal our salvation.d And the fact that the man was prevented from touching the wood of the tree of life does not come from the spite of malicious envy, but so that he would not live forever, for unless Christ had forgiven his sins beforehand, he would wander around forever with the everlasting punishment of his crime.e 13. And yet, in the higher places we cannot presently see, above the very vault of the heavens, he had already created the angels, apportioned the spiritual powers, established thrones and authorities, and filled many other immeasurable spaces of the heavens with infinite mysterious works. Therefore it seems that this immeasurable universe is just the latest of God’s creations, rather than being his only work. 14. He even distributed and appointed authorities to those places which lie below the earth, where both pious and disloyal souls are led to be judged, already knowing the judgment that awaits them. So we see that God’s works are, as we have said, in all places overflowing with greatness, and are not contained within the expanse of this world. But yet from within this same world we can contemplate both depths and heights, and so considering his great works, we can worthily admire the Maker of so great a universe.

II Corinthians 5:10? Genesis 3:5. c  Genesis 3:17-19. d  Luke 19:10, Romans 8:19-21. e  Genesis 3:22-24. a 

b 

53

13

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 2, 1-5

Chapter 2

14

1. God is over all these things, containing everything, leaving no empty space outside of himself. He left no room for a superior deity, as some think, since he himself enclosed the whole universe in the fold of his tunic, with perfect greatness and power. He always maintains his work; he pervades all things and perceives all things, moving everything and giving life to the whole universe. Thus he connects all discordant materials in a harmony of elements, bound together in a unity so firm that nothing could destroy it, unless he who made it would order it to dissolve in order to present to us something greater.a 2. For we read that he holds all things together, and therefore nothing could exist outside of himself.b Certainly he has no beginning at all, and therefore he will experience no end. For if at some time he began to exist (perish the thought), then he could not be above all things, because if he began to exist after some other thing, he would be inferior to whatever existed before him, and therefore he would be discovered to be of lesser power than whatever preceded him. 3. Therefore, because of this, he is ever infinite because there is nothing greater, ever eternal because there is nothing older. For he who is without origin cannot be preceded by anything, since he is outside of time. Therefore, he is immortal, not weakening to a final end. And since whatever is without origin is not under any law, he is outside the limit of time, and he knows he is obligated to no one. 4. Therefore, regarding God and the things which belong to him and are in him, the human mind cannot adequately grasp anything of their identity, their extent, or their nature. Nor is the eloquence of human speech able to express in words the majesty of his works. 5. For when it comes to understanding and speaking of his majesty, all eloquence is deservedly mute, and every mind is inadequate. For he is greater than the mind itself, and therefore it is impossible to understand how great he is. Indeed, if it could be possible to understand him, he would be inferior to the human a  b 

II Peter 3:10-12, Revelation 21:1. Wisdom of Solomon 1:7, Colossians 1:17.

54

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 2, 5-11

mind that could contain him. He is also greater than all language, and therefore he cannot be explained. Indeed, if he could be explained, he would be inferior to the human language which could explain him; and by understanding and explaining him, he would be contained and confined. 6. Whatever is understood about him is less than he is, and whatever is explained about him is less than he is, when compared with him. To some degree we can experience him in silence, but we cannot reveal him in words as he is in himself. 7. For example, if you should say that he is light, you would have spoken more about his created thing than about him. You would not have explained him. Or if you should say that he is power, you would have spoken of and explained more about his authority than about him. Or if you should say he is majesty, you would have described more about his glory than about him. 8. But why do I go over these things one by one at length? Once and for all I will explain everything. No matter what you propose about him, you are really expressing more about an attribute or a power that he has, than about him. 9. For what can you worthily say or perceive about him who is above all language and perception? Only this one thing: however we are able, however we grasp, however one may understand what God might be, we must not think that we will understand him, since his nature and his greatness cannot be understood. It is not even possible for human thought to approach him. 10. For if the sharp sight of our eyes becomes dull by looking into the sun, to the point where by looking at the sphere, they are overcome by exposure to the brightness of the rays, in the same way the sharp mind suffers in every thought about God, and the more it considers God the more it is affected, to the point where it is blinded by the light of its own thought. 11. Again, I repeat, what indeed can you worthily say about him who is more exalted than all exaltation, higher than all height, deeper than all depth, brighter than all light, more brilliant than all brilliance, more splendid than all splendor, mightier than all might, more powerful than all power, more excellent than all excellence, more true than all truth, stronger than all strength, greater than all majesty, more sovereign than all authority, richer than all riches, more prudent than all prudence, kinder than all

55

15

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 2, 11-12 – CHAPTER 3, 1

kindness, better than all goodness, more just than all justice, and more merciful than all mercy? 12. For every kind of power must necessarily be inferior to him who is the God and Creator of every power, so that it can truly be said that the nature of God is such that nothing can be compared to him. For he is superior to anything that can be said about him. In fact, he is Reason, with no beginning or ending in time, causing and completing everything, guiding the natural chain of cause and effect with highest and perfect reason, for the good of all.

Chapter 3 1. Therefore, we know and we admit that this God is Creator of all things, the Lord by virtue of his power, the first cause by virtue of creation. We declare that he is the one who spoke and all things were made, who gave the order and everything in the whole world came forth.a He is the one of whom it is written, You have made all things in wisdom,b and about whom Moses said, God is in heaven above and in the earth below.c According to Isaiah, He has measured heaven with the palm of his hand, the earth with his fist.d He looks at the earth and makes it tremble,e holds the sphere of the earth and those who live in it as if they were locusts,f and he weighed the mountains with a scale and the forests with a balance.g It is clear that by this balance of divine arrangement, he carefully leveled the weight of the earth’s mass, so that its great mass would not lie unevenly, for if its weight were not evenly balanced, it would easily fall apart.

Psalm 148:5. Psalm 104:24. c  Deuteronomy 4:39. d  Isaiah 40:12. e  Psalm 104:32. f  Isaiah 40:22. g  Isaiah 40:12. a 

b 

56

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 3, 2-6

2. He is the one who says through the prophet, I am God and there is none before me,a and by the same prophet declares, I do not give my majesty to another,b so that he might exclude all the pagans with their idols and the heretics, proving that God has not been made by the hand of a craftsman,c nor has he been invented by the cleverness of the heretic. Indeed, whatever requires a maker to exist is not God. 3. In addition, he also says through the prophet, Heaven is my throne, and earth is the footstool for my feet; what kind of house will you build for me, or where can I rest?d This was to show that since the world does not contain him, it is all the more true that a temple cannot contain him. And he declares this, not to brag about himself, but for our understanding. In fact, he is not looking for us to glorify him for his greatness, but rather, like a Father, he wants to give us wisdom for holiness. 4. He also wants to draw our wild hearts, which are proud and stubborn, from their rude inhumanity to gentleness, so he says, And upon whom shall my Spirit rest, but upon the humble and the peaceful and the one who trembles at my words?e This is so that, to some degree, humanity might be able to acknowledge how great God is while we learn to fear him by the Spirit given to us. 5. And likewise, he desires that his courtship of us will awaken our minds and increase our understanding of him, so he said, I am the Lord who made the light and created the darkness.f This is so we might not suppose that those changes by which nights and days are controlled are produced by some natural force (I do not know which), but rather that we would recognize that it was in truth God who was their Creator. 6. Since we cannot see God with our eyes, we learn about him from the greatness, power and majesty of his works. The apostle Paul says, For his invisible attributes are perceived, as well as his eternal power and divinity, and are understood from the created

Isaiah 45:18, 21-22. Isaiah 42:8, 48:11. c  Hosea 8:6, cf. Acts 19:26. d  Isaiah 66:1. e  Isaiah 66:2, cf. James 4:8. f  Isaiah 45:6-7. a 

b 

57

16

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 3, 6-7 – CHAPTER 4, 1-3

17

things of the world.a This is so that the human mind, learning of the hidden things from those which are evident, would see the great works of God with the eyes of the intellect, and reflect on the greatness of the Creator. 7. The same apostle says of him, Now to the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory.b For he who surpassed the greatness of thought is also beyond the contemplation of the eyes. Because, he says, all things are from him and through him and in him.c For indeed, all things exist by his command, so that they are from him; and all things are created by his word, so that they are through him; and all things rely on his judgment while looking forward to freedom in him when corruption is no more, revealing that everything will be revived in him.

Chapter 4 1. The Lord proclaims that God alone deserves to be called good.d The whole world is a witness to his goodness, since he would not have established it if he were not good. For if everything was very good,e then those things which have been created well have demonstrated that the Creator is good, because whatever is made by a good Creator could not be anything other than good, since all evil is far from God. 2. For it is not possible that he who claims for himself the name of perfect Father and judge could be considered the author or creator of any evil work, especially since he is the avenger and judge of every evil work. For evil does not come to humanity from anywhere other than by withdrawal from the good God. 3. This withdrawal is counted against humanity, not because it was necessary, but because humanity willed it. Thus it became clear both what evil was and also what was its source, so that there should not appear to be any envy in God. Romans 1:20. I Timothy 1:17. c  Romans 11:36. d  Luke 18:19. e  Genesis 1:31. a 

b 

58

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 4, 4-8

4. Therefore, he is always the same, he never changes,a nor turns himself into other forms, otherwise by changing he would seem to be mortal. Indeed, the mutation of change includes a kind of death. For that reason there is never any increase in him, neither of parts nor of honor, because the one who is always perfect should not seem to have been lacking anything. There is not even the thought of loss in him, or the appearance of the slightest degree of the decline of mortality. What he is, he always is, and who he is, he is always himself, and such as he is, he is always the same. 5. For increase reveals a beginning, and loss is evidence of death and destruction. This is why he says, I am God, and I have not changed.b He always maintains his own state of being, since whatever does not begin to exist cannot be changed. 6. For whatever it is that God is, this is what he must always be; always himself, always God, sustaining himself by his own powers. This is why he says, I am who I am.c For the one who exists has this name because he always retains his same nature. Indeed, change would remove the name, the one who exists, since anything that is changed at any time is revealed to be mortal by the very fact that it is changed. That is to say, it ceases to be what it was and subsequently begins to be what it was not. 7. Appropriately, therefore, God always maintains his own state of being, without the loss of change; he is always both the same as, and consistent with, himself. Truly, whatever does not begin to exist cannot be changed, for only those things which are created or come into being are subject to change. Anything that at one time did not exist, has its existence by being created; but by the very fact of its having been created, it is changed. On the other hand, whatever has neither a beginning to its existence nor a creator is not subject to change, since it has no origin, which is the cause of change. 8. And this is why God is proclaimed to be one, because he has no equal. For whatever God is, he must necessarily be the greatest being. And whatever the James 1:17. Malachi 3:6. c  Exodus 3:14. a 

b 

59

18

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 4, 8-12

19

greatest being is, it follows that to be the greatest he must be alone, and without equal. And therefore, he must necessarily be the one and only, with whom nothing can be compared, since he has no equal. 9. The very nature of things dictates that there cannot be two infinities. Now whatever has neither any beginning nor any end at all is infinite. Furthermore, whatever occupies the whole leaves no room for another. For if something does not contain all things, then it is found to be contained within something else, and therefore it is found to be inferior to whatever contains it. Such a thing could not be God, since it is inferior by virtue of being included within another higher power, and therefore, whatever contains it would claim to be God instead. 10. This is why God’s own name cannot be uttered, because it cannot be contained within human understanding. For within the name of a thing is also contained something of its nature, an understanding of its state of being. Indeed, a name is significant, for it is from its name that a thing can be understood. But when the thing under consideration is of such a kind that not even the intellect itself can properly contain it, how will it properly be declared by the concept of a name, when something that is beyond intellect itself is necessarily also beyond the meaning of a name? 11. Consequently, when God speaks his own name and brings it to light for certain reasons and on certain occasions, it is not so much that we might know the actual character of the name that it is uttered, as much as a certain situational significance, to which people may turn, and through which we can see that they are able to obtain the mercy of God. 12. Therefore, God is both immortal and incorruptible, experiencing neither any loss nor end at all. For it is both because he is incorruptible that he is immortal, and because he is immortal that he is also incorruptible. Each one is in the other, and is bound to the other by a mutually interdependent connection, an eternal condition which demonstrates that immortality comes from incorruptibility and incorruptibility comes from immortality.

60

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 5, 1-6

Chapter 5 1. Although we contemplate his appropriate anger over certain indignations which have been recorded, and we even learn of reports of his hatred, we do not, however, understand these reports to be examples of human faults. 2. For even though all these things can corrupt a person, they cannot diminish divine power in any way. For while it may be appropriate to say that these emotions exist in humans, it would not be appropriate to ascribe them to God. Indeed, a human can be corrupted by these emotions because he is susceptible to corruption, but God cannot be corrupted by them because he is not susceptible to corruption. 3. Therefore, these things have a power of their own which they may exert, but only where there is passible matter, not where there is impassible substance. 4. Also, the fact that God is angered does not come from any fault of his, but it happens for our remedy. Indeed, he is being patient even when he threatens, since it is by these threats that people are called back to the right way. For anyone who lacks reason needs fear, so that those who have abandoned reason might be moved by terror back toward an honorable life. And for that reason all those things, whether God’s anger or hatred or whatever they are at any given time, are mentioned to teach that they come, not from fault, but from God’s intention for our healing. 5. Nor do they come from any weakness on God’s part, since these things are not powerful enough for God to be corrupted. As for us, we are made out of diverse materials, so we may be corrupted by emotions which raise conflict in us. However, this cannot happen to God, either from nature or from fault, since he cannot be understood to be made up of corporeal elements joined together. 6. For he is simplex, and without any corporeal coalescence. Whatever it is that he is in totality, only he himself knows, because he is called Spirit.a And for that reason, those things which are faulty and corrupt in humans cannot use their power of cora 

John 4:24.

61

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 5, 6 – CHAPTER 6, 1-2

ruptibility on God, since they are caused by the body itself and by its corruptible matter. In God, as we have said, they come from reason, not from fault.

Chapter 6 20

1. It is granted that heavenly Scripture often changes the divine face to human form when it says, The eyes of the Lord are upon the just,a or, The Lord God smelled the scent of a good fragrance,b or when tablets written by the finger of God are given to Moses,c or when the people of the children of Israel were liberated from the land of Egypt with a mighty hand and a raised arm,d or when it says, For the mouth of the Lord has spoken this,e or when the earth is held to be the footstool of God’s feet,f or when it says, Incline your ear and hear.g But we who say, For the law is spiritual,h do not confine the scope or form of divine majesty within the limits of our body. Rather, his unbounded magnitude is so great that we could say it extends over the fields without any limit. 2. For it is written, If I should ascend into heaven, you are there; if I should descend to the depths of hades, you are present; and if I should take up my wings and go across the sea, there your hand will take hold of me and your right hand will keep me.i Indeed, we learn the reasoning of divine Scripture from the order of its logical arrangement. For in the time of the prophets they spoke about God in parables, according to the faith of the time, not as God is, but as the people were able to grasp him. So therefore, when these things are said about God in this way, it Psalm 34:15. Genesis 8:21. c  Exodus 31:18. d  Deuteronomy 5:15, Psalm 136:12. e  Isaiah 1:20. f  Isaiah 66:1. g  II Kings 19:16. h  Romans 7:14. i  Psalm 139:8-10. a 

b 

62

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 6, 2-6

should be attributed to the people, not to God. 3. And thus, the people were permitted to set up the tabernacle, though God is not contained inside a tent. And so it was that the temple was built, although God is not at all enclosed within the narrow confines of a temple. Therefore it is not God who is limited, but the perception of the people is limited. It is not God who is confined, but the human mind’s ability to understand is confined. 4. Finally, in the time of the Gospel, the Lord said, The hour will come when you will worship the Father, neither on that mountain, nor in Jerusalem.a And he gives the reasons, saying, God is Spirit, and therefore those who worship ought to worship in spirit and truth.b 5. Therefore, although the divine abilities were depicted as limbs, we are not to conclude anything about God’s appearance or supposed bodily features. So when eyes are described, it means that he sees all things.c And when ears are described, it means that he hears all things.d And when it is a finger, this reveals a certain indication of his will.e And when it is a nose, this shows that he receives our prayers like odors.f And when it is hands, this demonstrates that he is the Maker of all creation.g And when it is an arm, this proclaims that nothing can resist his strength. And when it is feet, this explains that he fills all of creation, and there could be no place without God.h 6. He is the one whose very will, even before it is spoken, is served and attended by all of creation, so that he needs neither limbs nor the services of limbs.i Indeed, why would the one who is light require eyes? Or why would the one who is everywhere need feet? Or why would he want to walk, when there is nowhere he can go outside of himself? Or why would the one whose unspoken will is the maker of all created things desire hands? Nor does the one John 4:21. John 4:24. c  II Kings 19:16, Psalm 33:13. d  II Kings 19:16, Psalm 34:15. e  Exodus 31:18. f  Genesis 8:21. g  Deuteronomy 5:15, Psalm 136:12. h  Psalm 139:7-12, Isaiah 66:1. i  Psalm 119:91. a 

b 

63

21

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 6, 6-9 – CHAPTER 7, 1-2

who knows even our silent wishes need ears. Or why would the one who only has to think something to command it need a tongue? 7. Certainly these body parts are necessary for humans (but not for God), because a person’s intention would be ineffective without the body to fulfill the thought. However, God does not need a body, because his works not only follow his will without any effort, the works themselves proceed immediately with the will. 8. As for the rest, he is all eye, because he is all seeing; all ear, because he is all hearing; all hand, because he is all action; and all foot, because he is omnipresent. Furthermore, whatever he is, he is non-composite and omnipresent. 9. For whatever is simplex has no components within itself. Indeed, only those things which come into being and then go into decay revert to their different parts. But whatever is not composite cannot experience these things. For that which is immortal, whatever it is, it is singular and simplex and eternal. And for that reason, because whatever it is, it is singular, it cannot decay, it is itself outside the law of decay, and it is free from the laws of death.

Chapter 7

22

1. Now when the Lord says that God is Spirit,a I believe Christ spoke of the Father in this way to convey much more than simply that God is a spirit. In other words, while he debates with people in his Gospel in order to increase their understanding, nevertheless he still speaks to them about God in a way that they are able to hear - as we have said – if possible to make them grow in their reverent recognition of God so that they might make progress. 2. For example, we read that it may be said that God is love,b yet this does not mean that the word “love” has explained the substance [substantia] of God. Also, it has been said that he is light,c yet the substance of God is not in this. Rather, what has been said about God is all that can be said. So while it is correct to say that John 4:24. John 4:8. c  John 1:4-5, I John 1:5-7. a 

b 

64

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 7, 2-5 – CHAPTER 8, 1

he is spirit, this does not express all that he is. But the human mind progresses in understanding of this Spirit, and is changed by the Spirit, until it may be able to conclude that God is something more than just a spirit.a 3. What he is – what he truly is – cannot be expressed by human words, received by human ears, or perceived by human senses. For if, No eye has seen nor ear has heard nor human heart or mind itself perceived those things which God has prepared for those who love him,b then how much more has the human mind and nature failed to understand the essence and the greatness of the one who has promised these things? 4. Furthermore, if you accept that spirit is the substance of God, you make God a creature, because every spirit is a creature.c Now that would mean God was created. It would be as if, following Moses, you accept that God is fire,d saying that he is a creature, you would have expressed that he is created, rather than pointing out that he is the Creator. 5. But these things are figurative rather than literal. So for example in the Old Testament it is said that God is fire, in order to inspire fear in a sinful people while being revealed as their Judge. And in the New Testament it is said that he is spirit, so that through the goodness of his mercy given to those who believe, those who are dead in their sinse may accept him as Restorer and Creator.

Chapter 8 1. Therefore the Church, dismissing the myths and illusions of heretics, knows and worships this God. And nature, as much invisible as visible, always and everywhere gives testimony to the one whom the angels adore, the stars admire, the seas bless, and II Corinthians 3:15-18. Isaiah 64:3, I Corinthians 2:9. c  This does not include the Holy Spirit, as chapter 29 clarifies. Novatian apparently believed that created spirits were in some sense material, having a spiritual substance. However God (including the Holy Spirit) is purely immaterial. d  Deuteronomy 4:24. e  Ephesians 2:1. a 

b 

65

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 8, 1-4

23

the lands revere.a The underworld looks up to him whom every human mind perceives, even if he cannot be comprehended. By his command all things are moved: springs flow, streams cascade, waves swell, and all bear their offspring; winds are compelled to blow, storms come, seas are agitated, and all things everywhere pour forth their fruitfulness. 2. He created a world of eternal life, a paradise in the east, just for those first created people. He planted the tree of life, and likewise he placed there another tree, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.b He gave a command, and pronounced a sentence against transgression.c He saved the most righteous Noah from the dangers of the flood because of his innocence and faith.d He took Enoch up,e called Abraham into the fellowship of his friendship,f protected Isaac,g made Jacob prosper,h made Moses a leader for the people,i and rescued the groaning sons of Israel from the yoke of slavery.j He wrote the law,k and he led the descendants of the patriarchs into the promised land.l 3. He instructed the prophets by the Spirit, and through all of them he promised Christ, his Son; and then he sent him, at the time when he had vowed to give him. Through his Son, he willed that we should come to know him, and he poured fourth his abundant reserve of mercy upon us, granting the Spirit to enrich the poor and despondent. 4. And because he is beyond both generosity and goodness, in order to prevent this whole world that has turned away from his flowing grace from drying up, he willed that the apostles would be sent by his Son into the whole world Romans 1:20. Genesis 2:8-9. c  Genesis 2:16-17. d  Genesis 6:8, II Peter 2:5. e  Genesis 5:24. f  Genesis 17:2-4. g  Genesis 22:12. h  Genesis 30:43. i  Exodus 3:10. j  Exodus 13:14, 20:2. k  Exodus 20. l  Joshua 1:2. a 

b 

66

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 8, 4-7

as teachers of our race,a so that in its condition, the human race might acknowledge its Creator. And if they should choose to follow him, they would have a God whom they could call “Father” in their prayers.b 5. His providence has run, or rather it runs, not only through individual humans, but also through cities and states themselves – and he has predicted their demise by the voices of the prophets. Truly his providence runs through the whole world itself, and because of the world’s lack of belief he has described its end: plagues, tribulations, and judgments. 6. And so that no one might think that tireless providence does not also come to the least of God’s own, the Lord says, one of two sparrows will not fall without the will of the Father, and even the hairs of your head are all numbered.c Also, in his providence and care of the Israelites he allowed neither their garments to be used up, nor the worthless shoes on their feet to wear out.d He did not even allow the captive youths’ pants to be burned.e This is as it should be, for if the one who encompasses all things also preserves all things (even though all things are composed of individual parts), then therefore he also extends his care to all of the individual parts, since his providence has come to the whole, whatever it is. 7. This is why he sits above the cherubs,f meaning that he presides over his various works, and even these living creatures, who hold preeminence over the rest of creation, are subject to his throne. And everything is covered by crystal from above,g meaning that all things are covered by heaven, which by God’s command became a solid support from the fluid matter of the waters, so that the firm ice, hardened by freezing, might support the weight of

Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:15, Ephesians 4:11. Matthew 6:9, Luke 11:2. c  Matthew 10:29-30, Luke 12:6-7. d  Deuteronomy 29:5. e  Daniel 3:27. f  Psalm 80:2, 99:1. g  Ezekiel 1:22, Revelation 4:6. a 

b 

67

24

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 8, 7-11

25

the higher water by the strength of its back, dividing between the waters which covered the earth long ago.a 8. And as for the wheels that are under it,b one understands the divisions of time, by which all the things which make up the world are always in flight, as if feet were added to these things so that they do not constantly stand still, but are in motion. 9. And what is more, all of the spokes are thoroughly starry with eyes,c for the works of God are to be contemplated with a watchful gaze, and in the hub of these wheels is a fire of burning coals,d either because the world hurries toward that fiery day of judgment,e or because all the works of God are radiant – they are not dark – on the contrary they flourish.f For if they did not, if they had arisen from earthly beginnings, they would naturally become dull with the numbness of their origin. So each one is given the warm nature of an interior spirit, which provides cold material bodies with an even balance of everything in life. 10. This, then, is the chariot of God according to David. For he says, the chariot of God is multiplied ten times a thousand times,g meaning that it is innumerable, infinite, and immeasurable. Indeed, under the yoke of natural law which is given to all, some are held back, as if restrained by reins, others are driven forward, as if spurred on by loose reins. 11. For that chariot of God is the world, and all that is within it. It is led on by the angels and the stars, and although various motion is allowed, nevertheless it is bound by fixed laws. And we see that these laws lead the heavenly bodies to their fixed goals at the appointed times, so that it might please us now to rightly exclaim with the apostle, wondering at both the Maker and his works, Oh the height of riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God, how incomprehensible are his judgments, and how unsearchable are his ways,h and the rest. Genesis 1:6. Ezekiel 1:15-21, 10:9-19. c  Ezekiel 1:18, 10:12, Revelation 4:6. d  Ezekiel 1:13. e  II Peter 3:12. f  John 3:19-21. g  Psalm 68:17. h  Romans 11:33. a 

b 

68

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 9, 1-6

Chapter 9 1. After the Father, who is the one and only God and the Founder of all things, as it has already been explained above, this same Rule of Truth teaches us also to believe in the Son of God: Jesus Christ – our Lord and God, and yet the Son of God. 2. For we read of this Jesus Christ, again I should say this Son of God, both promised in the Old Testament, and, as we have observed, presented in the New Testament, fulfilling the shadows and figures of all the sacred mysteries [sacramentorum] concerning the presence of incarnate truth. 3. Indeed, both the ancient prophecies and the Gospels testify that he is the son of Abraham, and no less than the son of David.a 4. Genesis itself refers to him when it says, I will give to you and your seed…b It refers to him when it shows a man wrestling with Jacob.c It refers to him when it says, A leader will not fail to come from Judah, nor a ruler from his offspring [ femoribus], until he who has been promised comes, and he himself will be the expectation of the nations.d 5. Moses refers to him when he says, Find another whom you could send.e Likewise, he refers to him when he testifies, saying, God will raise up a prophet for you from among your people, listen to him as you would listen to me.f And he refers to him when he says, You will see your life hanging by night and by day and you will not believe him.g 6. Isaiah says of him, A branch will sprout from the root of Jesse and a flower will arise from the root.h Likewise, he refers to him when he says, Behold, a virgin will conceive and bring forth a son.i He refers to him when he describes the miraculous healings to be Matthew 1:1-17, 20:30-31, Luke 3:23-31.. Genesis 17:8. c  Genesis 32:25. d  Cf. Genesis 49:10. e  Genesis 4:13. f  Deuteronomy 18:15. g  Deuteronomy 28:66. h  Isaiah 11:1. i  Isaiah 7:14. There is a play on words here between the two Isaiah passages: uirga prodiet (branch sprouts) and uirgo pariet (virgin bears). a 

b 

69

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 9, 6-8

26

done by him, saying, Then the eyes of the blind will be opened and the ears of the deaf will hear; then the crippled will leap as a deer and the tongue of the mute will be eloquent.a Finally, he referred to him when he exhibited the virtues of tolerance, saying, His voice will not be heard in the streets; he will not trample the broken reed and he will not extinguish the smoldering wick.b 7. He referred to him when he described his Gospels, And I will arrange with you an eternal covenant, holy and faithful to that of David.c He refers to him when he prophesies that the nations will believe in him, Behold, I have made him a leader and a teacher of the nations. Nations which have not known you will call upon you and people who do not know you will take refuge in you.d Likewise, he refers to him when he proclaims his passion, saying, He was led as a sheep to the slaughter, and just as a lamb is mute in the presence of the shearer, so in humility he has not opened his mouth.e 8. He refers to him when he described the lashings and wounds of his whippings, By his bruises we are healed,f or his humility, And we have seen him and neither beauty nor position was his; a wounded man who knew how to endure weakness,g or that people would not believe, All day I have extended my hands to an unbelieving people,h or that he was to rise from the dead, And there will be in that day a root of Jesse who will rise to rule over the nations; in him the nations will hope and his rest will be glorious.i Also, with regard to the time of the resurrection, We will find him ready as at dawn,j or that he will be seated at the right hand of the Father, The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right, until I place your enemies as a footstool for your feet,” k or when he is presented as Isaiah 35:5-6. Isaiah 42:2-3. c  Isaiah 55:3. d  Isaiah 55:4-5. e  Isaiah 53:7-8. f  Isaiah 53:5. g  Isaiah 53:2-3. h  Isaiah 65:2. i  Isaiah 11:10. j  Hosea 6:3. k  Psalm 110:1. a 

b 

70

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 9, 8-9 – CHAPTER 10, 1-3

the possessor of all things, Ask of me and I will give you the nations as your inheritance and the ends of the earth as your possession,a or that he is shown to be the judge of all things, God, give your judgment to the king and your justice to the son of the king.b 9. I will not pursue this further here, these things announced concerning Christ are known to all the heretics, yet even more so to those who hold the truth.

Chapter 10 1. So my advice is, do not look in the Gospel for any christ other than this one, who was promised before by the Creator in the writings of the Old Testament – especially since those things which have been predicted about him were fulfilled, and what has been fulfilled was predicted before. 2. Therefore, to the false christ I do not know,c fictitious and counterfeit, coming from the old wives’ tales of those heretics who reject the authority of the Old Testament, I can reasonably ask with truth and conviction: Who are you? Where did you come from? Who sent you? Why did you want to come now? Why are you the way you are? Or, How were you even able to come? 3. Or, Why have you not gone to your own people, unless it is to demonstrate that you have no people of your own, since you come to strangers? What does the Creator’s world have to do with you? What does humanity – also made by the Creator – have to do with you? What does the appearance of a body have to do with you, since you steal its hope of resurrection? Why do you come to the servant of a stranger?d Do you want to provoke the stranger’s Son? Why are you trying to steal me away from the Lord? Why do you try to get me to be impious and blaspheme the Father?

Psalm 2:8. Psalm 72:1. c  That is, the christ of the Marcionites (docetics). d  Romans 14:4. a 

b 

71

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 10, 4-7

27

4. Or, What am I to obtain from you in the resurrection, that I do not retain myself, when I let go of the body? If you want to be a savior, you should have made humanity, to whom you could give salvation. If you want to rescue me from sin, you should have previously granted it to me not to commit sin. On the other hand, what support do you carry from the law? What testimony do you have from the voice of the prophets? 5. Or, What tangible thing can I promise myself from you, when I see that you have come as a phantom, and not in solid form? For that matter, if you have despised the body, what does the appearance of a body have to do with you? In fact, you are disproven in that you disdain to carry the substance of a body, and yet you have still wished to take up its appearance. Indeed you should have rejected the imitation of the body, if you rejected the reality. For if you are something else, you should have come a different way, so that you would not be called the Son of the Creator, because you had the image of flesh and body. Certainly if you despised human birth, because you hated the Creator’s union of marriage, you should have refused even the imitation of humanity, which is born through the Creator’s institution of marriage. 6. And so we do not acknowledge the christ of these heretics, who is said to have existed in appearance but not in reality, for there is nothing real of those things which he has supposedly done, if he himself was a phantom and not real. We do not acknowledge one who has carried in himself nothing of our body, received nothing from Mary, and has not really even come to us, since he appeared without our human nature [substantia]. Nor do we acknowledge one who has put on ethereal or otherworldly flesh, as other heretics have supposed, for we could not realize our salvation in him if we could not recognize our solid body in him. Nor do we acknowledge any other christ at all, who carries any other kind of mythical body from the fabrication of heretics. 7. Indeed, both the birth of the Lord and his death silence all of these. For John says, And the Word was made flesh and lived among us,a because truly he was in our body, since even the Word a 

John 1:14.

72

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 10, 7-9 – CHAPTER 11, 1-2

has taken up our flesh. And blood flowed from his hands and feet and also his side, to show that he shares in our body, since (having fallen to our laws) he died. 8. The one who is now revived in the same substance of body in which he died, is proven by the wounds of his own body, and he has also demonstrated the conditions of our resurrection in his flesh, having restored in his own resurrection the body which he had from us. Indeed, the precedent of resurrection is set, now that Christ is raised up in the substance of a body, as a pattern for the rest of humanity. 9. For when it is written, Flesh and blood will not obtain the Kingdom of God,a it is not that the substance of flesh has been condemned – it has been made by divine hands and is not lost – but only that the fault of flesh has been blamed. And rightly so, for this willfulness of humanity has rebelled against the rule of divine law by its recklessness. Yet it is removed in baptism and in the dissolution of death, and flesh is restored to salvation, and it is recalled to a state of innocence when the mortal guilt is absolved.b

Chapter 11 1. However, while we affirm the fact that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God the Creator, was revealed in real bodily substance, by saying this we must not appear to have given in to other hereticsc (either by giving them a hand or by expressing their position), who maintain that he is only and merely a man and so are eager to demonstrate that he is an ordinary man and nothing more. We do not express ourselves this way concerning the substance of his body, saying that he is only a mere man, but rather we hold that the divinity of the Word was mingled into this solid matter, and furthermore that he is God, according to the Scriptures. 2. In fact it is a great danger to say that the Savior of the human race – the Lord and Ruler of the whole world, to whom, all things I Corinthians 15:50. Cf. Psalm 103:12, Matthew 16:19. c  The adoptionists. a 

b 

73

28

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 11, 2-6

29

have been handed over by his Father,a and everything given to him; through whom all things were ordered, all things were created, all things were arranged; the King of all ages and times,b the Ruler of all the angels; the one whom nothing outranks except the Father – is only a man, and to deny his divine authority in these things. For this insult of the heretics would also extend to God the Father himself, if God the Father was not able to generate God the Son. 3. Certainly the blindness of the heretics will not lead to the truth,c because they accept one thing in Christ, but they do not accept the other; they see one thing, but they do not see the other, so the reality that they do not see is stolen from us because they are so focused on what they do see. 4. For they consider the weaknesses of humanity in him, but they do not take into account the powers of God; they reflect on the weaknesses of flesh, but they ignore the powers of divinity. If these weaknesses of Christ prove that he is human, then his powers add up to proof of divinity in him, and his works assert that he is God. For if sufferings show human frailty in him, why do his works not declare divine power in him? No, if his powers do not prove that he is God, then neither will his sufferings by themselves prove that he is a man. 5. The fact is, whichever proposition is put forward in either case, the other will be found to be supported as well. Indeed, the danger will be that his sufferings do not prove his humanity, if his powers do not prove him to be God. Therefore, one is not to lean toward one part and avoid the other part, since whoever ignores some portion of the truth could never possess the whole truth. 6. For just as Scripture announces that Christ is God, so it also announces that God is truly human. Just as it has described Jesus Christ as a man, so it has also described Christ the Lord as God as well, because it proclaims him to be not only the Son of God, but also the Son of Man. It says he is not only of humanity, but it often relates that he is also of God, and therefore since he is from both, he is both – if he were only one, he could not be the other. Matthew 11:27. I Timothy 1:17. c  Matthew 15:14. a 

b 

74

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 11, 7-8

7. For nature itself has ordained that whoever is from humanity must be accepted as human; in the same way nature also dictates that whoever is from God must be accepted as God.a If he were not also God, being from God, then he would not be human, even though he is from humanity, and both his divinity and his humanity would be in danger, since either one would be refuted by the loss of confidence in the other. 8. Therefore those who read that the man Jesus Christ is the Son of Man, let them also read that this same one is called both God and the Son of God.b For it is like this: as a man, he is from Abraham,c so also as God he is before Abraham.d And likewise, as a man he is the son of David,e so also as God he has been called David’s Lord.f And in the same way, as a man he was born [ factus] under the law,g so also as God he has been described as Lord of the Sabbath.h And as a man he suffers judgment, so also as God he will have judgment over all the living and the dead.i And as a man he was born after the world, so also as God he is held to have existed before the world.j And as a man he was born from the seed of David,k so also as God the world is said to have been created through him.l And as a man, he comes after many, so also as God he is before all. And as a man he was lower than the rest, so also as God he is greater than all. And as a man, he has ascended into heaven,m so also as God he had first descended from there.n And as a man, he has gone to the Father,o

John 8:42. I Timothy 2:5. c  Matthew 1:1-17, Luke 3:23-34. d  John 8:58. e  Matthew 1:1-17, 20:30-31, Luke 3:23-31. f  Psalm 110:1, Matthew 22:41-46. g  Galatians 4:4. h  Matthew 12:8, Mark 2:28, Luke 6:5. i  John 5:22. j  John 1:1-3, 17:5. k  Romans 1:3. l  John 1:1-3, 10. m  Mark 16:19, Luke 24:51, Acts 1:9-11. n  John 6:38, 62, Philippians 2:6-8. o  John 14:3, 28. a 

b 

75

30

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 11, 8-9 – CHAPTER 12, 1-2

so also as the Son – obedient to the Father – he will descend from there.a 9. Therefore if his limitations prove his human frailty, then his majesty affirms his divine power. So when you read of both, it is dangerous to believe only one and not both. Because it is written that both are in Christ, both must be believed, so that in this way faith may be true – but only if it is also complete. 10. For if we fail to believe in one of the two, and only one is accepted (especially that one which by itself is insufficient for faith), then the Rule of Truth is upset. Such recklessness will not bring salvation, but in exchange for salvation it will bring about a great danger of death from the rejection of the faith.

Chapter 12

31

1. Therefore, why should we hesitate to say what Scripture does not hesitate to express? Why should the truth of faith be undecided in that which the authority of Scripture has never been undecided? For example, look at Hosea the prophet. Speaking from the person of the Father, he says, Now I will not save them by bow or by horse or by cavalry, but I will save them by the Lord their God.b 2. If God says he will save them by God, and if God does not save unless by Christ,c then why would one hesitate to call Christ God, when one can see that the Father has established through the Scriptures that Christ is God? In fact, if the Father does not save unless by God, no one could be saved by God the Father without admitting that Christ is God, in whom and through whom the Father promises to grant salvation.d So whoever acknowledges that Christ is God consequently finds salvation in God through Christ, but whoever does not recognize that Christ is God will lose salvation, which one could not find anywhere except in Christ, who is God. a  Possibly John 8:38, 62, Philippians 2:6-8. More likely a reference to the second coming and judgment. b  Hosea 1:7. c  John 14:6, Acts 4:12. d  Romans 10:9-10.

76

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 12, 3-6

3. For as Isaiah says, Behold, a virgin will conceive and bear a son, and you will call his name Emmanuel, which means “God with us”.a And so Christ himself says, Behold I am with you, even to the end of the age.b Therefore he is God with us, in fact what is more, he is also in us. Christ is with us, and that is why his name is God with us, because he is also with us. Or perhaps he is not with us? Then how does he say he is with us? Therefore he is with us. And since he is with us, he has been called Emmanuel, that is, God with us. Therefore, he is called God with us because he is God with us. 4. The same prophet says, Be strong, fumbling hands and weak knees; be encouraged you who are afraid. Be strong, do not fear. Behold, our God will repay judgment; he himself will come and save us. Then the eyes of the blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will hear; then the crippled will leap as a deer, and the tongue of the mute will be eloquent.c 5. If the prophet says that these things, which have been done, are future signs of the arrival of God, then let the heretics either acknowledge Christ as the Son of God (with whose arrival and by whom these signs of miraculous healing were accomplished), or, having been overcome by the truth of Christ’s divinity and falling into the other heresy, let them confess him to the be the Father, since they refuse to admit that Christ is Son of God as well as God. For now that they have been confined by the voices of the prophets, they cannot deny that Christ is God. 6. Therefore, what will they answer when it is asserted that these future signs of the arrival of God were brought about with the arrival of Christ? For now that they cannot deny that Christ is God, in what way do they understand him to be God – as the Father or as the Son? If as the Son, why do they deny that the Son of God is God? If as the Father, why do they not follow those who are seen to hold such blasphemies? Or perhaps, in our struggle against these opponents of the truth, this is enough for now, in that whatever the type of heresy, they are proven to be mistaken, so that they should admit that Christ is also God – the very God they wish to deny. Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:23. Matthew 28:20. c  Isaiah 35:3-6. a 

b 

77

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 12, 7-9 – CHAPTER 13, 1

32

7. Through Habakkuk the prophet, he says, God will come from the south, and the holy one will come down from the dark and impenetrable mountain.a Whom do they wish to say is that one who comes from the south? If they say the omnipotent God the Father came, then God the Father has come from a place, and therefore he is also enclosed by a place and contained within the confines of some location. And thus because of this, as we have indicated, the sacrilegious heresy of Sabellius has taken form, if indeed Christ is believed to be, not the Son but the Father. This is a new manner of heresy, for while those others claim that Christ is a mere man, having been stripped of his divinity, Sabellius on the other hand claims that Christ is God the omnipotent Father. 8. But if Christ, whom the Scriptures call God, was born in Bethlehem, which lies to the south as it is laid out under heaven, then truly God can be described as coming from the south, because it was predicted that he would come from Bethlehem. 9.  Therefore, they should choose from the two which they will embrace as the one who comes from the south – the Son or the Father – for God is said to be coming from the south. If they choose the Son, why do they hesitate to say that Christ is also God? Truly Scripture says that God will come. If they choose the Father, why do they hesitate to be associated with the recklessness of Sabellius, who says that Christ is the Father? Unless it is because, whether they call him the Father or the Son, it is unavoidable that they (although unwilling) should withdraw from their own heresy in which they are in the habit of saying that Christ is only a man. For now they are compelled by the facts to admit that he is God, whether they wish to call him the Father or the Son.

Chapter 13 1. Similarly, John, describing the nativity of Christ, says, the Word was made flesh, and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, glo-

a 

Habakkuk 3:3.

78

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 13, 1-5

ry as the only-begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth,a and also, And his name is called the Word of God,b and rightly so. He says, my heart has brought forth a good word, that word which he subsequently addresses to the name of the king when he professes, I speak my works to the king.c 2. For all works were made through him, and nothing was made without him.d Indeed, the apostle says, whether thrones or dominions, or principalities or powers, visible and invisible, all things exist through him.e And this is that Word who, came to his own, but his own did not receive him.f For, the world was made through him, and yet the world did not know him.g Now this Word was in the beginning with God, and the Word was God.h 3. So then, when he says in the latter part of the prologue, the Word was made flesh and lived among us, who could doubt that Christ, whose nativity it is, and who was made flesh, is human? And because he is the Word of God, who could hesitate to declare him to be God, especially when one sees in the writing of the Gospel that both of these substances were brought together into one unity in the nativity of Christ. 4. Indeed, he is the one who, as a groom coming out of his chamber, as a hero has rejoiced to run the course, his going out is from highest heaven and his return is even to the highest place,i all the way up to the highest, for, no one ascends into heaven, except the one who descended from heaven, the Son of Man, who is in heaven.j Repeating this same idea, he says, Father, glorify me with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.k 5. And if the Word descended from heaven like a groom, to unite with flesh, so that John 1:14. Revelation 19:13. c  Psalm 45:1-2. d  John 1:3. e  Colossians 1:16. f  John 1:11. g  John 1:10. h  John 1:1-2. i  Psalm 19:6-7. j  John 3:13. k  John 17:5. a 

b 

79

33

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 13, 5-7

34

through the taking of flesh, the Son of Man could ascend to that place from which the Son of God, the Word, had descended, then truly through the mutual connection the flesh carries the Word of God and the Son of God accepts the frailty of the flesh. With flesh as his bride, he ascends to that place from which he had descended without flesh. Now he receives back that glory which he is shown to have had before the creation of the world, and it is clearly proven that he is God. And what is more, while the world itself is said to have been created after him, it is found to have been created through him, which proves both the glory and the authority of the divinity in him, through whom the world was made. 6. Since no one except God knows the secrets of the heart, and Christ understands the secrets of the heart,a and since no one except God forgives sins, and this same Christ forgives sins,b and since no human comes from heaven, but he descended, coming down from heaven,c and since no human is able to say, the Father and I are one, yet Christ alone declares this saying from the awareness of his divinity,d and since the apostle Thomas, finally convinced of the divinity of Christ by all the proofs and evidence, says in reply to Christ, my Lord and my God,e and since the apostle Paul also writes in his letters, whose are the fathers, and from whom is Christ according to the flesh, who is over all things, blessed God forever,f and since the same apostle declares himself to have been appointed, not by people or through humanity, but by Jesus Christ,g and since the same apostle maintains that he did not learn the Gospel from people or through humanity, but that he received it from Jesus Christ,h then truly Christ is God. 7. And so at this point, one of two things must be certain. For although it may be clear that all things were made through I Kings 8:39, Matthew 9:4, John 2:25. Matthew 9:2-8, Mark 2:5-12, Luke 5:20-26. c  John 3:13. d  John 10:30. e  John 20:28. f  Romans 9:5. g  Galatians 1:1. h  Galatians 1:11-12. a 

b 

80

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 13, 7-8 – CHAPTER 14, 1-2

Christ, either he existed before everything else, because all things were made through him,a and consequently he is also God, or he came into being after everything else, because he is human, and consequently nothing has been made through him. But we cannot say that nothing has been made through him, since we see that it is written, all things were made through him.b Therefore, he did not come into being after everything else, like the rest of humanity – in other words, he is not human only, but he is also God, because God existed before everything. Truly he existed before everything, because all things were made through him.c If he were only human, nothing would have been made through him. But if all things were made through him, then he is not human only, because if he were human only, all things could not have been made through him – in fact nothing could have been made through him. 8. So what will they reply? That nothing was made through him and he is only a man? Then why is it written that all things were made through him? Therefore he is not a mere human, but also God, because all things exist through him. So we must understand Christ correctly – that he is not only human (having come into being after everything else), but that he is also God, since all things were made through him. How can you say he is human only, just because he was visible in the flesh? Since both his humanity and divinity are observed, both must be believed.

Chapter 14 1. And yet the heretic still hesitates to say that Christ is God, even though he observes that so many facts and voices prove that he is God. 2. If Christ were human only, how is it that when he came into this world, he came to his own,d since no human could have John 1:3. John 1:3. c  John 1:3. d  John 1:11. a 

b 

81

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 14, 2-10

35

made the world? 3. If Christ were human only how is it said that, the world was made through him,a when it is not said that the world was made through a human, but that humanity was put in place after the world? 4. If Christ were human only, how is it that Christ is not just, from the seed of David,b but is also, the Word who was made flesh and lived among us?c For even though the first created human was not from any seed, still he was not formed by the joining together of Word and flesh. For that first man is not the Word who was made flesh and lived among us.d 5. If Christ were human only, how is it that, he who comes from heaven testifies to what he has seen and heard,e when it is certain that a human cannot come from heaven, because he cannot begin his existence there? 6. If Christ were human only, how is it said that, the visible and the invisible, thrones, principalities, and dominions, were created through him and in him,f when heavenly powers could not have been made through a human, and must have existed before humanity itself? 7. If Christ were human only, how is it that he is present wherever he is called upon,g when this ability to be present in every place does not belong to human nature, but to God? 8. If Christ were human only, why is a man called upon in prayer as a mediator, when calling upon a human to be a guarantee for salvation is judged futile? 9. If Christ were human only, why do we put our hope in him,h when hoping in a human is said to be cursed?i 10. If Christ were human only, why is it that Christ cannot be denied without the loss of the soul,j when it is written that a crime committed against a human can be forgiven?k John 1:10. Romans 1:3. c  John 1:14. d  John 1:14. e  John 3:31-32. f  Colossians 1:16. g  Matthew 18:20. h  I Corinthians 15:19, I Timothy 1:1. i  Jeremiah 17:5. j  Matthew 10:33. k  Matthew 6:14-15, 18:35, Mark 11:25. Cf. I Samuel 2:25. a 

b 

82

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 14, 11-17

11. If Christ were human only, how is it that John the baptizer testifies to him, saying, he who comes after me outranks me because he existed before me?a If Christ were human only, he could not have existed before John (since he was born after John). He came before John because he is God. 12. If Christ were human only, how is it that, what the Father does, the Son also does in like manner,b when a human is not able to do works like the heavenly works of God? 13. If Christ were human only, how is it that, just as the Father has life in himself, so also he has granted it to the Son to have life in himself,c when a human cannot have life in himself after the example of the Father, since he is of mortal matter, not glorious eternity? 14. If Christ were human only, how could he say, I am the bread of eternal life, that has come down from heaven,d when a human, who is himself mortal, could not be the bread of life, nor could he have descended from heaven? For no frail matter ever originated in heaven. 15. If Christ were human only, how can he say, for no one has ever seen God the Father, except the one who is from God, he has seen God?e For if Christ were human only, he could not have seen God, because, no one has seen God.f If, however, he is from God after all, then he has seen God, and since he has seen God, he wanted himself to be understood as more than a human. 16. If Christ were human only, why does he say, what if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to that place where he was before?g Now he has ascended into heaven. Therefore, he was there, if he has returned to that place where he was before. 17. Since he has been sent from heaven by the Father, then he is not human only, for as we have said, a human could not come from heaven. So he was not there before as a human, but his humanity ascended to that place where it had not been. However, the Word of God, who John 1:15. John 5:19. c  John 5:26. d  John 6:51. e  John 6:46. f  John 1:18, I John 4:12. g  John 6:62. a 

b 

83

36

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 14, 17 – CHAPTER 15, 1-3

was there, has descended. I say the Word of God, but also God, through whom, all things were made and without whom nothing was made.a Therefore, he did not come from heaven as a human, but as the Word of God, that is, God, who descended from there.

Chapter 15

37

1. If Christ were human only, how could he say, even if I witness to myself, my testimony is true, because I know where I have come from, and where it is I go… you judge according to the flesh?b And see how he also says here that he will return to the place he testifies he came from, meaning that he has been sent from heaven. Therefore he descended from that place he came from, just as he has gone back to the place he descended from. Consequently if Christ were human only, he would not have come from there, and also for that reason he could not go back there, because he would not have come from there. However, since he came from there – from that place no human could come from – he has demonstrated that he came as God. 2. But indeed the Jews were unacquainted with and ignorant of this descent of his, and they have made those heretics heirs to themselves, to whom it is said, you do not know from where I have come and where it is I go, you judge according to the flesh.c So these heretics, along with the Jews, have believed Christ to be nothing more than human, assuming the nativity of Christ to be only carnal. They fail to consider that, since a human could not come from heaven, subsequently to be able to return there, the one who descended from there (the place a human could not come from), is God. 3. If Christ were human only, how could he say, you are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world?d John 1:3. John 8:14-15. c  John 8:14-15. d  John 8:23. a 

b 

84

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 15, 3-6

But if every human is from this world, and Christ is in this world,a does that mean that he is human only? Far from it. Consider that he said, I am not of this world.b So is he lying? For if he were human only, he would be from this world. Otherwise if he is not lying, then he is not from this world. Therefore, he is not human only, because he is not from this world. 4. In fact he has explained where he was from, so that his nature might be revealed. He said I am from above,c that is, from heaven, from that place no human can come from, because humans are not made in heaven. Therefore, the one who is from above is God, and for that reason he is not of this world. Yet in a certain way he is from this world, which means Christ is not only God, but he is also human. So it follows that just as he is not from the world according to the divinity of the Word, so in the same way he is from this world according to the frailty of the body which he has taken up. For he is humanity joined with God, and God connected with humanity. 5. But in this passage Christ emphasized only one part, his divinity, since Jewish blindness had perceived only the fleshy part of Christ. And so in the present place he passed over in silence the frailty of the body (which is of the world) and he spoke only about his divinity (which is not of the world). He wanted to overcome their disbelief concerning his divinity by omitting mention of his human part for the time being, and by addressing his divinity alone. This was so that - to the same extent that they were inclined to believe that he was human only - Christ could bring them to consider his divinity, so that they might believe that he is God. 6. If Christ were human only, how could he say, I have gone forth and have come from God,d when it is agreed that humanity was made by God, it has not proceeded from God? But while humanity did not proceed from God in this way, the Word of God did proceed from God. Of him it was said, my heart has brought John 1:10. John 8:23. c  John 8:23. d  John 8:42. a 

b 

85

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 15, 6-8

38

forth a good word.a Since he is from God, he is also truly with God,b and since the Word was not sent out in vain,c he truly accomplishes everything. For, all things were made through him and nothing was made without him.d Indeed this Word, through whom all things were made, is God. And the Word, it says, was God.e Therefore God proceeded from God, since the Word, who proceeded from God, is God from God. 7. If Christ were human only, how could he say, if anyone would keep my word, he will never see death?f What is it never to see death, except immortality? Now immortality is the partner of divinity, because divinity is immortal and immortality is the fruit of divinity.g But certainly every human is mortal, and immortality cannot exist from what is mortal. Therefore, immortality cannot originate from Christ as a mortal human. But he says, whoever will observe my word will never see death.h Therefore the word of Christ confers immortality, and through immortality, confers divinity.i Since a human is mortal himself, he cannot make another immortal. But this word of Christ both offers and confers immortality, and certainly one who confers immortality is not human only, for if he were human only, he could not confer immortality. But by conferring divinity through immortality, he proves that he is God granting divinity, for if he were not God, he could not confer it. 8. If Christ were human only, how could he say, before Abraham was, I am?j For no human could exist before his own ancestor, in fact nothing could exist before its own source. But truly Christ says he existed before Abraham, even though he is from Abraham. So either he is lying and deceiving, if he was from Abraham and did not exist before Abraham, or he is not deceiving, if Psalm 45:1. John 1:1. c  Isaiah 55:11. d  John 1:3. e  John 1:1. f  John 8:51. g  Wisdom 6:19. h  John 8:51. i  II Peter 1:4. j  John 8:58. a 

b 

86

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 15, 8-12

he is also God, and thus he existed before Abraham. If he were not God, and was therefore only from Abraham, he could not have existed before Abraham. 9. If Christ were human only, how could he say, and I will know them, and my own follow me, and I give them eternal life, and they will never perish?a But truly, since every human is bound by the laws of mortality, and no one is, by himself, able to save himself for eternity, it would be even more impossible for someone to save another person for eternity. Yet Christ, by himself, promises to grant eternal salvation. How deceitful he is if he will not give what he promises! But if he does give it, then he is God. And he does not deceive, because he gives what he promises. Therefore he is God, who grants eternal salvation, which a human (who could not even save himself) could not confer on another. 10. If Christ were human only, what did he mean when he said, the Father and I are one?b For how could he say, the Father and I are one,c if he is not both God and the Son? This is why the Son can be called one with the Father, because he is from him, and he is his Son, and he is generated from him, and he is revealed to have proceeded from him, and he is God through him. 11. With these words, Christ showed that he is God, but the Jews viewed this with envy and believed it to be blasphemous, so they ran to gather stones and they were eager to stone him with rocks.d But he powerfully refuted his adversaries with the example and testimony of the Scriptures. He said, if it called those to whom the words were given “gods,” and the Scripture cannot be broken, do you say, “Because you blaspheme,” to the one whom the Father has declared holy and sent into this world, because I said, “I am the Son of God”?e 12. With these sayings he did not deny that he is God, on the contrary, he has established himself as God. For without a doubt those to whom the words were given are called gods, so how much more is the one who is found to be better than all of them to John 10:27-28. John 10:30. c  John 10:30. d  John 10:31. e  Psalm 82:6, John 10:31-36. a 

b 

87

39

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 15, 12-13 – CHAPTER 16, 1-2

be called God. In this way he adequately refuted their slanderous blasphemy by logical argument. For he wants to be known as God, specifically he wanted to be known as the Son of God, not the Father himself. Indeed, he said that he was sent, and he pointed out that he had shown many works from the Father,a which means that he wanted to be known as the Son, not as the Father himself. And in the last part of his defense he called himself the Son, not the Father, when he said, do you say, “Because you blaspheme,” because I said “I am the Son of God”? b 13. So as far as the accusation of blasphemy is concerned, he says that he is the Son, not the Father; but with regard to his own divinity, he declares, the Father and I are one.c And by saying this, he has proven that he is the Son, and God. Therefore, he is God, but in the sense that he is the Son, not the Father.

Chapter 16

40

1. If Christ were human only, how could he say, And everyone who sees and believes in me will never die?d But certainly whoever believes in a mere human alone is said to be cursede – yet here it is recorded that whoever believes in Christ is not cursed, and will never die. Consequently, if he were only human as the heretics would have it, how can it be that whoever believes in him will never die, when anyone who trusts in a human is considered cursed? Or if one is not cursed, but rather is destined to the attainment of eternal life, as it is written, then Christ is not human only, but he is also God, and whoever believes in him not only avoids the danger of the curse, but also comes to the reward of righteousness. 2. If Christ were human only, how could he say that the Paraclete would receive from him the things that he will announce?f John 10:32. John 10:36. c  John 10:30. d  John 6:40, 11:26. e  Jeremiah 17:5. f  John 16:14. a 

b 

88

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 16, 2-5

Certainly the Paraclete does not receive anything from humanity. On the contrary, the Paraclete grants knowledge to humanity – he does not learn the future from humanity but instructs humanity about the future. Therefore, either Christ is lying and deceiving us in this passage when he says that the Paraclete will receive from him, a human, whatever he announces (if in fact the Paraclete does not receive what he announces from Christ, a human), since a mere human would not be able to give anything to the Paraclete, because a human must receive from him; or he is not deceiving us - certainly he never deceives – and the Paraclete receives from Christ what he announces. 3. So if he receives what he announces from Christ, then Christ is higher than the Paraclete, since the Paraclete would not receive from Christ unless he were lower than Christ. But in fact the Paraclete is lower than Christ, which proves that Christ himself, from whom he receives what he announces, is God. This is a great testimony to the divinity of Christ, that the Paraclete is discovered to be lower than Christ, from whom he receives what he gives to others. For if Christ were human only, Christ would receive what he says, the Paraclete would not receive from Christ what he announces. 4. If Christ were human only, why did he establish such an article of faith as this, when he said, Now this is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ?a If he did not also want to be known as God, why did he add, and the one whom you sent, Jesus Christ, unless it is because he did also want to be understood as God? For if he did not want to be known as God, he could have added, “and the one whom you sent, the man Jesus Christ.” However, Christ neither added this, nor has he taught us that he was only a human. Rather, he has connected himself to God so that through this association he would be understood to be God, as indeed he is. 5. Therefore, one must believe – according to the prescribed rule – in the Lord, the one true God, and then in the one whom he sent, Jesus Christ, who as we said, would never have connected a 

John 17:3.

89

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 16, 5-7

41

himself to the Father unless he also wanted to be known as God. Indeed, he would have separated himself from the Father if he did not want to be known as God. Certainly he would have placed himself among humans only, if he knew that he was only human; he would not have connected himself to God if he had not known that he was also God. On the one hand, he is silent about his humanity, since no one doubts that he was a man; but on the other hand he deservedly connects himself to God, to establish the doctrine of his divinity for those who would believe. 6. If Christ were human only, how could he say, And now, glorify me with the glory that I had with you before the world existed?a If he had glory with God before the world existed, and he held the glory together with the Father, then he existed before the world. For he could not have had glory unless he existed before the glory, so he could hold it. Indeed, no one could have anything unless the one who has something exists before it. But truly Christ had glory before the creation of the world – therefore he existed before the creation of the world. For unless he existed before the creation of the world, he could not have glory before the creation of the world, when he himself did not exist. Truly no human, who came into existence after the world, could have glory before the creation of the world. But Christ had it, therefore he existed before the world, and so the one who existed before the world did not exist as a human only. Therefore he is God, because he existed before the world, and held glory before the world. 7. But it cannot be said that this is a matter of predestination, because this is not what is written. Whoever thinks this, adds it, but woe to the addition, as well as to the subtraction from what is written.b Therefore, what cannot be added cannot be said. So, having eliminated predestination, which is not written, Christ existed in substance before the creation of the world. For he is the Word through whom all things were made and without whom nothing was made.c John 17:5. Deuteronomy 4:2, 13:1, Revelation 22:18-19. c  John 1:3. a 

b 

90

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 16, 8-10 – CHAPTER 17, 1-2

8. For if he is said to be glorious by predestination, and the predestination was before the creation of the world, then (if order is preserved) there would be a great number of people who came before him, also destined to glory. Indeed, by that determination, Christ, who came along after, would be known as less than the others. For if this glory was by predestination, then Christ received that predestination to glory most recently – indeed it would be discovered that Adam was predestined before him, as well as Abel, and Enoch, and Noah, and Abraham, and all the rest. 9. For since the order of people and of all things was arranged by God, many will be said to have been predestined to glory before this predestination of Christ. And this would imply that Christ is revealed to be less than other people, even though he is found to be better and greater and more ancient even than the angels themselves. 10. Therefore, either all these facts should be dismissed, so that no divinity could be ascribed to Christ, or if they cannot be dismissed, then the heretics should restore to Christ his own divinity.

Chapter 17 1. What about the fact that Moses follows this same Rule of Truth? He has even handed it down to us at the beginning of his writings, where we learn that everything was created and founded through the Son of God, that is, through the Word of God. For Moses says what John and the others say, and in fact it is assumed that John and the others received what they say from him. 2. For John says, all things were made through him, and nothing was made without him,a and the prophet states, I speak my works to the king.b But Moses presents God in the beginning directing that light should be created, heaven should be established, the waters should be gathered, the dry land should be exposed, fruit should be called forth according to its seeds, animals should be proa  b 

John 1:3. Psalm 45:1-2.

91

42

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 17, 2-5

43

duced, and the lights and stars in heaven should be set in place.a It is clear that at that time no one else was present with God, who was charged with these works so that they should be done, except the one through whom, all things were made, and without whom nothing was made.b 3. And if he is the Word of God, for, my heart has brought forth a good word,c then it is clear that the Word existed in the beginning, and this Word was with the Father, and what is more, the Word was God, and all things were made through him.d And indeed, this Word was made flesh and lived among us,e who is of course Christ the Son of God. While we accept him as human according to the flesh after the creation of the world, we also see him as the Word of God, and as God, before the creation of the world. We correctly believe and hold, according to the instruction of both the Old and New Testaments, that Jesus Christ is both God and human. 4. What about the fact that the same Moses presents God as saying, let us make humanity in our image and likeness,f and later, and God made humanity in the image of God, he made them male and female?g If all things were made through the Son of God, as we have already pointed out, then certainly humanity was also created through the Son of God, since all things were made for humanity. 5. Indeed, by God directing that humanity should be made, it is confirmed that God made humanity. And yet the Son of God made humanity, namely, the Word of God through whom, all things were made, and without whom nothing was made.h However, this Word was made flesh and lived among us.i Therefore, Christ is God. So humanity was made through Christ, that is, through the Son of God. But it is God who made humanGenesis 1. John 1:3. c  Psalm 45:1-2. d  John 1:1-3. e  John 1:14. f  Genesis 1:26. g  Genesis 1:27. h  John 1:3. i  John 1:14. a 

b 

92

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 17, 5-8

ity in the image of God. Therefore, the one who made humanity in the image of God must be God. Therefore, Christ is God. So truly the authority of the Old Testament concerning the person of Christ could never falter, since it is supported by what the New Testament makes clear; and the power of the New Testament could never be stolen, since its truth rests on the roots of the same Old Testament. 6. Consequently, whoever assumes that Christ, Son of God and Son of Man, is only human and is not also God, acts against both the Old and the New Testament. They are defying the authority and truth of both Old and New Testaments. 7. What about the fact that the same Moses consistently presents God the Father as immeasurable and without end? He is not enclosed by any place, but he surrounds all places. He would never be in a place, but rather every place is in him, and he contains all things and embraces everything, so that consequently he neither descends nor ascends, since he himself both contains and fills all things. And yet Moses presents God descending to the tower which the mortals were building, seeking to investigate and saying, Come and let us descend there now and confuse their languages, so that each one might not hear the voice of his neighbor.a Who do they suppose this God was, who descended to that tower and then sought to visit those people? God the Father? If so, then God is now enclosed within a place. And then how are all things embraced by him? 8. Or perhaps they think it was an angel descending with the angels saying, Come and let us descend there now and confuse their languages?b But truly, we have noticed in Deuteronomy where it is written that it is God who has reported these things, and it is God who has said, with the scattering of the sons of Adam, he set the limits of the people equal to the number of the angels of God.c Therefore, this shows that the Father did not descend, and it proves that an angel did not direct these things.

Genesis 11:7. Genesis 11:7. c  Deuteronomy 32:8 (LXX). a 

b 

93

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 17, 9 – CHAPTER 18, 1-4

44

9. Therefore, we are left with the fact that the one who descended is the one the apostle Paul wrote about when he said, the one who descends is the same one who ascends above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.a He is the Son of God, the Word of God. And the Word of God was made flesh and lived among us.b This is Christ. Therefore, it must be proclaimed that Christ is God.

Chapter 18 1. See that the same Moses states in another place that God appeared to Abraham.c And yet this same Moses hears from God that no human could see God and live.d If God cannot be seen, how has God appeared? Or if he has appeared, how it is that he cannot be seen? 2. For John also says, no one has ever seen God,e and the apostle Paul said, whom no one has seen or can see.f But certainly Scripture does not lie. Therefore God truly was seen. From this we can deduce that it was not the Father who was seen, since he has never been seen, but it was the Son, since it was characteristic of him both to descend (which he did) and to be seen. 3. For, he is the image of the invisible God,g so that the limitation and the frailty of the human condition might in time become used to seeing God the Father in the image of God, that is, in the Son of God.h For human frailty had to be brought up gradually and by increments, through the image toward that glory, so that at some time it might be able to see God the Father. 4. For great things are dangerous if they are unexpected. Even the light of the sun, coming suddenly after darkness, is too much brilliance for unaccustomed eyes, and will not illuminate the day, but rather Ephesians 4:10. John 1:14. c  Genesis 12:7, 18:1. d  Exodus 33:20. e  John 1:18, I John 4:2. f  I Timothy 6:16. g  Colossians 1:15. h  John 14:7-9. a 

b 

94

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 18, 4-8

will cause blindness. To protect human eyes from injury, the darkness is broken and dispersed gradually. So the rising of that light, by moderate increments, without the increase being noticed, will gradually accustom human eyes to bear its total sphere, through the increments of its rays. 5. Therefore in the same way, Christ, who is the image of God and the Son of God, is observed by humanity as we could see him. And in this way, the frailty and limitation of the human condition is strengthened, improved, and raised up by him, so that by becoming used to perceiving the Son, at some time we also may be able to see the Father himself. Otherwise, one might be struck and carried away by the sudden and unbearable brightness of his majesty, so that one could not see the Father, who is the object of humanity’s eternal desire. 6. Therefore, this is the Son who is seen, and the Son of God is the Word of God. And, the Word of God was made flesh and lived among us,a and this is Christ. So what evil reason is there to doubt that he is called God, when we can see that he proves himself to be God in so many ways? 7. And it is the same with Hagar, the maid-servant of Sarah. When she was thrown out and driven away from home, she met the angel near a spring of water on the road to Shur. He inquired and learned the reasons she ran away, and afterward he advised humility, in hope that she would be granted motherhood. And then he vowed and promised that the offspring of her womb would be many, and told her what Ishmael (who was to be born from her) would have, and among other things, predicted the place of his dwelling and described his behavior.b And yet, Scripture shows that this angel is both the Lord and God, since he could not have promised the blessing of offspring if the angel was not also God. Let the heretics try to explain what this passage means. 8. Was it the Father who was seen by Hagar, or not? Because it has been established that it was God. But far be it from me to call God the Father a messenger [angelum], for he could not have been subject a  b 

John 1:14. Genesis 16.

95

45

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 18, 8-13

46

[subditus] to another, whose messenger [angelus] he would have been. 9. But they will say that he was only an angel. Then how could he be God, if he was a mere angel, when the divine name has never been given to angels? When both are taken into account, the truth brings us to this conclusion, that we must understand him to be the Son of God. Since he is from God, he is truly God; and yet he is called the Son of God because he is subject to the Father as the messenger of the Father’s will. Thus he is declared, the angel of great counsel.a 10. Therefore, if this passage is not appropriately applied to the person of the Father (who should not be called a messenger [angelus]), nor to the person of an angel (who should not be called God), it is, however, fitting for the person of Christ. He is God, because he is the Son of God; and he is an angel, because he is the messenger of the Father’s plan. The heretics must understand that they act against the Scriptures when they say that they believe that Christ is an angel, but are not willing to declare that he is God, the same God who has often come to visit the human race, as they read in the Old Testament. 11. Besides this, Moses has added that God appeared to Abraham, near the oak of Mamre while he was sitting at the entrance of his tent at midday.b And although he might have seen three men, he called only one of them Lord. When he had washed their feet, he offered them ashen bread cakes with butter and plenty of his milk, and he encouraged them to remain as guests and eat. 12. Afterward, he hears that he will be a father and that Sarah, his wife, will bear a son by him. And he also learns about the destruction that the Sodomites deserve to suffer, and that God has come down because of their infamous reputation.c 13. If the heretics wish to see the Father in this passage, then he would have been hospitably received with two angels, so they must think that the Father is visible. If, however, they say that it was just an angel, why Isaiah 9:5-6. Genesis 18:1. c  Genesis 18. a 

b 

96

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 18, 13-17

is an angel called God? Scripture does not do this, and yet one of the three angels is called Lord. The only explanation is this: to ascribe to God the Father his own particular invisibility [inuisibilitas], and to grant to the angel his own particular limitation, we must believe that it was the Son of God, who is also God, who was seen and hospitably received by Abraham. 14. For by being the guest of Abraham, he was then what he would later be, foreshadowed in a sacred mystery [sacramento]. He would later be among the sons of Abraham, and wash their feet as a demonstration of who he was, giving back to the sons their right to hospitality which their father had extended to him at another time.a 15. Consequently, so that there would be no doubt that he was Abraham’s guest, in the account of the destruction of the Sodomites it is written, the Lord rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and sulfur from the Lord down from heaven.b Indeed, in the same way the prophet also says, speaking for God, I have overthrown you, just as the Lord has overthrown Sodom and Gomorrah.c 16. So the Lord has overthrown Sodom, that is, God has overthrown Sodom. But in the destruction of the Sodomites, the Lord rained fire from the Lord. And this Lord was seen by Abraham as God, for this God was Abraham’s guest; he was certainly seen because he was touched. But since the Father, who is invisible, could certainly not have been seen then, the one who was seen and hospitably received and welcomed – the one for whom it is natural to be touched and seen – is the Son of God, the Lord who rained upon Sodom and Gomorrah fire and sulfur from the Lord.d Now, he is the Word of God, and the Word of God was made flesh and lived among us.e And this is Christ. 17. Therefore, it was not the Father who was a guest of Abraham, it was Christ. The Father was not seen there, but it was the Son. Christ is the one who was seen. So then, truly Christ is both Lord and God. It was none other than he whom Abraham saw, John 13:3-8. Genesis 19:24. c  Amos 4:11. d  Genesis 19:24. e  John 1:14. a 

b 

97

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 18, 17-21

47

because God the Word was generated from God the Father before Abraham himself existed.a 18. Besides, it is said that the same angel, who is also God, visited Hagar in the same way, and consoled her, when she was driven away from the house of Abraham with her son.b For when she had abandoned the child in the wilderness, because the bottle had run out of water, and when the boy cried out and she wept and beat her breast for relief, Scripture says, and God heard the boy’s voice from the place where he was.c 19. When Moses reported that it was God who had heard the child’s voice, he added, and the angel of the Lord called to Hagar from heaven.d The one who is called God is referred to as an angel, and the one who is called an angel is proclaimed to be the Lord. This one who is both angel and God promises greater comfort to Hagar by saying, do not fear, for I have heard the boy’s voice from the place where he was; get up, take the boy and hold on to him, for I will make him into a great nation.e 20. Why would this angel, if he is only an angel, claim for himself the authority to say, for I will make him into a great nation, when the power to do this must certainly belong to God, and not to a mere angel? Logically, the one who is able to do this is proven to be God. And so that this very fact is confirmed, the Scripture immediately adds, and God opened her eyes, and she saw a well of spring water, and she went and filled the bottle from the well and gave it to the boy; and God was with the boy.f 21. Therefore, this was God who was with the boy, and who opened Hagar’s eyes so she could see the well of spring water and draw water for the urgent need of thirst. And yet this God is called an angel when he calls from heaven (along with being called God above when hearing the crying voice of the boy). Thus it is better to realize that the one who is called an angel is not an angel only, but is also God.

John 8:58. Genesis 21. c  Genesis 21:17. d  Genesis 21:17. e  Genesis 21:17-18. f  Genesis 21:19-20. a 

b 

98

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 17, 22-23 – CHAPTER 19, 1

22. What could not be appropriate or fitting for the Father, who is God only, can however be appropriate for Christ, who is not God only, but is also called a messenger [angelus]. And so it appears clear that it was not the Father who spoke to Hagar in that passage, but rather Christ, since he is God, and also the title angel is appropriate for him - especially since he was appointed the angel of great counsel.a And he is a messenger [angelus], because he reveals the Father’s heart, just as John reports.b 23. For if John himself says that this same Word, who reveals the Father’s heart, was made flesh so that he could reveal the Father’s heart, then truly Christ is not human only, but also a messenger [angelus]. However he is not a mere angel, but the Scriptures reveal that he is also God. And this is what we must believe, for if we do not want to accept that it was Christ who spoke to Hagar in that passage, then either we would be making a mere angel out to be God, or we would be counting God the omnipotent Father among the angels.

Chapter 19 1. What about the fact that we read something similar in yet another place, where an angel is regarded as God? For example, when Jacob was complaining with his wives Leah and Rachel about their father’s injustice, and he stated that he wanted to go back and return to his own land, he brought up the authority of his dream. He stated that in the dream the angel of God had said to him, “Jacob, Jacob.” Jacob says, “And I said, ‘What is it?’” The angel said, “Look with your eyes and see that the male goats and rams mating with the sheep and female goats are striped white with various colors and ashen and speckled. For I have seen what Laban has done to you. I am the God who appeared to you in the place of God where you dedicated a stone pillar to me there, and you made a vow to me there. Now go, therefore, get up and depart

a  b 

Isaiah 9:5-6. John 1:18.

99

48

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 19, 1-7

49

from this land and go into the land of your birth, and I will be with you.”a 2. If the angel of God speaks these things to Jacob, and the angel himself concluded by saying, “I am the God who appeared to you in the place of God,” then this is not a mere angel, but we recognize without any hesitation that he is also regarded as God, for he stated that Jacob’s vow was made to him in the place of God, though he does not say, “in my place.” Therefore, it is the place of God, and he is God. 3. But truly, it simply says, in the place of God. It does not say, “in the place of an angel and God,” but only of God. And the one who promises those things is asserted to be God and an angel, so that a distinction should be made between the one who is only called God,b and the one who is called not only God but also an angel.c 4. Consequently, if no other angel can be conceded such great authority that he could claim to be God, and report that a vow has been made to him – except Christ alone, to whom a vow can be made because it is not made to a mere angel, but to God – then it is clear that he cannot be taken to be the Father, but rather the Son, who is God and angel. 5. However, if he is Christ (and he is), then whoever says that Christ is either a mere human or an angel only is in great danger, having stolen from him the power of the divine name, a name he has frequently received from the faith of the heavenly Scriptures, which consistently call him both God and angel. 6. Indeed, in addition to all these things, divine Scripture portrayed what he was to be, depicting at an earlier time in an image what he would later be in true substance. So just as divine Scripture has consistently established that he is both angel and God; so it also establishes that he is both human and God. 7. For it says, Jacob remained alone and a man was wrestling with him until morning, and since the man saw that he was not able to resist him, he struck the broad part of Jacob’s thigh, while they Genesis 31:4-13. That is, God the Father. c  That is, God the Son, Jesus Christ, who is the Father’s messenger (angel). a 

b 

100

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 19, 7-11

were wrestling, and he said to Jacob, “Let me go, for the morning star has risen.” And Jacob said, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” And the man said, “What is your name?” And he said, “Jacob.” And the man said to him, “Your name will not be called Jacob any more, but your name will be Israel, because you have been strong with God, and with men you are powerful.” And besides, this Scripture asserts, And Jacob named that place, “Vision of God,” saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and my life has been spared.” And when the sun had risen upon him, then he passed beyond the place called “Vision of God,” but in truth he himself was limping because of his thigh.a 8. Scripture says a man was wrestling with Jacob. If he was only a man, then who is he? Where is he from? Why does he struggle and wrestle with Jacob? What had come between them? What had happened? What are the reasons for so great a struggle and such a contest? And why, after all this, is Jacob found to be stronger when he pins the man? And why, when the morning star had risen, does he ask a blessing from the one he was holding down? We discover that he asked it for no other reason than this: that it foreshadowed the future struggle between Christ and the descendants of Jacob, and this struggle has taken place in the Gospel, as it is reported. 9. For the people of Jacob fought against this same man, and in that fight the people of Jacob were discovered to be more powerful when, of course, they obtained the victory of their injustice against Christ. In that time, their own walk of faith and salvation began to limp seriously, uncertain and insecure, due to the crime which they had committed. But although they have been discovered to be superior by condemning Christ, nevertheless they need his mercy; nevertheless they need his blessing. 10. But indeed this man who wrestled with Jacob says, Your name will not be called Jacob any more, but your name will be Israel. And if Israel is a man who saw God, then the Lord was cleverly showing that the one who was fighting with Jacob at that time was not a mere man, but was also God. 11. Certainly Jacob saw God a 

Genesis 32.

101

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 19, 11-18

50

when he was fighting with him, and yet in the fight he subdued a man. And so that there could no longer be any doubt, the man settled the interpretation himself by saying, …because you have been strong with God, and with men you are powerful.a 12. This is why Jacob himself, now understanding the significance of this sacred mystery, and discerning the authority of the one with whom he had wrestled, named that place where they fought, “Vision of God.” 13. After this he continued offering the reasons for the interpretation of God. He says, For I have seen God face to face, and my life has been spared.b Indeed, he saw God with whom he fought, as if it was with a man. But even though he pinned the man as a victor, he begged a blessing from God as an inferior.c So he has fought with God and with a man. 14. Also, if this fight has been foreshadowed there, then it has been fulfilled in the Gospel, in the struggle between Christ and the people of Jacob. Although the people may have been found to be superior, they are discovered to be inferior since their guilt is confirmed. And who will hesitate to acknowledge that Christ, in whom this sign of struggling has been fulfilled, is not human only, but is also God, especially since we can see that this very sign of struggling has proven that he is both human and God? 15. And yet, still after all of this, divine Scripture itself does not cease to call an angel God, and to say that God is an angel. 16. For when this same Jacob was about to bless Manasseh and Ephraim, the sons of Joseph, placing his crossed hands over the heads of the boys, he said, May God, who has supported me from my youth all the way until this day, the angel who has delivered me from all evils, bless these boys.d 17. Furthermore, when he establishes that the same angel is the one whom he had called God, he goes to such an extent that at the end of his phrase he could put the person he was speaking about in the singular, saying, May he bless these boys. 18. For if he had wanted the angel to be understood as someone else, he would have connected two people with the pluGenesis 32:29. Genesis 32:31. c  Cf. Hebrews 7:7. d  Genesis 48:8-16. a 

b 

102

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 19, 18-20 – CHAPTER 20, 1-3

ral number. But here in the blessing he has used the singular number for one person, and therefore he wanted the same one to be understood as God and angel. 19. But certainly God the Father cannot be taken as such. However Christ can be taken to be God and angel. By placing his crossed hands over the boys, Jacob signified that the author of this blessing was Christ, as if he was their father, and by the way he was placing his hands, he was showing a sign and future symbol of the passion. 20. So just as no one hesitates to call Christ an angel, in the same way, let no one hesitate to declare that he is even God, since one should understand that he was called upon as both God and angel in the blessing of these boys, through the sacred mystery of the passion, formed in the sign of the hands.

Chapter 20 1. And if any heretic, stubbornly resisting the truth, should want to perceive or profess that it is an ordinary angel in all of these examples, this understanding inevitably will be demolished by the force of truth. 2. For if all things, in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, have been placed under Christ’s authority,a and even the angels themselves, who have been subjected to Christ along with everything else, are called gods,b then truly Christ is also God. And if any angel under Christ’s authority can be called a god, and if it is discovered that it is called this without blasphemy, then certainly one can agree that this Christ, the Son of God himself, is that much more to be declared God. 3. That is to say, if an angel, who is subject to Christ, is presented as a god, it is even more certain that Christ (to whom all angels have been subjected) is said to be God. For it is not natural that those things which are granted to the lesser are denied to the greater. So if an angel is lower than Christ, and yet the angel is called a god, then all the more is Christ said to a  b 

Matthew 28:18, Ephesians 1:20-22, I Peter 3:22. Psalm 82:6.

103

51

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 20, 3-9

52

be God, since he is revealed to be greater and better than not one, but all the angels. 4. And if God has stood in the assembly of the gods, and in their midst God judges the gods,a and yet several times Christ stood in the assembly, therefore Christ stood in the assembly as God, obviously judging the gods, to whom he says, How long will you accept human nature? b Of course subsequently he accused the men of the assembly of not exercising just judgments.c 5. Furthermore, if those who are criticized and blamed are still for some reason seen to obtain this name without blasphemy, so that they are called gods, then certainly Christ will be held as God even more. Not only is he said to have stood as God of the gods, but he even judges and condemns the gods, as the authority of this reading discloses. 6. And if those who fall like one of the princesd are nevertheless called gods, then Christ is to be called God even more. Not only does he not fall like one of the princes, but he even defeats the author and prince of evil himself. 7. So when they read that even Moses has been given this name, when it is said, I have made you as God to Pharaoh,e for what evil reason is the name denied to Christ, who is not simply God to Pharaoh, but is found to be established as both Lord and God of all creation?f 8. But in the case of Moses this name has been given in moderation, while in the case of Christ it is given abundantly; in that case according to a measure, in this case beyond any measure at all. Scripture says, For the Father gives to the Son without measure, indeed it says, the Father loves the Son.g In the case of Moses, the name was given for a time, in the case of Christ, it is given without a time limit, for he received the power of the divine name, which is over all things and for all time. 9. Since the one who received powPsalm 82:1. Psalm 82:2. c  Psalm 82:2-4. d  Psalm 82:7. e  Exodus 7:1. f  John 20:28. g  John 3:34-35. a 

b 

104

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 20, 9 – CHAPTER 21, 1-3

er over one man (and in that case the granting of this power was limited) is nevertheless given the name of God without hesitation, we must believe even more that the one who has power in himself, even over Moses, has been given the authority of that name.

Chapter 21 1. And I could have gone on to filter through the discussions of all the heavenly Scriptures concerning this monumental question of Christ’s divinity, so as to displace a forest, I might say, except that I have not so much intended to speak against this heresy as to briefly explain the Rule of Truth concerning the person of Christ. 2. However, although I should hurry on to other things, I think it should not be overlooked that the Lord pronounced an indication of his majesty in the Gospel, when he said, Tear down this temple, and in three days I will raise it up,a or when he declared in another passage, in another part of the Gospel, I have the power to lay down my life and to take it back again, for I have received this command from the Father.b 3. For who says he can lay down his own life, or that he can regain his own life again, because he has received this command from the Father? Or who says that when the temple of his body has been destroyed he is able to revive it, and to rebuild it again? Only the Word, who is from the Father, and with the Father, through whom all things have been made and without whom nothing was made.c He is the one who does the Father’s works and miracles,d the image of the invisible God,e who has descended from heaven… and testified to what he has seen and heard.f He has not come to do his own will, but rather to do the will of the Father,g by whom he was sent for this very thing, havJohn 2:19. John 10:18. c  John 1:1-3. d  John 5:19. e  Colossians 1:15. f  John 3:31-32. g  John 6:38-39. a 

b 

105

53

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 21, 3-9

54

ing been made the angel of great counsel,a so that he might reveal to us the laws of heavenly mysteries. As the Word made flesh, he has lived among us.b Therefore, this Christ who is from among us is the Son of Man, but he is not human only, because he is also the Son of God, and so is proven to be God as well. 4. Since Christ has also been called, the firstborn of all creation,c by the apostle, how could he be the firstborn of all creation, unless he proceeded from God the Father before all creation by virtue of his divinity as the Word? Unless the heretics interpret it in this way, the burden of proof is on them to demonstrate how Christ (as a mere man) could be the firstborn of all creation – which they have not been able to do. 5. Therefore either he existed before all creation, so that he is the firstborn of all creation - and then he is not human only, since humanity came after the rest of creation - or he is only human, and came into being after all creation. 6. And how could he be the firstborn of all creation, unless it is as that Word which was before all creation? The firstborn of all creation was made flesh and lived among us, that is, he assumed this humanity which came to be after all creation, and so with it and in it he lived among us, so that neither Christ’s humanity is removed nor his divinity is denied. 7. For if he is only before all creation, the humanity in him has been removed. However, if he is only human, the divinity which is before all creation has been stolen. Therefore, both have been united in Christ, and both have been joined, and both have been connected. 8. And consequently, since there is something in him which is above creation, the harmony of divinity and humanity is seen to be secured in him. For this reason, the one who is described as having been made, mediator between God and humanity,d is discovered to have combined in himself both God and humanity. 9. Also, if the same apostle says concerning Christ, that having taken off the flesh, he has dishonored the powers, openly triumphIsaiah 9:6. John 1:14. c  Colossians 1:15. d  I Timothy 2:5. a 

b 

106

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 21, 9-14

ing over them in himself,a he certainly did not intend the words “having taken off the flesh” to be without purpose. He said this because he wanted us to understand that it was put on again in the resurrection. 10. So who is this one who has taken off the flesh and put it on again? Let the heretics find out! For we know the Word of God has put on the substance of flesh, and the same one has taken off again the same bodily matter, which he has taken up again like clothing in the resurrection. 11. But truly, if Christ was human only, then he has not taken off, nor put on, humanity. For no one is ever stripped of or clothed with himself. Whatever is stripped off or put on from outside the person must necessarily be something other than the person. 12. Consequently, it was truly the Word of God who has taken off the flesh and who put it on again in the resurrection. Furthermore, he could take it off because he put it on in the nativity. And so in Christ, God is clothed with flesh, and yet it was necessary that it was taken off. Therefore the one who is clothed with flesh must necessarily be the one from whom it is removed. And so humanity is put on and taken off like a kind of tunic made of a body. And therefore this is why we have said that the Word of God was the one who is revealed to have put on flesh at one time, and taken it off at another time. 13. For he had even previously predicted this in the blessings of Jacob: He will wash his garment in wine and his robe in the blood of the grape.b 14. If in Christ the garment is flesh and the robe is his body, then the question is: who is this whose body is a robe and whose flesh is a garment? In fact it has been made clear to us that flesh was the garment and a body was the robe of the Word, who has washed the substance of the body and the material of a  Colossians 2:15. This is based on a mistranslation of the Greek text in Novatian’s Latin version, or perhaps a lapse in Novatian’s memory and a confusion/ conflation with Colossians 2:11. Novatian’s point is that Jesus Christ defeated the principalities and powers by his death on the cross, which he understood the passage to describe as “putting off the flesh.” Unfortunately, Novatian builds his whole argument here on a phrase – “having taken off the flesh” – that does not actually appear in the passage. b  Genesis 49:11.

107

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 21, 14-16 – CHAPTER 22, 1-3

55

the flesh in blood, that is, wine, and by his passion cleansing the human condition which he has taken up.a 15. Therefore, since he is washed, he is human, because the robe which is washed is the flesh. On the other hand, the one who washes it is the Word of God, who wore the robe so that he could wash the robe. 16. He is appropriately described as human because of the substance which was taken up so that it could be washed, just as he who washed it is demonstrated to be God, by the authority of the Word.

Chapter 22 1. But why, may I ask, should we seem to hurry to another part of the discussion, when we would pass over this passage of the apostle, …who, although he was in the form of God, did not consider equality with God to be a prize, but emptied [exinaniuit] himself, taking the form of a servant, having been made in the likeness of humanity and found as a human in condition; he humbled himself, becoming obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. Therefore God has also exalted him to the highest degree and given him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should be bent, in heaven, on the earth, and under the earth, and every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus is in the glory of God the Father.b 2. Who, although he was in the form of God… he says. If Christ were human only, he would have been referred to as in the image of God, not in the form of God. For we know that humanity was made in the image, not in the form of God.c 3. Therefore, who is this who was made in the form of God, as we have said?d An angel? But we do not read of angels in the form of God. It can only be that this particular messenger is also the Son of God, noble above Revelation 19:13. Philippians 2:6-11. c  Genesis 1:26-27. d  The use of the word “made” does not imply that Novatian thought of the Word as created, he is simply using biblical language borrowed from the incarnation ( factus est, cf. John 1:14) and applying it to the generation of the Word. a 

b 

108

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 22, 3-8

all, the Word of God, the one who does all of the Father’s works, since he works like his Father.a So he is in the form of God the Father, as we have explained. 4. So it is appropriate that he has been declared to be in the form of God, since he is above all things and holds divine authority over every creature. And he is God in the same way that the Father is God, yet having obtained this very thing from his own Father, so that he might be both God and Lord of all. He is God in the form of God the Father, generated and brought forth from him. 5. Therefore, …although he was in the form of God, he did not consider equality with God to be a prize.b For although he knew he was God from God the Father, he never compared or ranked himself with God the Father, mindful that what he is, he is from the Father, and what he has, he has because the Father had given it to him. And furthermore, both before he took up flesh and also after he took up a body, and even after the resurrection itself, he showed – and still shows – complete obedience to the Father in all things. 6. This proves that he never considered divinity to be a kind of prize, as if he would equate himself with God the Father. On the contrary, he was obedient and subject to his every command and wish, and he was even willing to take up the form of a servant. That is, he became human, and by being born he took up the substance of flesh and body, the slavery which comes from the ancestors as a consequence of the sins of humanity.c At that time he also emptied himself, since he did not refuse to take up the frailty of the human condition. 7. For if he had been born a human only, then he would not have been emptied by his birth. Indeed, when a human is born he is increased, not emptied. For when he begins to exist (since he could not have anything when he did not exist) he is not emptied but rather increased and enriched, as we have said. 8. So if Christ is emptied in his birth, taking the form of a servant, how could he be a human only? If he were a mere human, then to tell the truth, John 5:17-19. Philippians 2:6. c  Novatian associates the incarnation with Jesus’ birth, however strictly speaking it began (and the kenosis occurred) at his conception. a 

b 

109

56

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 22, 8-12

57

he was enriched when he was born, not emptied. No, the only answer is that, for the power of the divine Word to be received by humanity, he lowered and humbled himself for a time, pausing for the time being and not exercising his powers, while bearing the humanity which he accepted. 9. He empties himself when he descends to injuries and insults, when he hears unspeakable things, experiences disgraceful things, yet with such humility comes extraordinary fruit. 10. For he received the name which is above every name,a which we understand to be none other than the name of God. For since God alone is above all things, consequently it is the name of God that is above all names – that name which belongs to the one who is above all things. Therefore, that name which is above all others is certainly the name of the one who, although he was in the form of God, did not consider equality with God to be a prize. 11. And yet if Christ were not also God, every knee in heaven and on earth and under the earth would not bend at his name, nor would visible things or invisible things or everything in all creation be subject or subservient to a human, who would have remembered that all these things existed before humanity. 12. Therefore, since Christ is said to be in the form of God, and since he is shown to have emptied himself in the nativity according to the flesh, and since he is described as having received the name which is above every name from the Father, and since at his name every knee in heaven, on earth, and under the earth is shown to bend itself and bow, and it is asserted that this results in the glory of God the Father, consequently he is not a mere human, simply because we read that he became obedient to the Father, to the point of death, even the death of the cross.b Rather from these very facts above, the divinity of Christ is articulated loud and clear, and the Lord Christ Jesus is proven to be also God, which the heretics do not accept.

a  b 

Philippians 2:9. Philippians 2:8.

110

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 23, 1-6

Chapter 23 1. Here I will allow myself to collect arguments even from the side of other heretics.a It is a strong kind of proof which is taken even from an adversary, so that it is proven by the very enemies of truth. 2. For the fact that he is also God is so clearly taught in the Scriptures, that many heretics, so moved by the magnitude and truth of his divinity, extend his honors to the point where they would dare to proclaim or believe that he is not the Son, but God the Father himself. 3. Although this is against the truth of the Scriptures, it is still a powerful and excellent argument for the divinity of Christ, who is so fully God (but as the Son of God generated from God) that many heretics, as we have said, have accepted him as God in such a way that they thought he should be proclaimed to be the Father rather than the Son. 4. Therefore let themb consider whether he is God, since his authority has so influenced certain other heretics that they would consequently believe him to be God the Father himself, as we have said above. These heretics are compelled to acknowledge the Divine in Christ by his obvious divinity, but they do so without restraint or moderation, so that even though they read that he is the Son, they think he is the Father, because they perceive that he is God. 5. Other heretics,c too, have embraced the clear divinity of Christ to such an extent that they said he was without flesh, and have stolen away all the humanity he took up, for fear that they might diminish the power of the divine name in him if they were to associate him with a human birth, or so they judged. 6. Now we do not approve of this, but we apply the argument to the extent that Christ is God. For while one heresy steals his humanity by believing that he is only God, and another one thinks he is God the Father, the reason and balance of the heavenly Scriptures show

Modalists, also known as Sabellians. The adoptionists. c  Marcionites and other docetics. a 

b 

111

58

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 23, 6-8 – CHAPTER 24, 1-3

that Christ is God, but as the Son of God, and since God took up the Son of Man, it must be believed that he is also human. 7. For if he was coming to humanity so that he might be the mediator between God and humanity,a he would have to be united with humanity. The Word would have to be made flesh,b so that he could unite in himself the harmony of earthly things together with the heavenly, while connecting tokens of both sides in himself, so that he could join together both God to humanity and humanity to God. Thus the Son of God could become the Son of Man by taking up flesh, and the Son of Man could become the Son of God by receiving the Word of God. 8. This most profound and mysterious sacred sign,c arranged before the ages for the salvation of the human race,d is found to be fulfilled in the Lord Jesus Christ, both God and human, by whom the condition of the human race could be brought to the fruit of eternal salvation.

Chapter 24 1. In truth the cause of the heretics’ error is, in my opinion, born from the fact that they do not admit that there is a distinction between the Son of God and the Son of Man. They fear that by making such a distinction, Jesus Christ is easily shown to be both God and human. 2. For they want to claim that the humanity, that is, the Son of Man, is one and the same as the Son of God, so that the humanity – that frail substance of flesh – is also said to be the very Son of God himself. Since they make no distinction between the Son of Man and the Son of God, but assume that the Son of Man is the Son of God, consequently they claim that Christ is only a man, though he is also the Son of God. 3. This is why they strive to exclude the passages which say, The Word was made flesh and lived among us,e and, You will call his I Timothy 2:5. John 1:14. c  Ephesians 1:9-10. d  II Timothy 1:9. e  John 1:14. a 

b 

112

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 24, 3-7

name Emmanuel, which is interpreted, “God with us”.a 4. In fact, they even promote their arguments from what is written in Luke’s Gospel, trying to claim not what is, but only what they want to be. For example, The Holy Spirit will come to you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you, and for this reason the Holy One who is born of you will be called the Son of God.b 5. They say that if the angel of God says to Mary, the Holy One who is born of you, then the substance of his flesh and body is from Mary. Furthermore, this substance, that is, this Holy One who is born of her, was revealed to be the Son of God. So they say that the very humanity of Christ, and his bodily flesh which is called holy, is itself the Son of God, so that when Scripture says the Holy One we should take it to mean the human Christ, the Son of Man, and when it speaks of the Son of God, we should understand not God, but a mere human. 6. But in truth divine Scripture easily exposes the deceptions and the deceits of the heretics, and proves them mistaken. For if it only said, “the Spirit will come to you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you, for this reason the Holy One who is born of you will be called the Son of God,”c then perhaps the burden of proof might be on us to oppose them by another method, and we would find other arguments and take up other weapons to conquer their dishonesties and tricks. But when Scripture itself, overflowing with heavenly fullness, casts off from itself the misrepresentations of those heretics, we easily put our trust in what has been written, and without any hesitation we overcome their errors. 7. For as we have already explained, it does not say, “for this reason the Holy One who is born of you…,” but a conjunction was added, so it says, and for this reason the Holy One who is born of you…, so that it would show that what is born of her, which is holy – that is, the substance of flesh and body – is not primarily

Isaiah 7:14, Matthew 1:23. Luke 1:35. c  In this hypothetical version of the passage, the words, “Holy,” and, “and,” are missing. a 

b 

113

59

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 24, 7-10

60

the Son of God, but subsequently and secondarily.a However, the Word of God is primarily the Son of God, incarnate [incarnatus] through that Spirit about whom the angel reports, the Spirit will come to you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. 8. For the Word of God is the true Son of God, from God himself, who takes up what is holy, and joins the Son of Man to himself. He takes hold of the Son of Man and draws him to himself, and he also presents him associated with himself by this connection and union, and makes him the Son of God, which he was not by nature. So the primacy of that name, “Son of God” was in the Spirit of the Lord who descended and came to Mary, and therefore the name was already in the Son of God, and then subsequently in the Son of Man. Consequently, the Son of Man truly became the Son of God, though he was not primarily the Son of God. 9. And therefore the angel, seeing that arrangement and explaining the order of the sacred mystery, did not in this way confuse everything so that he left no trace of distinction. On the contrary he confirmed the distinction by saying, …and for this reason the Holy One who is born of you will be called the Son of God. Indeed, if he had not weighed out that division with such balance, but had left it mixed up in confusion, then truly he would have given the heretics an opportunity to declare that the same Son of Man, who is human, is also the Son of God as well as the Son of Man. 10. As it is, however, he presented it step by step, and clearly explained the plan and significance of such a great sacred mystery, when he said, …and the Holy One who is born of you will be called the Son of God, proving that because the Son of God descended when he took the Son of Man to himself, he has thereby made him the Son of God, because he associated and joined him to himself, the Son of God, so that when the Son of Man clings to the Son of God in the nativity, he might hold, loaned and borrowed by the union itself, what he could not possess from his own nature.

Novatian’s argument here depends on interpreting the Latin word, et with the force of “also,” implying the distinction between the two natures of Christ. a 

114

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 24, 11 – CHAPTER 25, 1-5

11. And so the voice of the angel made this distinction, which the heretics deny: a distinction between the Son of God and the Son of Man, yet with their union. Thus the heretics are urged to understand that Christ the human, the Son of Man, is also the Son of God, and that the Son of God is a human. That is, they must accept that the Word of God, who is God just as it is written, is also therefore the Lord Jesus Christ, joined from both, so that I could say united and compounded from both, into one harmony of both substances, humanity and God reciprocally associated with a bond of mutual unity. Let them recognize this by what the truth of Scripture itself says.

Chapter 25 1. “Well,” the heretics respond, “if Christ is not a mere human, but is also God, and yet Scripture reports that Christ died for us and was raised, then it seems we are to believe from Scripture that God died. Or if God could not die, and yet it is reported that Christ died, then Christ could not be God, since God cannot be thought of as having died.” 2. If they had understood – or if they ever could understand what they read – they would never have spoken in such an entirely dangerous manner. But the senselessness of error is always precarious, and this is nothing new, for those who abandon true faith lower themselves to the point of danger. 3. For if Scripture proposed that Christ was God only, and that the union with human frailty had not been brought together in him, then this confused saying of theirs, “if Christ is God, and Christ died, then God died,” might have some force. 4. But since he is not God only, as we have already frequently made clear, and Scripture establishes that he is also human, then one must accept that what is immortal remains uncorrupted. For who does not understand that divinity is impassible, and human frailty is surely passible? 5. Therefore, just as he is of God, he is also of humanity, so we understand that both are brought together and united in Christ, for the Word was made flesh and lived among

115

61

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 25, 5-11

62

us.a For who could not easily recognize, all by himself without any teacher or interpreter, that what is God in Christ did not die, but what is human in him died? 6. In fact, the divinity of Christ could not die, but the substance of flesh alone is destroyed, as also in the rest of humanity, who are not only flesh, but flesh and soul. The flesh alone suffers the assault of destruction and death, and it must be discerned that the incorruptible soul is outside the laws of destruction and death. 7. For the Lord himself also said this, when encouraging us in martyrdom and to the contempt of all human power, Do not fear those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul.b 8. Since the immortal soul cannot be killed or destroyed in anyone else, (although the body and flesh alone could be destroyed), it is even more certain that the Word of God, that is, God in Christ, could not be destroyed at all, when only his flesh and body have been killed. 9. For if the soul in any human possesses this noble quality of immortality, so that it could not be destroyed, the nobility of the Word of God holds this power much more, so that he could not be killed. For if human power fails to destroy the sacred power of God, and if human cruelty fails to destroy the soul, it must fail all the more to destroy the Word of God. For since the soul itself, which was made through the Word of God, is not killed by humans, we believe with even more certainty that the Word of God could not be destroyed. 10. And if the bloody rage of humanity against fellow humans can do no more than kill the body only, it is even more certain that it will be weak against Christ, so that in the same way it only kills his body. So if it is concluded from this that nothing but the human in Christ was killed, then it should be apparent by this that the Word is not reduced to mortality. 11. For it is clear that Abraham and Isaac and Jacob (who it is agreed were mere men) are alive, since Scripture says, For all live to God,c and death, which disintegrated their bodies, has not destroyed their souls. For the law of death was able to exercise conJohn 1:14. Matthew 10:28. c  Luke 20:37-38, cf. also Luke 16:19-31. a 

b 

116

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 25, 11 – CHAPTER 26, 1-3

trol over their bodies, but it could not exercise control over their souls, for the former is mortal, and for that reason it died, while the latter is immortal, and for that reason it is understood that it has not been destroyed. This is why Scripture declared that they are said to be alive to God. Therefore, it is even more certain that the death of Christ could only have power over his bodily matter. It could not exercise control over the divinity of the Word. For the power of death is broken where the authority of immortality intervenes.

Chapter 26 1. However, since the holy authorities of the divine writings confirm that Christ is not human only, but is also God, other hereticsa take this opportunity to come forward and contrive to disturb the established manner of reverence toward Christ. They want to claim that, since it is declared that Christ is not a mere man, but is also God, he must be God the Father himself. 2. For they say that if God is declared to be one, and yet Christ is God, therefore, they reason, if the Father and Christ are one God,b then Christ should be called the Father. In this they are proven to be mistaken. They do not know Christ, but they allow only the sound of the name,c for they do not want him to be the second person after the Father, but rather the Father himself. 3. Because this is easily answered, little will be said. For who does not know that the Son is the second person after the Father, when one reads what the Father aptly said to the Son: Let us make humanity in our image and likeness, and after this it was reported, And God made humanity, in the image of God he made them?d Modalists, also known as Sabellians. Literally, “if the Father and Christ is one God…” c  The modalists taught that “Father,” “Son,” “Christ,” and even “Holy Spirit” were nothing more than various names for the one God. The names may have described activities of God, but for them did not describe any real distinction in God as Trinity. d  Genesis 1:26-27. a 

b 

117

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 26, 4-16

63

4. Or when one holds in one’s hands the passage that says, The Lord rained down from heaven fire and sulfur from the Lord upon Sodom and Gomorrah?a 5. Or when the Father said to Christ, You are my Son, today I have begotten you; request it of me, and I will give you the nations as your inheritance and the ends of the earth as your property?b 6. Or also when that beloved writer says, The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit at my right hand until I place your enemies as a footstool for your feet”?c 7. Or when one opens the prophecies of Isaiah and finds this written, This the Lord says to Christ my Lord?d 8. Or when one reads, I have not come down from heaven to do my own will, but the will of the one who sent me?e 9. Or when one finds it written, For the one who sent me is great than I?f 10. Or when one contemplates the text, I go to my Father and your Father, my God and your God?g 11. Or when one considers this statement along with all the rest, But in your law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is true. I testify on my behalf and the Father who sent me has testified on my behalf?h 12. Or when the voice from heaven replies, I have glorified it and I will glorify it again?i 13. Or when Peter answered and said, You are the Son of the living God?j 14. Or when the sacred mystery of this revelation was confirmed by the Lord himself, when he said, Blessed are you, Simon Bar Jonah, for flesh and blood have not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven?k 15. Or when Christ himself utters the words, Father, glorify me with the glory that I had with you before the world existed?l 16. Or when Christ says, Father, I know that you always hear me, truly I have Genesis 19:24. Psalm 2:7-8. c  Psalm 110:1. d  Isaiah 45:1, based on a common patristic confusion of Cyrus with Kyrie (Lord), and assuming that the word “anointed” can simply be translated as “Christ.” e  John 6:38. f  John 14:28. g  John 20:17. h  John 8:17-18. i  John 12:28. j  Matthew 16:16. k  Matthew 16:17. l  John 17:5. a 

b 

118

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 26, 16-21

spoken for the sake of those standing around, so that they might believe that you have sent me?a 17. Or when Christ himself provides a description of the Rule of Truth, when he said, Now this is eternal life, that they should know you, the one true God, and the one whom you have sent, Jesus Christ. I have glorified you on the earth, I have finished the work which you gave me?b 18. Or when Christ made this claim, All things have been given to me by my Father?c 19. Or when both the prophets and the apostles confirm that he is seated at the right hand of the Father?d 20. But I would go on too long if I were to try to assemble together all the voices that speak to this side of the argument, since the divine Scriptures of the Old as well as the New Testament everywhere show that the Son is generated from the Father. He is the one through whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made.e He has always been obedient to the Father, and continues to be obedient. He has always had authority over everything, but an authority which has been given, and which is permitted, and which has been granted to him by his own Father. 21. For what could be so clear as the fact that he is not the Father, but he is the Son, since it is revealed that he is obedient to God the Father? For if one believes that Christ is the Father, then one would be saying that he is under the authority of some other father god.

John 11:42. John 17:3-4. c  Matthew 11:27, Luke 10:22. d  Mark 16:19, Hebrews 1:3. e  John 1:3. a 

b 

119

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 27, 1-4

Chapter 27 64

1. But since they frequently present to us that passage where he said, the Father and I are one,a on this point, too, we will refute them easily. 2. For if Christ was the Father, as the heretics think, he would have said, “I, the Father, am one.” b But since he connected the Father to himself by saying, the Father and I, he separates them and makes a distinction between the individuality of his person (that is, of the Son), and the authority of the Father – not simply with respect to the sound of the name, but also with respect to the hierarchy of authority. For if he had thought that he was the Father, he could have said, “I, the Father.” 3. And since he used the word, one [unum], the heretics should understand that he did not say, “one person” [unus]. For the word, one [unum], employing the neuter, expresses a union of partnership, not a unity of person. So he is said to be one [unum], not “one person,” [unus], with the Father, since this word does not refer to number, but rather it expresses a mutual partnership. 4. Furthermore, he goes on to say, we are [sumus], not “I am,” to show that there are two persons by the fact that he said, we are, with the Father.c And when he uses the word, one [unum], it relates to agreement and unity of purpose and to the fellowship of love a  John 10:30, apparently a favorite prooftext of the modalists. In the Latin, Ego et Pater unum sumus, Novatian points out that the word sumus is plural, not singular. In other words, Jesus did not say, “The Father and I AM one,” but rather, “The Father and I (we) are one,” which indicates that, while the Father and Son are one, they are still also two. b  In the hypothetical quotation the word, “and,” is omitted and the verb is changed to singular. Also, the word “one” is changed from neuter to the masculine gender. In the neuter, as the Scripture text has it, the word “one” is interpreted in the sense of “unified,” while the masculine gender would, for Novatian, imply “one person.” Thus since the actual quotation included the word “and,” did not use the singular verb, and did not use the masculine gender for the word, “one,” Jesus could not have meant for the saying to be understood in the modalist sense of “the Father and I are the same person.” c  Novatian is pointing out that in Latin the verb “to be” is plural, not singular. Jesus did not say, “The Father and I AM one,” but rather, “The Father and I (we) are one,” which shows that the Father and the Son are two distinct persons. Here Novatian accepts Tertullian’s terminology of “persons.”

120

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 27, 4-10

itself, so that the Father and the Son are truly one through agreement and through love and through intention. 5. And since he is from the Father, whatever the Father is, the Son is, although the distinction remains, so that the Son is not the Father, because the Father is not the Son. For he would not have added we are [sumus], if he had thought that the one and only Father himself had become the Son.a 6. Furthermore, the apostle Paul knew of this unity of agreement, yet with the distinction of persons. For when he wrote to the Corinthians he said, I planted, Apollos watered, but God has given the growth. And so neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, only God who gives the growth. Now the one who plants and the one who waters are one.b 7. For who does not understand that Apollos is one person, and Paul another, and that Apollos and Paul together are not one and the same person? Furthermore, it also says that the roles of each one are different, for the one who plants is one person, and the one who waters is another. Yet the apostle Paul has held up these two – they are not one person, but they are one – to show that while one is indeed Apollos and the other is truly Paul, in so far as it applies to the distinction of persons, both are truly one, in so far as it applies to the unity of agreement. 8. For when two share one purpose, one truth, one faith, one and the same devotion, and one fear of God, they are one, even though they are two; they are one as long as they are of one mind. 9. And those who are distinct with regard to person, are nevertheless unified with regard to devotion. And although they are not the same person, as long as they are of the same mind, they are unified. And although they are two, they are one, because even though they remain distinct in their persons, they share a partnership in faith. 10. Furthermore, when Jewish ignorance had been excited and without cause became thoroughly inflamed at these sayings of the Modalists taught that, in their version of the incarnation, the Father became (or took on the appearance of) the Son. b  I Corinthians 3:6-8. a 

121

65

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 27, 10-14

66

Lord, they ran around gathering rocks and said, It is not because of a good work that we stone you, but because of blasphemy, and because you make yourself God, though you are a man.a In the Lord’s response, he established the distinction of persons by the way that he said he wanted people to understand that he is God. He said, Are you saying that the one whom the Father has consecrated and sent into the world blasphemes, because I said, “I am the Son of God”?b 11. And he said this to indicate that he had a Father. Therefore he is the Son, not the Father. For if he had thought that he was the Father, he would have claimed that he was the Father. 12. But he reveals that he has been consecrated by his Father. And since he receives sanctification from the Father, therefore he is lower than the Father. And since he is lower than the Father, consequently he is not the Father, but the Son. For if he had been the Father, he would have given sanctification, not received it. But as it is, by confessing that he received sanctification from the Father, he demonstrates that he is lower than the Father. By receiving sanctification from the Father, he has revealed that he is the Son, not the Father. 13. Besides this, he says that he has been sent, so that as the Lord Christ came through the obedience of being sent, he is revealed to be the Son, not the Father. For he certainly would have done the sending if he had been the Father. But since he was sent, he is not the Father, otherwise the Father, if he was sent, would be shown to be subject to another god. 14. And still after all these things he adds what should completely resolve every doubt and put an end to the uncertainty of the whole question. For he says in the last part of the discussion, Are you saying that I blaspheme because I said, “I am the Son of God”? Therefore, if the Lord himself clearly testifies that he is the Son, not the Father, it is an example of great recklessness and of tremendous insanity to argue the question of divinity and devotion against the testimony of Christ the Lord himself, and to say that Christ Jesus is the Father, when one should observe that he has proven that he is the Son, not the Father himself. a  b 

John 10:33. John 10:36.

122

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 28, 1-6

Chapter 28 1. Besides this I should add that section in which the heretic now delights, as if it were his own eye (though the eye of truth and light has been lost), so that maybe he will admit the complete blindness of his error. 2. For hea frequently and repeatedly holds up that saying which goes, Have I been with you for so long, and you do not recognize me? Philip, whoever sees me, also sees the Father.b 3. But let the heretic learn what he does not understand. Philip is blamed, deservedly and appropriately so, because he said, Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.c But when had he ever heard from Christ or learned that Christ was the Father? On the contrary, he had frequently heard and often learned that Christ was the Son, not the Father. 4. For when the Lord said, If you have come to know me, you have also come to know my Father, and from now on you know him and you have seen him,d he did not say it to imply that he wanted himself to be taken to be the Father. No, he meant that whoever has approached the Son of God, thoroughly and fully, and with complete faith and devotion, by all means will reach the Father through the Son, and by believing in the Son in this way, one may see the Father. 5. For he says, No one can come to the Father except through me.e And for this reason, not only will a person reach God the Father and come to know the Father himself, but he should also take this to heart, and keep in mind the anticipation of it, as though he has already seen the Father and knows him. 6. For often divine Scripture presents those things that have not yet been done as though they have been done, because that is how things are going to be. It also foretells those things that must take place, not as if they are yet to take place, but it describes them as if they have already been done.

The modalist. John 14:9. c  John 14:8. d  John 14:7. e  John 14:6. a 

b 

123

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 28, 7-15

67

7. For example, when Christ had not yet been born, in the time of the prophet Isaiah, he said, For a child is born to us.a And when Mary had not yet been approached, he said, And he approached the prophetess and she conceived and bore a son.b 8. And when Christ had not yet revealed the heart [sinum] of the Father,c Isaiah reported, And his name will be called the Angel of Great Counsel.d 9. And when he had not yet suffered, Isaiah announced, He was led like a sheep to the slaughter.e 10. And also when the cross did not yet exist, Isaiah wrote, All day I have stretched out my hands to an unbelieving people.f 11. And when Christ had not yet been spitefully given vinegar to drink, the psalmist said, In my thirst they gave me sour wine to drink.g 12. And also when he had not yet been stripped of his clothes, he said, They cast lots for my clothing and they counted my bones. They gouged my hands and feet.h 13. For divine Scripture speaks of those things that it knows will happen, foreseeing them before they take place. And it speaks of those things that must happen, those things that without a doubt are coming to be, as though they have already been completed. 14. And so this is why the Lord said in that passage, From now on you know him and you have seen him.i For he said whoever followed the Son would see the Father through him. Not that the Father was seen as the Son himself, but that whoever was willing to follow him and be his disciple would receive as a result the reward that he would be able to see the Father. 15. For he also is the image of God the Father, so that this is added to these things as well: just as the Father works, in the same way the Son also works, and the Son is the one who does all of the Father’s works,j so that it is just as if someone has already seen Isaiah 9:5-6. Isaiah 8:3. The text of Isaiah narrates this in the first person perspective. c  John 1:18. d  Isaiah 9:5-6. e  Isaiah 53:7. f  Isaiah 65:2. g  Psalm 69:21-22. h  Psalm 22:16-19. i  John 14:7. j  John 5:17-19. a 

b 

124

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 28, 15-25

the Father when he sees the one who always imitates the invisible Father in all his works. 16. As for the rest, if Christ is the Father himself, how could he immediately go on to say, Whoever believes in me will also do the works that I do, and will do greater ones than these, because I am going to the Father?a 17. And he even adds, If you love me, keep my commandments, and I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate.b 18. And after these things he also adds this, If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him.c 19. Nor has he omitted this as well, But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send, he will teach you and remind you of everything I say.d 20. He also presents another saying to show that he is the Son, when he says, If you loved me, you would rejoice that I am going to the Father, because the Father is greater than I.e 21. And what about when he also adds this, I am the true vine, and my Father is the vine grower. He removes every branch in me that does not produce fruit, and prunes every productive branch so that it might bear more fruit.f 22. He still presses on and he adds, Just as the Father has loved me, I have also loved you. Remain in my love. If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and remain in his love.g 23. Still he heaps on more and he says, But I have called you friends, because I have made known to you everything I have heard from my Father.h 24. And he adds this to the rest, But they will do all these things to you on account of my name, because they do not know the one who sent me.i 25. Therefore, if the Lord had thought that he was the Father, or wanted people to think he was the Father, he never would have John 14:12. John 14:15-16. c  John 14:23. d  John 14:26. e  John 14:28. f  John 15:1-2. g  John 15:9-10. h  John 15:15. i  John 15:21. a 

b 

125

68

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 28, 25-29

added these sayings to all the others, clearly giving evidence that he is not the Father, but the Son. He said these things to articulate that each and every person who sees the image of God the Father in the Son can now consider himself as though he has seen the Father as well. This is because everyone who believes in the Son trains in the study of his image, so that, having become accustomed to seeing the Divine in the image, it is possible to progress and grow all the way to perfect contemplation of God the almighty Father. And since anyone who takes this to heart and keeps it in mind, and believes in this way concerning all that is going to take place, has in a certain way already seen the Father, whom he will see someday, he should also now consider himself in this way, as if he already has what he knows for certain he will someday have. 26. As for the rest, if he was the Father himself, why did he promise as a future reward what he had already fulfilled and given? 27. For when he says, Blessed are the pure of heart, for they will see God,a we can see that he offers contemplation and vision of the Father. Therefore, he had not yet given it, for why would he promise it, if he had already given it? Truly, if he was the Father, then he had already given it, for certainly he was seen and touched. 28. But when Christ himself is touched and seen, and yet he makes a promise by saying that whoever will be pure of heart will see God, by this very fact he proves that he is not the Father, since he was present then and was seen while promising that whoever would be pure of heart will see the Father. 29. Therefore it was not the Father promising these things, but the Son, because the Son promised what would be seen later. Such a promise would have been unnecessary if he was not the Son. For why would he promise the pure of heart that they would see the Father, if those who were present at that time were already seeing the Father as Christ? But since he was the Son, and not the Father, he could be seen at that time, because he is the image of God. And the Father is promised and allotted to the pure of heart, to be seen in the future, because he is invisible. a 

Matthew 5:8.

126

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 28, 30 – CHAPTER 29, 1-4

30. And therefore, these few words on so many points should be enough to repeat against that heretic, for a very broad and extended field would be opened if we wanted to argue against that heretic more fully. Now that he has been deprived of these two passages,a like someone whose eyes have been gouged, he has been completely overcome in the blindness of his doctrine.

Chapter 29 1. And in fact, after these things, the order of reason and the authority of faith, laid out in the Lord’s sayings and in the writings, urge us also to believe in the Holy Spirit, promised to the Church long ago, brought forth and given at the appointed time. 2. For he was promised through the prophet Joel, and given by Christ. The prophet says, In the last days I will pour out my Spirit upon my servants and maids.b And then the Lord said, Receive the Holy Spirit. If you will forgive the sins of anyone, they will be forgiven, and if you hold anyone’s sins against them, they will be held against them.c 3. Now Christ the Lord sometimes calls the Holy Spirit the Advocate [paracletum] and other times calls him the Spirit of Truth.d He is not new in the Gospel, nor is this the first time he was given, for the same Spirit has both reprimanded the people of Israel in the prophets and offered consolation to the nations in the apostles.e Those who were reprimanded deserved it because they had disregarded the law, and those of the nations who believe deserve to be supported by the patronage of the Spirit, because they desire to follow the law of the Gospel. 4. Surely the Spirit engages in different types of activity, since in different times, different situations require different methJohn 10:30, 14:9. Joel 3:1-2. c  John 20:22-23. d  John 14:16-17, 15:26. e  Novatian is affirming that the same Holy Spirit is evident in both testaments, against Marcionites and gnostics who rejected the Old Testament and claimed that the God of the Old Testament was not the same God whom Jesus called Father. a 

b 

127

69

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 29, 4-9

70

ods. Yet this does not mean that the one who does these things has thereby opposed himself, or has consequently become someone else. No, he is one and the same Spirit, distributing his actions throughout the times and the circumstances of particular situations and the turning points of history.a 5. Furthermore, the apostle Paul says, Since we have the same Spirit, as it is written, “I believed, therefore I spoke,” we too believe, and therefore speak.b 6. Therefore, it is one and the same Spirit in the prophets and the apostles, except that he was in the former only for a time, and in the latter always. He was in the prophets, but not always in them; he was in the apostles in such a way that he would remain in them always. In the former, he was distributed in limited measure; in the latter completely poured out. In the former sparingly given; in the latter plentifully provided. Before the resurrection of the Lord he was not yet revealed, but he was shared with humanity through the resurrection of Christ. 7. For Christ said, I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you forever, the Spirit of Truth.c He also said, When the Advocate has come, whom I will send to you from my Father, the Spirit of Truth who proceeds from my Father…d And, If I do not go away, the Advocate will not come to you. But if I go away, I will send him to you.e And, When the Spirit of Truth has come, he will guide you to all truth.f 8. And since the Lord was to be going away into heaven, the disciples needed him to give them the Advocate [paracletum], so as not to leave them as orphans,g since it would not work to leave them behind without an advocate and abandon them without some kind of guardian. 9. For the Spirit is the one who strengthened their hearts and minds, who interpreted the sacred mysteries of the Gospel, and who was in them as the revealer of divine things. By his encourI Corinthians 12:4. II Corinthians 4:13, cf. Psalm 116:10. c  John 14:16-17. d  John 15:26. e  John 16:7. f  John 16:13. g  John 14:18. a 

b 

128

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 29, 9-15

agement they feared neither prisons nor chains for the name of the Lord. On the contrary they have defied the rulers and persecutions of the world. To be sure they were already armed and strengthened by the Spirit, having in themselves the gifts which he apportioned and distributed to the Church, the Bride of Christ, as a kind of equipment.a 10. For the Spirit is the one who raises up prophets in the Church, he instructs teachers, distributes tongues, performs miracles and healings, carries on extraordinary works, grants the discernment of spirits, assigns administrations, guides decisions, and organizes and arranges whatever other spiritual gifts there are, and this is why he makes the Lord’s Church complete and perfect in every respect and in all things. 11. The Spirit is the one who descended like a dove on the Lord after he was baptized,b and he remained living fully and entirely in Christ alone, not diminished in any proportion or by any division.c And with all his overflowing abundance he is given and sent, so that others might be able to obtain from him a kind of sample of his graces. The spring of the fullness of the Holy Spirit resides in Christ, so that streams of gifts and works could be drawn from the Holy Spirit living abundantly in Christ.d 12. As a matter of fact, Isaiah already said this when he prophesied, saying, And the spirit of wisdom and understanding rests upon him, the spirit of counsel and strength, the spirit of knowledge and reverence, and the spirit of the fear of God has filled him.e 13. And this very idea is also in another passage from the person of the Lord himself, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me. He has sent me to bring good news to the poor.f 14. Likewise David said, Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of joy over your peers.g 15. The apostle Paul said of I Corinthians 12:4-31, Ephesians 4:11-16, 5:25-32, 6:10-17. Matthew 3:16, Mark 1:10, Luke 3:22, John 1:32-33. c  John 3:34. d  John 7:37-38, cf. John 4:10-14. e  Isaiah 11:2. f  Isaiah 61:1, Luke 4:16-21. g  Psalm 45:7-8. a 

b 

129

71

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 29, 15-22

72

him, For whoever does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him,a and Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.b 16. It is the Spirit who works a second birth from the waters of baptism, a kind of seed of divine origin. And he consecrates this heavenly birth with a pledge of the promise of inheritance, like a kind of signed contract of eternal salvation, by making us into a temple of God and a home for himself.c He disturbs the divine ears, with unutterable groanings on our behalf,d performing the role of an advocate and carrying out the duties of protection. He is given to us to live in our bodies and produce holiness,e and by effecting this in us he brings our bodies to eternity and to the resurrection of immortality. And while he is in us, the Holy Spirit trains our bodies to be joined with heavenly power and to share in divine eternity. 17. For our bodies are instructed in him and through him to make progress toward immortality, while they learn to exercise restraint by controlling themselves according to his commands. 18. For he is the one who strives against the flesh, because the flesh opposes him.f 19. He is the one who inhibits insatiable desires, breaks unrestrained lusts, puts out the flames of unlawful passions, conquers burning provocations, casts off drunkenness, drives away greed, puts to flight excessive revelries, binds together loves, holds together good relations, drives away divisions, explains the Rule of Truth, refutes heretics, casts out the immoral, and guards the Gospel. 20. The apostle also said of him, For we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God.g 21. Paul rejoices in him and says, And I think that I too have the Spirit of God.h 22. He says this about the Spirit, And the Spirit of the prophets is under Romans 8:9. II Corinthians 3:17. c  I Corinthians 3:16-17, 6:19, II Corinthians 6:16, Ephesians 1:14. d  Romans 8:26, cf. Luke 18:1-8. e  Galatians 5:22-23. f  Galatians 5:17. g  I Corinthians 2:12. h  I Corinthians 7:40. a 

b 

130

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 29, 22-26

the prophets’ control.a 23. And he says this of him, Now the Spirit clearly says that in the end times some will withdraw from the faith, paying attention to misleading spirits and the teachings of demons, speaking lies in hypocrisy, having numbed their consciences.b 24. Established in this Spirit, no one ever says Jesus be cursed,c no one has denied that Christ is the Son of God, or has rejected God the Creator. No one in the Spirit quotes the words of Scripture against its meaning, or makes up contrary and sacrilegious doctrines, or writes different laws. 25. For, Whoever blasphemes against him does not have forgiveness, either in this age, or truly in the one to come.d 26. The Holy Spirit testifies to Christ in the apostles, reveals the firm faith of devotion in the martyrs, preserves the remarkable self-control of love kept pure in virgins, and guards the uncorrupted and unpolluted laws of the Lord’s teaching in the rest. He ruins heretics, straightens the crooked, exposes the disloyal, reveals pretenders, and sets the immoral on the right path. He keeps the Church uncorrupted and unprofaned with the holiness of perpetual chastity and truth.e

I Corinthians 14:32. Paul’s text actually says, “the spirits of the prophets are under the prophets’ control,” with the word “spirits” in the plural. Paul is speaking of the prophets’ own spirits, however Novatian’s text (or his memory, if the text was not right in front of him) has the word in the singular, which leads Novatian to assume that it is a reference to the Holy Spirit. What it would mean to Novatian for the Holy Spirit to be under the control of the prophets is never clarified. b  I Timothy 4:1-2. c  I Corinthians 12:3. Based on this, Novatian seems to have believed that a true Christian could never deny the faith, which becomes the assumption underlying his rigorism toward the lapsed. d  Matthew 12:32, Mark 3:29, Luke 12:10. e  II Corinthians 11:2, Ephesians 5:25-27. That the Holy Spirit “exposes the disloyal” and “reveals pretenders” would be important during times of persecution when imposters could infiltrate the Church to expose it, or even baptized members could turn on their fellow Christians and report them to the authorities. a 

131

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 30, 1-5

Chapter 30

73

1. And now let these things that we have briefly presented concerning the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit remain succinctly stated, and not extended by further debate. For they could be expanded more fully and advanced by more weighty argumentation, because one could bring the whole of both the Old and New Testaments as evidence that in this, one has true faith. 2. But because the heretics are accustomed to prolonging the debate, always struggling against the truth of genuine tradition and catholic faith, they are offended by Christ, whom the Scriptures declare and we believe to be God as well as human. Therefore, so that all heretical misinterpretation might be removed from our faith, this is what we affirm about him: that Christ is also God, but not in a way that would obstruct the truth of Scripture, or of our faith, rather in a way that is consistent with the Scriptures, which profess the oneness of God, which we accept and believe. 3. So in fact those who say that Jesus Christ is God the Father himself, and also those who want him to be human only, both have stolen the sources and justifications for their deception and heresies from Scripture. For when they noticed that it was written that God is one, they thought they could not hold that opinion any other way, except to believe either that Christ is a mere human, or that he is actually God the Father. And in this way, they have become accustomed to gathering their own misinterpretations, so that they depend on this reasoning to justify their own particular error. 4. So those who say that Jesus Christ is the Fathera claim this: If God is one, and yet Christ is God, then Christ is the Father, because God is one. If Christ is not the Father, and Christ the Son is also God, then it appears that two Gods are presented, contradicting the Scriptures. 5. However, those who maintain that Christ is human onlyb argue from a different angle in this way: If the Father is one, and the a  b 

Modalists. Adoptionists.

132

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 30, 5-16

Son is another, and yet the Father is God and Christ is God, then God is not one, but two equal Gods are presented, the Father and the Son. Therefore, if God is one, then Christ is a mere human, so that the Father would rightfully be the one God. 6. In truth, the Lord is being crucified as between two thieves.a Just as he was once fastened to the cross,b so now he suffers the sacrilegious insults of those heretics on either side. 7. But neither the holy Scriptures nor we give them any justification for their ruin and blindness, since they either will not see, or cannot see, what is clearly established within the divine writings. 8. For we know and read and believe and affirm that God, who made heaven and earth alike, is one. Since there could be no other god, we could not know or ever learn of any other. 9. He says, I am God, and there is no just and saving one besides me.c 10. And in another passage, I am the first and the last, and there is no god besides me. Who is like me?d 11. And, Who has measured heaven with his hand and the earth with his fist? Who has weighed the mountains on a scale and hung the forests in a balance?e 12. And Hezekiah said, …so that they all may know that you alone are God.f 13. Beyond this, the Lord himself said, Why do you ask me about what is good? The one God is good.g 14. Also, the apostle Paul says, …who alone has immortality and lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see.h 15. And in another passage, Now a mediator is not for one, and yet God is one.i 16. But in the same way that we affirm and read and believe this, so we must not omit any part of the heavenly Scriptures. Especially we must not in any way reject those indications of Christ’s divinity which are set down in the Scriptures, or we may be acThe modalists, who would steal his humanity, and the adoptionists, who would steal his divinity. b  Matthew 27:38, Mark 15:27, Luke 23:33, John 19:18. c  Isaiah 43:11, 45:21, Hosea 13:4. d  Isaiah 44:6-7. e  Isaiah 40:12. f  II Kings 19:19, cf. Isaiah 37:20. g  Matthew 19:17, Mark 10:18, Luke 18:19. h  I Timothy 6:16. i  Galatians 3:20. a 

133

74

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 30, 16-23

cused of damaging the integrity of holy faith by degrading the authority of the Scriptures. 17. And therefore we should believe this, in fact it is most trustworthy, that Jesus Christ the Son of God is our Lord and God, since Scripture says, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God… And the Word was made flesh and lived among us.a 18. And, My Lord and my God,b and …theirs are the fathers, and from them is Christ according to the flesh, who is above all things, blessed be God forever.c 19. So what should we say? Surely Scripture does not suggest that there are two Gods? If it did, how could it say that God is one?d Or could it be that Christ is not also God? Then how could it be said to Christ, My Lord and my God?e 20. Therefore, unless we hold all this with suitable reverence and correct reasoning, we would deserve to be thought to have provided a temptation to the heretics. Certainly it is not the fault of the heavenly Scriptures – which never deceive – but it comes from the stubbornness of human wandering, by which they have chosen to become heretics. 21. First of all, the argument of those who presume to attribute to us a doctrine of two Gods will be refuted. 22. It is written that, the Lord is one,f which they cannot deny. So what do they think about Christ? Is he the Lord, or is he not the Lord at all? But they do not doubt in the least that he is Lord. Therefore, if their logic is true, there are now two Lords. How is it, then, that according to the Scriptures there is still only one Lord? 23. And Christ is called the one teacher.g But we read that the apostle Paul is also a teacher.h Therefore, there is no longer one teacher, for in fact there are two teachers according to what we gather from these passages. John 1:1-2, 14. John 20:28. c  Romans 9:5. d  Galatians 3:20. e  John 20:28. f  Deuteronomy 6:4, I Corinthians 8:6, Ephesians 4:5. g  Matthew 23:8. h  II Timothy 1:11. a 

b 

134

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 30, 23-25 – CHAPTER 31, 1-2

How, then, is Christ the one teacher according to the Scriptures? 24. In the Scriptures, the only one who should be called good is God,a and yet in the same Scriptures Christ is also presented as good.b Therefore, if they deduce correctly, there is not one who is good, but two who are good. How, then, can the Scriptures faithfully declare that only one is good? 25. And so if they do not think that the concept that Christ is also Lord can be an obstacle to the principle that there is one Lord, nor that the concept that Paul is also a teacher can be an obstacle to the principle that there is one teacher, nor that the idea that Christ has also been called good can be an obstacle to the principle that there is one who is good, then for the same reason they should understand that the fact that Christ has also been proclaimed to be God cannot be an obstacle to the fact that there is one God.

Chapter 31 1. Therefore, there is God the Father, founder and Creator of all things, who alone knows no source, the one God, invisible, infinite, immortal, and eternal. I would say that nothing can be compared, let alone preferred, to his greatness, or majesty, or power. 2. When the Father willed it, the Word, the Son, proceeded from him.c “The Word” is not to be taken in the sense of a sound striking the air, or the tone of a voice forced from the lungs,d but we recognize him as the substance of power proceeding from Matthew 19:17, Mark 10:18, Luke 18:19. Matthew 19:16, Mark 10:17, Luke 18:18, John 10:11. c  Here Novatian refers to the “procession” of the Word at the time of creation, when the Word is the Father’s agent of creation. This is not a reference to the eternal generation of the Word, nor is it a reference to the incarnation. See Papandrea, James L., Novatian of Rome and the Culmination of Pre-Nicene Orthodoxy (Eugene, OR: Pickwick Publications, 2011), 92-94. d  Novatian is refuting the analogy, found in some of his predecessors, that the Word can be compared to a literal spoken word, which begins as a mere thought, only in the mind of the speaker (the Father), and then becomes a real word distinct from the speaker only when it is spoken forth (presumably at the Son’s procession). a 

b 

135

75

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 31, 2-5

76

God. No apostle has ever learned, no prophet has ever discovered, no angel has ever known, no creature has ever found out the secrets of his sacred and divine procession. They are known by the Son alone, who knows the Father’s secrets.a 3. Now since he is generated from the Father, he is always in the Father.b However, when I say “always,” I do not mean to imply that he is uncaused, but to clarify that his existence is caused.c Yet it is said that the one who is before all time has always been in the Father. For time cannot be attributed to the one who is before time. Truly he was always in the Father, otherwise the Father would not always be a Father. And yet the Father takes precedence, since this is necessary for him to be the Father. The one who knows no source must take precedence over the one who has a source, with the result that the Father outranks the Son. Because the Son is generated, he has a source, yet the Son knows that he is in the Father. And although his generation means that he has a source, it is because he is generated from the Father (who alone has no source) that this generation makes him like the Father in a certain way. 4. So when the Father willed it, the Son proceeded from the Father,d and the one who was in the Father, because he was generated from the Father, was now with the Father, because he proceeded from the Father. Of course the Son is that divine substance whose name is the Word, through whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made.e 5. Truly, all things are under his authority, because they were created through him. And therefore Matthew 11:27, cf. John 1:18. Here Novatian is speaking of eternal generation. See Papandrea, Novatian of Rome… 85-92. In verses 2 and 4 he is speaking of the Son’s procession as agent of creation, but here in verse 3 he takes a moment to clarify that although the Son proceeds from the Father at creation, the Son is nevertheless eternally generated. c  The word is natum, but Novatian is not speaking of the nativity of Christ. “Born” here does not mean to come into existence, but rather to have an origin, or a source. The Son’s source is the Father, though he is generated from the Father eternally and so he has no beginning to his existence. The Father has no source. In other words, the Son’s existence is caused by the Father, though not in time. The Father’s existence is without cause. d  Novatian goes back to speaking of the procession of the Son at creation, which becomes clear at the end of the verse and in verse 5. e  John 1:3. a 

b 

136

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 31, 5-13

he is over all things, but under the authority of the Father, since all things were made by the will of the Father, through the Son, who proceeded from the Father. Certainly the Son is God proceeding from God, making him the second person after the Father, so that he is the Son, but without taking away from the Father the oneness of God. 6. For if the Son had no source, then as uncaused he would have been compared to the one who had no source, which would have introduced a kind of equality of both Father and Son that would make two uncaused beings, and therefore it would make two Gods. 7. If the Son had not been generated, then he would have been compared to the one who is ungenerated, and found to be equal in rank, they would logically make two ungenerated Gods, and therefore Christ would have caused the existence of two Gods. 8. If the Son was without a source like the Father, then we would find that he is the first cause [principium] of all things like the Father, making two first causes, and consequently he would have shown us two Gods. 9. And if he was not the Son, but a father generating from himself another son, then he would have been compared to the Father and would be seen to be of equal rank, which would make two Fathers, and therefore he also would have confirmed the existence of two Gods. 10. If the Son could not be visible, he would have been compared to the one who must be invisible, and he would have been portrayed as on par with the Father. Thus he would have presented us with two who are invisible and therefore he also would have attested to the existence of two Gods. 11. If the Son were incomprehensible, or anything else that belongs to the Father, then we could say that he had stirred up the argument of two Gods – but in fact this argument was invented by those heretics. 12. Now, however, whatever the Son is, he is not from himself, because he is not ungenerated. But he is from the Father, because he is generated. Whether he is the Word, whether he is power, whether he is wisdom, whether he is light, or whether he is the Son. 13. Whatever he is of these things, it is not from anywhere else but from the Father. As we have already said earlier, his own Father is his source, and his origin is drawn from the one God by

137

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 31, 13-18

77

his generation. So he could not cause any disunity in the Divine by making what would amount to two Gods. 14. The Son is both only-begottena and firstbornb by generation from the one who has no source – the one who is both first cause and origin of all things – and therefore he has confirmed the oneness of God. He has shown that the Father is not subject to any beginning or origin, but rather he is the origin and first cause of all things. 15. In truth, the Son does nothing on his own authority, or from his own judgment. He does not come on his own behalf, but he is obedient to all the commands and instructions of the Father, so that although his generation shows that he is the Son, nevertheless his respectful obedience reveals that he is the servant of the Father’s will, because he comes from the Father. So even though he is also God, he obeys the Father in all things, and by his obedience he shows that there is still one God, the Father, from whom he also derives his source. 16. This is why Christ does not make two Gods, because the Father who has no source and the Son who is from him do not add up to two sources. The Son’s origin is his generation before all time. For only God the Father is ungenerated and without any source, and the Son, who is generated, is from the Father. The Son’s source is the Father, who has no source. And with the Father he is the source of everything else. And although the Son who is generated is God, nevertheless he bears witness to the Father, who is without source, and he still confirms the oneness of God. 17. Therefore, the Son is God, but generated in this divinity, making him God. He is also Lord, but generated from the Father in this lordship, making him Lord. He is also a messenger [angelus] but sent by his own Father to be the angel announcing the great council of God.c 18. Thus the Son’s divinity is explained in such a way that leaves no room for any disunity or inequality within the Divine John 3:16. Colossians 1:15. c  Isaiah 9:6. a 

b 

138

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 31, 18-21

that would cause the appearance of two Gods.a For since all things have been subjected to the Son by the Father, while the Son himself is under the authority of his Father (along with the things which are subjected to him) therefore he is demonstrated to be the Sonb of his Father, but he is revealed to be both Lord and God of everything else.c 19. Therefore, since all subjected things are handed over to the Son, who is God, and he gives everything he received that is subjected to him back to the Father,d he defers all divine authority back again to the Father.e 20. Thus the one God is shown to be the true and eternal Father. The divine power was sent out from him alone, communicated to, and extended in, the Son. And it has been reverted back to the Father again through the sharing of substance.f 21. Certainly the Son is revealed to be God, since we can see that divinity has been communicated and granted to him. And yet nevertheless the Father is shown to be the one God, since that majesty and divinity revert back, returning back toward the Father who had given it. Having been sent by him, it is turned back and turned around, sent back again by the Son himself, to acknowledge that God the Father of all is truly God and also the source of his own Son, whom he generated as Lord. And yet the Son is God of all the rest, since God the Father has put the one whom he generated in charge of everything.

This passage demonstrates that, for Novatian, the inequality of rank (authority) between Father and Son does not imply an ontological inequality or an inequality of divinity. b  A proposed alternate ending adds, “and servant.” See Pelland, 44-46. c  Matthew 11:27, Luke 10:22, John 3:35, I Corinthians 15:25-28, cf. Psalm 8:7, Ephesians 1:22, Philippians 3:21. d  The proposed alternate ending suggests replacing, “and he gives everything he received that is subjected to him back to the Father,” with, “…yet he is under the authority of the Father along with those things that are subject to him.” e  The proposed alternate ending adds to the end of the verse, “because of his submission.” f  The proposed alternate ending suggests replacing, “the sharing of substance,” with, “the submission of the Son.” Even with the alternate ending, this verse and the following passage is an early example of the concept of perichoresis. a 

139

78

The Rule of Truth, CHAPTER 31, 22

22. And so, the mediator between God and humanity, Jesus Christ,a has his own power from the Father, by which he is God, over all creatures subjected to him. And since every creature has been subjected to him, he is found to be in agreement with God, his Father. By remaining in the one who heard his prayers,b he has efficiently confirmed that his own Father is the one and only and true God.

a  b 

I Timothy 2:5. John 11:41-42, 14:10, Hebrews 5:7.

140

EPISTULAE THE LETTERS OF NOVATIAN TO CYPRIAN OF CARTHAGE, ON BEHALF OF THE CHURCH OF ROME

LETTER ONE (LETTER 30 IN THE CORRESPONDENCE OF CYPRIAN) NOVATIANUS, AS “ACTING BISHOP” OF ROME, C. 250 ce

Chapter 1 To the patriarch Cyprian, The priests and deacons standing firm in Rome greet you. 1. Anyone who knows that his spirit is in good condition, and who relies on the power of the discipline of the Gospel, and who is confident that he is true to the heavenly decrees, is secure in the knowledge that God is his only judge. He does not desire the praises of others, and he is not afraid of their accusations. However, those who are conscious of the fact that God alone must be their judge, and yet want their actions to be acceptable to their brothers, they are worthy of double praise. 2. The fact that you are like this, brother Cyprian, is not surprising, given your humility and your natural diligence. You desired that we should be partners with you in reaching your decisions, rather than judges after the fact, so that we could also be decision makers and ratify your resolutions, and so that we would be co-heirs of the benefits of your deliberations. And since we were entrusted with participa-

143

199 200

Letter One, CHAPTER 1, 2 – CHAPTER 2, 1-2

tion in all that has been done, we all present a united front on matters of rebuke and discipline.

Chapter 2

201

1. For what could be more appropriate in peacetime, or more necessary in the wartime of persecution, than the obligation of keeping the discipline of the godly life? Anyone who would be made undisciplined by a volatile course of events will always inevitably go off course, deviating here and there, and strewn about by the stormy troubles of uncertain times. To lose one’s grip on the Church’s decrees is like a ship whose helm is ripped from the pilot’s hands.a The salvation of the Church would be dashed on the rocks. It is clear that there is no other way one could look after the salvation of the Church than to fend off those who oppose it like so many adverse waves, and by maintaining the rule of discipline that has always been observed, like the rudder that provides salvation in a storm.b 2. This is not a decision that we have come to recently, and these rules of ours against the immoral are not late reinforcements appearing suddenly. No, our discipline is ancient as the faith is ancient, as we read in the ancient teaching, for the apostle would not have praised us so much when he said, Your faith is heralded in all the world,c unless such enforcement was already present at that time and was taken from the roots of the faith. To fall from the

In early Christian iconography, the Church is often depicted as a ship, with stormy seas as a metaphor for persecution, and safe harbor as a metaphor for salvation. During times of persecution, Christians found comfort in the Gospel accounts of Jesus calming the sea. Here Novatian uses the image of the ship on stormy seas to extend the metaphor to include the importance of the Church’s discipline (the helm/rudder) to guide the ship toward the harbor. b  The concept of “fending off” (or “driving away”) those who oppose the Church’s discipline is probably a reference to those who advocated easy reconciliation of the lapsed, or perhaps to the excommunication of the lapsed themselves. c  Romans 1:8. a 

144

Letter One, CHAPTER 2, 2 – CHAPTER 3, 1

praise and glory of the ancestors is the ultimate sin.a For the one who never gains a reputation for being praiseworthy is less shameful than the one who falls from the height of praise.b The one who was never honored by a good recommendation is less guilty than the one who loses the honor of good recommendations. The one whose virtues are unknown, going unnoticed and without praise, is judged less harshly than the one who is disinherited from the faith and loses its praises. For those things that are said which glorify anyone, they must be guarded by work with fear and trembling,c otherwise they rise up in the envy of the ultimate sin.d

Chapter 3 1. Our previous letters show that we do not speak falsely. In those letters, we sent you a clear description of our decision regarding those who had revealed that they are unfaithful by the unlawful presentation of those contemptible pamphlets [libellorum].e Although they might seem to be escaping the ensnaring traps of the devil, they are no less trapped than if they had approached the contemptible altars themselves, since by keeping such pamphlets they claim that they had done so. So we have still decided against those who acquired receipts, in spite of the fact that they were not present in person when the sacrifices took place. Certainly their presence was with those whom they caused to sign for them. For the one who caused a crime to be committed is not excluded from a  For Novatian, the worst sin one could commit was apostasy, in this context, to fall away from the tradition, or to fall short of the standards set by the ancestors in the faith (degenerem fuisse). b  Hebrews 10:26. c  Philippians 2:12. d  Novatian’s point seems to be that the lapsed – those who have committed the ultimate sin of apostasy – are now envious of those who have not “disinherited” themselves from the faith. e  Novatian is referring to the libelliteci, those who avoided the mandatory pagan sacrifices by obtaining a certificate of sacrifice illegally. See Papandrea, James L. Reading the Early Church Fathers: From the Didache to Nicaea (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2012), 156–168.

145

Letter One, CHAPTER 3, 1-3

202

it, nor is the one who is part of a conspiracy isolated from guilt, for although he did not commit the sin, nevertheless he caused it to be proclaimed in public. And since the entire mystery [sacramentum] of faith is in the confession of the name of Christ, one must understand that whoever looks for deceitful tricks to use as an excuse denies Christ. And whoever wants to appear to have satisfied the edicts and laws that are declared against the Gospel is actually obeying exactly what he only wanted to seem to obey. 2. Likewise, we have also decided against those who had defiled their hands and mouths with unlawful sacrifices.a Their minds were already defiled, and then from there they defiled their hands and mouths.b Thus we have pointed out that our faith is in agreement with your own. 3. For far be it from the Roman church to abandon its rule by giving in to worldly leniency, or to destroy the majesty of its faith by overturning the power of its discipline. Up to now, our brothers may have fallen down, as it were, but they would fall headlong to their destruction if they were hurried into overreaching remedies of reconciliation. Certainly it would be of no benefit to them if they are simply acquitted, so that by a false mercy, new wounds might be added to the old wounds of sin, and even repentance would be taken away from these miserable people, sending them to even greater destruction. For when could gentle medicine make progress if even the physician himself has removed repentance? He is kind to the point of danger if he only covers the wound and does not allow the time necessary to heal and form a scar. This is not a cure. If we want to speak the truth, it is murder.

Here Novatian refers to the sacrificati, who complied with the law and had actually made the pagan sacrifices, probably also eating the sacrificial meat or drinking part of a libation offering. b  Novatian (and presumably the Roman council of priests) assumed that apostasy was evidence of a lack of faith, and only one whose faith had already lapsed in his mind could submit to the sacrifices. a 

146

Letter One, CHAPTER 4, 1 – CHAPTER 5, 1

Chapter 4 1. Likewise you have a letter from some of the confessors who are still locked in prison here because of the honor of their confession.a Their battle for the Gospel had led to their faith being crowned with a glorious confession. Their letters are in agreement with our own, as they have proclaimed the teaching and discipline of the Gospel, and by their modesty they have recalled the unlawful petitions written on behalf of the church, since they could not follow through with them without causing the destruction of the discipline of the Gospel.b In fact, no one could be more suited to protect the stability of the power of the Gospel in undiminished dignity than someone who was handed over to be tortured and maimed for the sake of the Gospel by those who are stark raving mad. But if they had been willing to betray the Gospel when they faced martyrdom, they would have deservedly lost the honor of martyrdom. For the one who does not protect that which gives him what he has, dishonors that which gives him what he has, and he loses what he had.c

Chapter 5 1. At this point we must convey our many and utmost thanks to you for brightening the darkness of their prison with your letters. In this way you came to them, just as if you were able to enter the prison, and by your letters and your encouragements you reEpistle 28 in the correspondence of Cyprian. Some confessors may have been issuing certificates of their own, known as “libelli of peace,” which were meant to petition a bishop to reconcile penitent apostates on the basis of their confession to the confessors. This is, in fact, how the term “confessor” shifted in meaning from “one who confessed the faith” to “one to whom you confess your sins.” This practice created a controversy over the question of who had the authority to absolve sin and reconcile people to the Church. c  Novatian’s point is that the rule of faith and the rule of discipline are prerequisites for salvation. One who does not pay attention to the things that allow for salvation, will lose salvation. a 

b 

147

203

Letter One, CHAPTER 5, 1-4

204

vived their hearts to stand firm in their faith and confession. By describing their good fortunes with well-deserved praises, you enkindled in them a great burning desire for the glory of heaven. By the strength of your exhortation, you encouraged the oppressed so that – as we believe and we wish – they will be conquerors. You inspired them, so that although all of this seems to come from the faith of the confessors and from divine mercy, yet it would appear that in martyrdom they are in some way in your debt. 2. But it seems I should return from my digression to the conversation at hand. Included with this letter you have an example of the kind of letter that we also sent to Sicily. In any case, we must set this business aside and press on to a matter of greater necessity. Specifically, after the death of Fabian, a man of most noble memory, the troubles of recent events have so far prevented us from electing a bishop who could govern all of these things and who could, with discernment and authority, come to a decision regarding the lapsed. 3. In the meantime, we are gratified with your remarkable work in handling the matter. We must first wait until peace comes to the Church, and only then can we bring together the counsel of bishops, priests, deacons and confessors, together with the remaining laity, to discuss and make a ruling on the lapsed. For we find it extremely offensive and distressing that something which many people can be seen committing, is apparently not taken seriously by many people, and they voice their opinion while we see them spreading such a great sin. For a decision that does not appear to have a consensus of the majority cannot be an enduring decree. 4. Consider how the whole world is nearly devastated, and the remains and debris of fallen ruins are everywhere. So also the sin of apostasy seems to be spreading widely, and therefore powerful counsel is required. The medicine cannot be inadequate for the wound; the remedies cannot be weaker than mortal wounds. Those who have fallen fell because their rash boldness made them too reckless, and so those who work to sort this out must use the utmost care in discernment, so that the decisions made will not be judged invalid by the people.

148

Letter One, CHAPTER 6, 1-3

Chapter 6 1. Therefore, with one and the same counsel, and with the same prayers and tears, we who until now seem to have avoided the catastrophes of our time, as well as those who are seen to have fallen into the disasters of the time, must pray to the divine majesty, begging for peace to come to the name of the Church. By shared devotion we support, protect, and strengthen each other.a 2. Let us pray for the lapsed, so that they might be raised up; let us pray for those who stand firm, so that they might not fall when tested; let us pray that those who are said to have fallen will realize the gravity of their failure and understand that it is not a quick or hasty cure that is required. Let us pray that the compassion shown to the lapsed will result in their repentance, so that they will understand their sin, and they will be willing to show patience toward us for now. They must stop making waves, aggravating the Church’s situation, or else they would seem to be igniting an internal persecution among us, and what they have done by their impatience would be added to the accumulation of their sins. 3. For those who are unashamed of their sins are judged as deserving of the greatest shame. Let them knock at the door, yes, but certainly they must not break it down. Let them approach the threshold of the Church, but certainly not to jump across it. Let them keep watch outside the gates of the heavenly camp, but let them arm themselves with modesty, by which they must realize that they are deserters. Let them pick up again the trumpet of their prayers, but not to sound the call to battle. Let them arm themselves with the weapons of modesty and pick up again the shield of faith,b which they had abandoned when they denied the faith out of fear of death. But they must trust that they are now arming themselves against the enemy, the devil, not against the Church that mourns over their fall. A  modest petition will accomplish much for them. A humble request, an attitude of submission, and The verb translated “strengthen” here is armemus, and is part of a series of military metaphors that is continued in verse 3. b  Ephesians 6:16. a 

149

205

Letter One, CHAPTER 6, 3 – CHAPTER 7, 1-2

a diligent patience are what is needed. Let them send their tears as ambassadors for their sorrows, and let them appoint the groaning from their innermost being as an advocate to demonstrate their sorrow and shame over the sins they have committed.

Chapter 7 1. In fact, if they were horrified by the gravity of the disgrace of their offence, if with a healing hand they truly were to pull back the folds of their wound to expose the deep recesses of the fatal injury to their heart and conscience, they would be too ashamed to ask, except that not to ask for the antidote of peace results in even greater danger and shame.a But all this is in the sacrament. However, in the rule of the petition itself the appropriate time is determined by moderation, and so the petition is made with bowing, the request is made in submission to authority, because those who ask must not be demanding, but must be flexible. They must respect divine rebuke as much as they respect divine mercy. Just as it is written, I forgave you your entire debt because you begged me to.b Likewise it is written, Whoever denies me before people, I will also deny him before my Father and his angels.c 2. For God is merciful, but he is also the enforcer of his commands, and he is certainly strict. It is like the way he calls people to his banquet, but the one who does not have a wedding garment is bound by his hands and feet and thrown out from the assembly of the saints.d He has prepared heaven,e but he has also prepared hell [tartarum]. He has prepared cooling rest [refrigeria], but he has also prepared eternal punishment. He has prepared unapproacha  The metaphor at work here is that the Church is a hospital, sin is the sickness, and the sacraments are the medicine. The “antidote of peace” is the sacrament of reconciliation. b  Matthew 18:32. c  Matthew 10:33, Luke 12:9. d  Matthew 22:1-14, Luke 14:15-24. For Novatian, the casting out of the man without a wedding garment is analogous to excommunication. e  John 14:2–3.

150

Letter One, CHAPTER 7, 2 – CHAPTER 8, 1

able light,a but he has also prepared the vast everlasting darkness of perpetual night.

Chapter 8 1. For some time now we have been striving to manage this by holding to a middle way. The majority of us, along with the neighboring bishops, as well as others who came to us from far off provinces due to the heat of the persecution, believe that nothing new can be decided until a bishop is elected. We also believe that the problem of the lapsed is to be handled with restraint, so that for the time being, until God gives us a bishop, their reconciliation must wait. In the case of those who can endure delays of postponement, they may be kept in a state of uncertainty. However, those for whom the end of life is near, whose impending death can bear no postponement, if they repeatedly confess and make their renunciation and perform acts of penance, if by their tears, their groans, and their weeping they should reveal their sorrow and their true repentance of heart, and when there remains no hope of living (as far as anyone can tell), then cautiously and with anxious care they are to be helped. God himself knows what he may do with such people and how he might weigh the balance of his justice. However, we must be careful to make sure that we are not inclined to easy answers so that immoral people might praise us, or so that the truly penitent might accuse us of merciless cruelty.b We wish for you, blessed and most honorable patriarch, always to be very well in the Lord, and remember us.

a  b 

I Timothy 6:16. Here Novatian elaborates on what he means by the “middle way.”

151

206

LETTER TWO (LETTER 31 IN THE CORRESPONDENCE OF CYPRIANa) NOVATIANUS, AS “ACTING BISHOP” OF ROME, C. 250 ce

Chapter 1 To the patriarch Cyprian, The priests Moses and Maximus, as well as Nicostratus and Rufinusb and the other confessors who are with them greet you. 1. In the midst of our numerous and varied sorrows created by the present situation in which many throughout almost the entire world have fallen, brother,c this particular comfort has come to us, that we have received your letter. We are edified by it, and it has alleviated some of the emotional pain caused by these sorrows. From your letter we can now see that perhaps it was the grace of divine providence, and not some other cause, that willed to hold us in chains, locked up in prison for so long. Your letter taught us and inspired This letter is presented as number 25 in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, volume 5. See Epistle 51. c  The use of the word “brother” here implies some measure of equality between those mentioned in the greeting and Cyprian, and prevents us from translating the term papae in the greetings of these letters as “father.” a 

b 

153

227

228

Letter Two, CHAPTER 1, 1-3 – CHAPTER 2, 1-2

us to a firmer resolution so that we might be more able to reach the crown that awaits us.a 2. For your letter has illuminated us, like a calm in the midst of a storm, or like a long-awaited tranquility in a stormy sea. It was like rest from labor, safety from danger and suffering, a bright shining light in the deepest darkness. Therefore we drank it in with a thirsty soul, and we received it with a hungry will, and we rejoice that it has sufficiently fed us, and even filled us for battle with the enemy. 3. The Lord will reward you for your affection, and will repay you with appropriate fruit for such a good work. For the one who has encouraged the confessors is no less worthy of the reward of a crown than the one who has actually suffered. The one who has taught what is to be done is no less worthy of praise than the one who has done it. The one who has advised another is no less honored than the one who needed advice, except that sometimes even greater glory goes to the leader than to the disciple who submitted to his instruction. For it may be that without the leader’s teaching, the disciple would not have achieved what he did.

Chapter 2

229

1. We say again, brother Cyprian, that we feel great joy, great comfort, great relief, and all the greater from the way you described with worthy praise - I will not say the martyrs’ glorious deaths but rather their glorious entering into eternal life. For passings of this sort must have been published in the kind of reports that record the accounts of events just as they happened. Therefore, from your letter we have seen those glorious triumphs of the martyrs, and in a way, followed them with our eyes as they ascended into heaven, as if we have observed them taking their places among the angels and heavenly principalities and powers. 2. Furthermore, in a way we have also heard with our ears the Lord giving his testimony to the Father, as he promised.b And so, this raises our spirits every day, and also energizes us to aspire to such a great reputation. a  b 

II Timothy 4:8. Matthew 10:32, Luke 12:8.

154

Letter Two, CHAPTER 3, 1 – CHAPTER 4, 1

Chapter 3 1. For what could happen to anyone that is more glorious and more blessed than to be empowered by divine favor to confess the Lord God fearlessly among one’s executioners; or to confess Christ, the Son of God, in the midst of the many diverse and sophisticated tortures of a raging worldly power, while the body is torn and tormented and flayed? For although the spirit is leaving the body, it is still free. Or what could be more glorious and more blessed than to leave the world behind to reach for heaven; or to quit the human race to be among the angels; or to break free of all worldly burdens to stand in the sight of God;a or to attain the heavenly kingdom without any delay?b Or what could be more glorious and more blessed than to be made a companion with Christ in the passion, in the name of Christ; or to be made the judge of one’s own judge by divine favor; or to report on one’s confession of the Name with a pure conscience; or to disobey the human and sacrilegious laws against the faith; or to have publicly spoken up for the truth; or by dying to conquer death itself, which is feared by all; or through death itself to achieve immortality; or to overcome the tortures of all the instruments of cruelty by being flayed and torn by these very devices; or to have resisted by strength of spirit all the sufferings of a body torn to pieces; or not to be horrified at the gushing of one’s own blood; or to begin to love being punished for the faith; or to believe that to go on living is the loss of one’s life?

Chapter 4 1. For the Lord calls us to this fight, like a kind of trumpet of his Gospel, when he says, Whoever loves father or mother more than me Hebrews 12:1. A reference to purgatory. It was assumed that the martyrs were, in effect, baptized in their own blood, and that martyrdom washed away all sin, including postbaptismal sin, so therefore the martyrs would not have to experience purgatory, but would enter heaven immediately. a 

b 

155

230

Letter Two, CHAPTER 4, 1-2 – CHAPTER 5, 1

is not worthy of me,a and whoever loves his own life more than me is not worthy of me,b and whoever does not take up his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me.c And again, Blessed are those who suffer persecution for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when they persecute you and hate you. Rejoice and be glad, for in this way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.d And, You will stand before kings and governors… brother will hand over brother to death, and the father his child… but whoever endures to the end will be saved.e 2. And, I will give the victor the right to sit with me on my throne, as I myself won the victory and sat down with my Father on his throne.f And the apostle also, What will separate us from the love of Christ? Oppression, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or the sword? As it is written, For your sake we are being slain all day long, we are looked upon as sheep to be slaughtered, but in all these things we are conquerors through him who loved us.g

Chapter 5

231

1. When we read these passages from the Gospel brought together with similar ones, the sayings of the Lord seem to light a fire under us to enkindle the faith. Now we are not so terrified by the enemies of truth, but we challenge them. Now we have already subdued the enemies of God. By not yielding to them we have defeated them and their despicable laws against the truth. And if we have not yet spilled our blood, we are prepared to. No one should conclude that this present lull in the persecution is a hiatus born of compassion. It actually hinders us, it creates an impediment to glory, it delays heaven, it keeps us from the glorious vision of God. For in a battle Matthew 10:37, Luke 14:26. Matthew 10:39, 16:25, Luke 14:26. c  Matthew 10:38, 16:24, Luke 14:26. d  Matthew 5:10–12, Luke 6:22–23. e  Matthew 10:18, 21–22, Mark 13:9, 12–13, Luke 21:12, 16–19. f  Revelation 3:21. g  Romans 8:35–37, cf. Psalm 44:23. a 

b 

156

Letter Two, CHAPTER 5, 1-2 – CHAPTER 6, 1-2

of this kind, and in the kind of fight where faith struggles, true compassion does not delay the martyrs with a hiatus. 2. Therefore, most beloved Cyprian, pray that more and more every day the Lord may more abundantly and more readily equip and enlighten and support and strengthen each one of us with his grace by the force of his power, so that as the best general, he may now lead his soldiers, whom until now he has trained and tested in the boot camp of prison, into the open field of battle. May he grant us the divine armor, those weapons that cannot be defeated, the breastplate of righteousness, which never breaks, the shield of faith, which cannot be pierced, and the sword of the Spirit, which never dulls.a For who could be more trusted to pray for these things for us than so glorious a bishop? As ones who are destined to be victims, we beg for help from the priest [sacerdote].

Chapter 6 1. Here is another joy of ours, that although you have been separated from your brothers for the time being due to the present situation, you have not neglected your episcopal office. Your letters often strengthened the confessors, and you even supplied their necessary expenses from your own wages.b In a way, you have always made yourself present to everyone, and you have never wavered in any part of your responsibility, the way a deserter does.c 2. But we cannot fail to mention the way you have given us even greater and more lasting happiness, no, we must acknowledge what everyone affirms. That is to say, we have noticed your proper discipline Ephesians 6:13–17, I Thessalonians 5:8. The Latin is: de tuis laboribus iustis (literally, “from your just/lawful labors”), which implies that Cyprian had a legal source of income apart from the Church, and used his own money to help the confessors in prison. On the other hand, it could also be interpreted more broadly as if to say, “from the fruits of your labors which are rightfully due to you.” In that case, it could mean that Cyprian was using his own share of offering donations (i.e., his own stipend as bishop) to help the confessors. c  Novatian refers to the lapsed as “deserters,” continuing his military analogy. a 

b 

157

232

Letter Two, CHAPTER 6, 2-4

233

and equally appropriate rebuke of those who have forgotten their failures and have become impatient and extorted peace from the priests in your absence, as well as those who have no respect for the Gospel and would have given away what is holy and the pearls of the Lord by favoring leniency.a With such a great failure, and one that has advanced throughout almost the entire world with extraordinary devastation, careful and restrained management is required, as you yourself have written. All the bishops, priests, deacons, confessors, and the laity who stand firm must be consulted, as you yourself affirm in your letters. Otherwise, if we are willing to give premature relief to the fallen, we might appear to cause even greater falls. 3. For where would there be any remaining fear of God if forgiveness is so easily granted to sinners? In truth, their souls must be tended and cared for over time until they mature, and they must be taught from Scripture what a monstrous sin they have committed, the worst sin of all. They should not have been encouraged by the fact that there are many of them, but rather they should be all the more restrained because there are more than just a few. No crime has ever been diminished by increasing the number of the guilty. Rather they must exhibit modesty, self-restraint, repentance, discipline, humility and submission, and the patience to wait for another’s judgment regarding themselves, to accept another’s decision regarding what they have done. 4. This is what demonstrates repentance; this is what would form a scar over the wound; this is what edifies and lifts up a discouraged and fallen mind, what extinguishes and ends the burning fever of boiling sins. For the physician will not give to sick people food that is for those with healthy bodies, or the ill-timed and inappropriate food would not suppress the fury of the illness, but will enflame it instead. It is obvious that what could have been cured and alleviated sooner by fasting would produce indigestion and last longer by feeding, all because of impatience.

a 

Matthew 7:6.

158

Letter Two, CHAPTER 7, 1-2 – CHAPTER 8, 1-2

Chapter 7 1. Therefore, hands that have been stained by unholy sacrifice must be washed with good works, and miserable mouths that have been polluted by detestable food will be absolved with true words of repentance. Then a faithful spirit will be planted and take root in the hidden heart. Let the constant lamenting of the penitents be heard, and again, let them cry faithful tears from their eyes, so that those very eyes which have wrongly beheld idols might, by their weeping, make satisfaction to God and wipe away the unlawful act they have committed. 2. Impatience is not helpful in the midst of illnesses. The weak struggle with their suffering and they hope that by enduring it, they might eventually triumph over it and regain their health. But if the physician has hurried and introduced an unreliable quick fix, rather than gradually allowing reliable remedies to be applied, then any misfortune can undo the cure. A single flame is quickly revived and turned back into a blazing fire unless the wood of the whole fire is put out, all the way down to the last spark. Therefore it is only right that people in this situation must realize that the prescribed delay is in their best interest, and that postponements are necessary to produce more reliable remedies.

Chapter 8 1. Besides, since when should those who confess Christ be locked up in custody in a filthy prison while others deny him without any danger to their faith? Since when are they imprisoned, bound by chains in the name of God, while those who have refused the confession of God are admitted to communion? Since when do those prisoners put their glorious lives on the line while those who have forsaken the faith fail to grasp the significance and the risks of their offences? 2. If they display excessive impatience and demand unacceptable haste in being readmitted to communion, their complain-

159

234

Letter Two, CHAPTER 8, 2

ing is both pointless and envious, and the insults they hurl with their presumptuous and careless speech have no effect against the truth, especially since there was a lawful way for them to retain what they are now willfully seeking, what they feel compelled by necessity to demand. For a faith that was able to confess Christ was also, by the power of Christ, able to remain in communion. We wish for you, blessed and most honorable patriarch, always to be very well in the Lord, and remember us.

160

LETTER THREE (LETTER 36 IN THE CORRESPONDENCE OF CYPRIANa) NOVATIANUS, AS “ACTING BISHOP” OF ROME, C. 250 ce

Chapter 1 To the patriarch Cyprian, The priests and deacons standing firm in Rome greet you. 1. Dearest brother, when we read your letter that you sent by Fortunatus the subdeacon,b we were pierced with twin sorrows and upset by a double sadness; that the circumstances of this terrible persecution have given you no rest, and also the letter indicated that the unrestrained presumption of the lapsed brothers and sisters has gotten to the point of dangerous, reckless rhetoric. 2. But although we were deeply distressed and disheartened by these things we have mentioned, nevertheless the very heavy burden of our sadness is lessened by your enthusiasm and the tenacity you employ to honor the discipline of the Gospel. While you This letter is presented as number 29 in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, volume 5. Epistle 35, presented as number 28 in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, volume 5. Fortunatus is mentioned in Epistle 34, which is presented as number 27 in the AnteNicene Fathers, volume 5. a 

b 

161

247

Letter Three, CHAPTER 1, 2-3 – CHAPTER 2, 1

248

justifiably restrain the shamelessness of some, you show others the proper way of salvation by encouraging them to accept their penance. We were quite amazed by this, that they would want to rush so urgently, so prematurely, and at such an inopportune time, not so much to beg for peace from such a huge crime, such an unfathomable sin, but on the contrary to demand it, and to claim that they already have it in heaven. 3. If they have it, why do they ask for what they have? However, if the fact that they ask for it proves that they do not have it, why are they unwilling to accept the judgment of those whom they regarded enough to ask for the peace that they clearly do not have? If they believe that someone else has granted them the right to communion, then let them attempt to compare this with the Gospel, so that finally and decisively their case might prevail, if it does not contradict the law of the Gospel. But could something that has been judged contrary to the truth of the Gospel ever result in a communion that is in agreement with the Gospel? For if the one who seeks reconciliation is in agreement with every ruling, then he might eventually see a decision for leniency; but if the one who seeks reconciliation is not in agreement, then it might be necessary for him to be deprived of the pardon, as well as the privilege of fellowship.

Chapter 2 1. Therefore, let them consider what they are trying to achieve by causing trouble in this way. For if they truly claim that the Gospel has imposed one resolution, and the martyrs have imposed another, they will put the martyrs in conflict with the Gospel and put themselves at odds with both. The majesty of the Gospel would now seem to be broken and dishonored, as if it could be overshadowed by some new commandment; and the glorious crown of confession knocked off the martyrs’ heads, as if it is not clear that they became martyrs precisely by fulfilling the Gospel. Truly no one should be less willing to conclude anything contrary to the

162

Letter Three, CHAPTER 2, 1-3

Gospel than the one who endeavors to receive from the Gospel the name of martyr. 2. In addition, we would like to know this: if the only way one becomes a martyr is by refusing to sacrifice, and if the martyrs do this so that they might remain in the peace of the Church, and if they are even willing to go so far as to spill their blood, and if any are overcome by the pain of torture they could lose the peace of the Church and consequently they would also lose their salvation, then how could the martyrs believe that those who are said to have sacrificed will be granted salvation, when they believed that they themselves would not have salvation if they had sacrificed? We can see that the martyrs have already submitted themselves to this law, and now the others are obligated to observe it as well. 3. In this controversy, the lapsed proposed an argument that they thought would work in their favor, but as we can see, it works against them. For if the martyrs believed that peace will be granted to them, why have they not granted it? Why have they recommended that the matter be referred to the bishop, as they themselves say? For the one who commands something to be done can certainly do what he commands. But as we know, or rather as the evidence itself indicates and affirms, the most holy martyrs discerned that both sides must apply the proper amount of humility and truth.a For they referred the matter to the bishop because they concluded that they must defer to him out of respect, and to avoid being harassed any further, because they were being pressured by many people. And when they decline to communicate with the lapsed, they show how the integrity of the law of the Gospel must be preserved undiminished.

a  After describing the stance of the martyrs as one of advocating humility and truth, the next two sentences demonstrate how the martyrs themselves showed humility and truth, respectively. Their respect for the bishop shows their humility, and their respect for discipline of the Church shows their concern for the truth.

163

249

Letter Three, CHAPTER 3, 1-3

Chapter 3 1. Yet because of your love, brother, you never cease to calm the spirits of the lapsed and to bring the medicine of truth to those who have gone astray, even though the languishing soul often refuses the best efforts of the physicians. The injury of the lapsed is recent, and their wound is still swelling up. And therefore we are certain that an enforced waiting period will diminish their antagonistic urgency, and they will come to cherish the delay itself as trustworthy medicine. Yet there is no shortage of those who get them worked up until they are a danger to themselves. By giving them destructive advice, they do not recommend the saving remedy of postponement, but rather they demand for the lapsed the deadly poison of a hasty communion. 2. In fact, we do not believe that all of these lapsed would so rudely dare to claim the peace for themselves without the instigation of certain people. We know about the faith of the church of Carthage, we know of your teaching, and we know of your humility. Consequently we were surprised to see something less favorable about you included in a letter,a especially since we had often been convinced of your mutual love and affection from many shared examples of your collegial disposition. 3. Therefore, it is time that they do penance for their sin. Let them demonstrate sorrow for their fall, acknowledge their shame, show humility, and practice self-restraint, so that by their submission they might obtain for themselves the mercy of God, and by giving honor where it is due they might elicit for themselves divine compassion. Their case would have been so much stronger if their own humility had been combined with the prayers of those who remain standing firm, because when the beneficiary of a petition is deserving, the petition is more easily granted.

Apparently the same people who were encouraging the lapsed to demand reconciliation were also writing letters in opposition to bishop Cyprian. a 

164

Letter Three, CHAPTER 4, 1-2

Chapter 4 1. Now, regarding Privatus of Lambaesa,a you wanted to warn us of a disturbing matter, as it is your habit to do. For we all must be vigilant on behalf of the body of the universal Church, whose members are dispersed throughout all of the various provinces. 2. But even before reading your letter, the deception of this devious man could not escape our notice. For a while ago, a certain Futurus had come from that entourage of evil as a representative of Privatus. He dishonestly tried to obtain a letter from us, but he was unable to hide who he was, and he did not receive the letter that he wanted. We wish for you always to be very well.

Privatus is mentioned later in a letter from Cyprian to Cornelius of Rome. See Epistle 59.10, which is presented as number 54 in the Ante-Nicene Fathers, volume 5. Privatus was once bishop of Lambaesa (Lambesitanum/Lambaesis), a garrison town in the Roman province of Numidia (modern Algeria). He was charged with heresy by Cyprian’s predecessor and deposed at a synod of ninety bishops. a 

165

250

ETHICAL TREATISES

DE BONO PUDICITIAE ON THE BENEFIT OF PURITY (AKA: IN PRAISE OF PURITY) NOVATIANUS, AS “ANTI-POPE,” C. 253 – 257 ce

Chapter 1 1. You know from personal experience that while I was present with you I never neglected any part of my office, but I was always striving to take responsibility for your faith and knowledge (which the Lord causes to grow) especially with my regular and extensive interpretations of the Gospels. 2. For what else could one do to lead effectively in the Lord’s Church? What could be found to be more appropriate to the office of bishop than teaching the truths that were introduced and presented by the Lord himself, so that believers might come to the promised kingdom of heaven? Surely this is my work and duty, the ongoing business of fulfilling my vow, even while I am away. By my letters I try to be present with you and carry on. 3. As it is my habit to do, by sending these exhortations I urge you, I disturb you for the sake of the faith. And so I come to you, that you might always stand firm, the strong

169

113

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 1, 3-5 – CHAPTER 2, 1-2

114

foundation of the Gospel protecting and arming you against all of the devil’s attacks. It will not even seem like I am gone, if I can have peace of mind about you. 4. Nevertheless, everything that is profitably presented, and interpretations set forth either to explain or to promise eternal life, in the end they bear fruit, if the works are sustained to that end by the power of divine compassion. 5. So we offer, not only words – which come from the sources of the sacred Scriptures – but we unite prayers and petitions to the Lord with these same words, so that he might reveal the treasures of his sacred mysteries to you, as he has to us, and grant the strength to put into practice what we know. For the danger is greater when we know the Lord’s will but fail to act within the will of God.

Chapter 2

115

1. Therefore, whatever your many activities, I urge you always to remember the inspired teachings, which you know. For what other answer to prayer could mean more to me than that through it all you remain perfected in God?a I especially urge you, whatever you do, to keep your purity protected, for you know that you are a temple of the Lord,b members of Christ,c and the dwelling place of the Holy Spirit.d You are called to hope, consecrated to the faith, destined to salvation; sons and daughters of God, brothers and sisters of Christ, partners with the Holy Spirit. Those who are born anew from the water are no longer indebted to the flesh.e 2. Also, purity is more than a matter of the will, except that we should will that it would be ours. Indeed it is preferable because it is a matter of redemption, preventing what has been consecrated by Christ from being corrupted. For if the apostle says that the Ephesians 6:13. I Corinthians 3:16, II Corinthians 6:16. c  I Corinthians 6:15. d  I Corinthians 6:19. e  John 3:3-7, I Peter 1:23. a 

b 

170

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 2, 2-4 (5) – CHAPTER 3, 1-2

Church is the Bride of Christ,a I ask you, how important is purity when the Church is exalted as the virgin Bride in a marriage? 3. And certainly, if I did not intend to remind you briefly, I believe I could adequately praise the benefits of purity both far and wide. But I consider it unnecessary to praise it at length with those who honor it. For when you wear purity like a garment, you add to its beauty; and by practicing purity, you proclaim its many benefits. And when it is yours, it decorates you; its beauty is in turn loaned to you. 4. (5.) Purity provides you with the discipline of moral behavior, and you give preference to the service of holy works. For through you it is clear what and how much purity can do, and purity shows you and teaches you what you should wish for. The two benefits of commandments and of actions are combined into one, so that nothing could seem to be missing, either teachings neglecting service, or service neglecting teachings.

Chapter 3 1. Purity is the honor of the body, a badge of morality, the holiness of the sexes, the bond of marriage, and the promise of descendants. It is the defender of modesty, the fountain of chastity, the peace of the home, and the source of harmony. Purity is concerned to be satisfied with nothing less than itself. Purity is always modest, since it is the mother of innocence. Purity is always decorated with nothing more than decency, and if this annoys the immoral, it is an excellent witness to purity’s beauty. Purity needs no decoration, its own honor is its beauty. 2. It recommends us to the Lord, connects us to Christ, and fights against all of the forbidden conflicts of desire in our members, bringing peace to our bodies. It is a blessing, and so it blesses anyone who will live with it. And those who do not have it cannot criticize it, because it is even respected by its enemies, since those who cannot conquer it admire it all the more.

a 

II Corinthians 11:2, Ephesians 5:23.

171

116

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 3, 3-5 – CHAPTER 4, 1-3

3. But that this virtue would always be exhibited in men and desired by women, its enemy impurity must always be rejected, for impurity makes indecent mockery of its accomplices, sparing neither bodies nor souls. 4. In fact, when it conquers one’s behavior, the whole person is paraded along in its triumph of lust.a At first it is attractive, so that it might do more harm while it is pleasurable. But impurity is the enemy of self-control, and along with decency it consumes the whole person. Frequently the dangerous insanity of lust comes to bloodshed. It is the inflammation of a good conscience, the mother of impenitence, the destruction of the prime of life, and an insult to family. It undermines loyalty to blood and household. By foreign affections it inserts its own sons into the wills of strangers, and introduces unknown offspring and corrupt descendants. 5. This impurity often burns regardless of sex, when it does not limit itself to keep within the bounds of what is allowed. It considers itself unsatisfied until everyone turns to the bodies of men, not that they might seek some new pleasure, but that they might seek out something monstrous, overindulgent, and unnatural, men with men, against nature itself.

Chapter 4 1. But in fact purity holds first place among virgins, second among those with self-control, third among the married – truly in all of these levels it is glorious. 2. For it is meritorious to be faithful in marriage (with so many bodily struggles), but to commit to the way of self-control within marriage is a greater virtue, since even what is allowed is refused. 3. Surely it is an extraordinary power to preserve holiness from birth and to hold on to it from infancy all the way to old a  The reference is to the Roman tradition of the triumphal parade. Conquering generals would show off the spoils of war on floats in a parade. These spoils included captured slaves. Novatian’s point is that if one allows impurity to conquer one’s behavior in the war of morality, then one has become enslaved to the conquering force.

172

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 4, 3 – CHAPTER 5, 1-6

age throughout one’s whole life. But it is an even greater happiness never to know any of the alluring demands of the body. Now, it is a mark of virtue to conquer these demands, yet this virtue comes as a gift of God, even though it is to be exhibited in people’s members.

Chapter 5 1. Brothers and sisters, the principles of purity are ancient. What do I mean when I say they are ancient? It is because they were established with humanity itself. 2. For since woman comes out of man’s own body, so that she would not know another besides him, so also she is given back to him as a wife, so that what was taken is returned to him, and he would not desire another.a 3. And so Scripture says, And the two will be one flesh,b so that what was one might go back to being one – otherwise without this return the separation might enable the desire of another. 4. This is why the apostle also proclaimed that the husband is the head of his wife, so that he could endorse purity by the union of the two.c For just as one person’s head could not be appropriate for another person’s limbs, so also one person’s limbs do not go with another person’s head. In other words, a head fits its own limbs, and limbs fit their own head, because a natural link fastens both together in a mutual union. If it were not so, the covenant of the sacred institution [of marriage] could be destroyed by any disharmony arising from the conflict of bodily members. 5. So the apostle adds still more, saying, Whoever loves his wife loves himself. For no one hates his own flesh, but nourishes and takes care of it, just as Christ does the Church.d 6. From this passage comes an important principle about love and purity: that wives are loved by their husbands just as Christ has loved the Church, and wives must love their husbands, as the Church loves Christ. Genesis 2:21-23. Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:4-6, Mark 10:7-8. c  I Corinthians 11:3. d  Ephesians 5:28-30. a 

b 

173

117

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 6, 1-7 – CHAPTER 7, 1

Chapter 6

118

1. Consequently, when Christ was asked, he gave such honor to purity that he said one cannot dismiss a wife except for the reason of adultery.a 2. This is the reason for that decree which says, You shall not allow adulteresses to live.b 3. Consequently the apostle says, This is the will of God… that you renounce extramarital sex.c 4. He also says this: the members of Christ are not to be joined to the members of a prostitute.d 5. Therefore whoever engages in the sins of the flesh tramples on the law of purity, and is delivered to Satan for the destruction of the flesh.e 6. So it is fitting that adulterers do not possess the kingdom of heaven,f since, he says, every other sin is outside the body, only adultery is a sin against one’s own body.g But now it is not necessary to remind you of all the rest of the principles, especially since you know these judgments and consistently keep them. 7. Though they may be strict, nevertheless there can be no disagreement about them. For the adulterer has no excuse, since he is allowed to marry, he either has a wife, or could have had one.

Chapter 7 1. For though it is true that laws are written for wives, by which they are bound so that they cannot break them, it is also true that virginity and self-control are outside of all law. None of the laws of marriage are relevant for virginity, because it is so profound that it Matthew 5:32, 19:9, Mark 10:11-12, Luke 16:18. Leviticus 20:10. The Old Testament text says that both men and women guilty of adultery are to be put to death, though Novatian mentions only the women. c  I Thessalonians 4:3. d  I Corinthians 6:15-20. e  I Corinthians 5:5. Novatian, always the rigorist, omits “so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.” f  I Corinthians 6:9. g  I Corinthians 6:18. In this text, Paul is speaking more broadly of sexual immorality in general, which suggests that Novatian is using the term “adultery” in the broader sense as well. a 

b 

174

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 7, 1-4 – CHAPTER 8, 1-4

transcends all of them [in case any who are corrupt try to exempt sins from human laws]. 2. Virginity puts itself on par with the angels – in truth, if we were to inquire in depth, it even exceeds the angels, since it fights against the flesh and brings back a victory against a nature which the angels do not have. 3. What is virginity, but a glorious meditation on the future life? Virginity is for both sexes, it is an ongoing childhood, it is a triumph over sensuality. Virginity has no offspring, and even has disregard for the bearing of children. It has no fruitfulness, but it has no bereavement; it is happy to avoid the suffering of childbirth, but even happier to avoid the tragedy of burying its children. 4. What is virginity, but pure freedom? It has no husband as its lord. Virginity is free from all attachments, it is not committed to marriage, or to the world, or to children. Virginity cannot fear persecution, but it can confront it because it is free from such cares.

119

Chapter 8 1. Now that the principles of purity have been explained to you briefly, we should give an example of purity. For whatever is presented is more effective when it comes with an example, and the virtue of what is taught is never doubted when it is also confirmed by examples. 2. The example of purity begins with Joseph. A Hebrew youth of noble ancestry, he was all the more noble because of his innocence. His brothers hated him because of his revelations, and sold him to the Ishmaelites. He ended up in the house of an Egyptian man. 3. He engendered friendliness and kindness in the heart of his master by his obedience and innocence and by his complete loyalty of service. Although a slave, he had the appearance of nobility, and his youth and good breeding brought him to the attention of all. However, his master’s wife gazed at him inappropriately. 4. In a private part of the house where there were no witnesses, a convenient hiding place for crime, this weak-willed and pro-

175

120

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 8, 4-9 – CHAPTER 9, 1-2

121

miscuous wife thought she could conquer the youth’s purity, first by promises, then by threats. 5. She held onto him by his clothes, which made him struggle to escape, and because the crime was so bold, he left his clothes behind. But the honesty of his nude body would provide a witness to his innocence. Nevertheless, the shameless wife did not hesitate to add the arrogance of false accusation to the sin of impurity. 6. Her desire scorned, she was enraged and impulsive, and she complained to her husband and the others, pretending to be in anguish. She accused the Hebrew youth of trying to perpetrate the same violence on her that would have been inflicted on him. 7. The loving husband was unaware of the events and was deeply disturbed and enraged by his wife’s accusation.a And because Joseph would not entangle his conscience in sin, this truly virtuous young man was thrown into the deepest dungeon. 8. But purity was not alone in the prison, for God was with Joseph because he was innocent, and the guilty ones were under God’s control. 9. Then, he revealed the secrets of dreams because he was vigilant of spirit in times of temptation, and so by the Lord he was freed from his chains. The one who had served with some risk in a lower ranking household was made master over the household of a king, with no danger. His nobility, the fruit of purity and innocence, was returned to him by God the judge. He received what he had earned.b

Chapter 9 1. But there is equally another example of purity which comes to us from the other side, that is, the self control of women. 2. We read that there was Susannah, the daughter of Hilkiah, the wife of Joakim, beautiful in appearance, but even more beautiful in chara  Several of the verbs and adjectives in verses 6 and 7 are suggestive of heat and burning. Novatian was clearly making the connection between passionate emotions and the image of lust as being “on fire,” which may be an allusion to I Corinthians 7:8-9. b  Genesis 37, 39-41.

176

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 9, 2-6 – CHAPTER 10, 1

acter.a Her beauty did not make her call attention to her looks, for she was modest. Purity had enhanced her beauty, but besides purity, only nature.b 3. Two of the elders became obsessed with desire for her, forgetting the fear of God, as well as the advancing years of their declining age. The flame of resurfacing lust revived in them the burning passion of youth. So they planned an ambush against the modesty of this unfortunate bride. 4. Thieves of purity, they claimed to feel love, but in fact they felt hatred. When she resisted, they threatened to accuse her. The adulterers claimed to be informers against adultery. 5. She was caught in a dilemma brought on by their lust,c so she begged for help from the Lord, because she was not physically strong enough to fight them off. The Lord in heaven heard purity crying out to him, and although she was broken by injustice and would have been taken away to be punished, she was vindicated in the presence of her enemies and was released. She was trapped by life-threatening danger on two sides, and in both she was victorious – she escaped both lust and death. 6. I could go on with more examples, but that would be never ending. These two will suffice, especially since these are powerful examples by which purity is defended.

Chapter 10 1. Their reluctant awareness of noble blood could not weaken these two, though in some people this serves as a license for obscenity. Physical beauty and a well built body did not weaken them, Daniel 13. This is probably an implicit criticism of women wearing makeup, as we see in Clement of Alexandria, for example. c  Literally, “Between two rocks of lust…” Perhaps an early version of the expression, “caught between a rock and a hard place.” Novatian is conveying a double meaning: the fact that Susannah was trapped by two conspirators, but also that she was being forced to choose between two tragic possibilities – being raped by two men or being accused of a crime of immorality that may have carried a death sentence. a 

b 

177

122

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 10, 1-4 – CHAPTER 11, 1-3

123

though these frequently convince people that, like a kind of flower fading quickly, advancing age may provide an excuse for indulging in sensual pleasures. The early years of vigorous and healthy life, when wild boiling blood ignites the flames of nature and stirs up reckless passion in the innermost places, going so far as to endanger decency for its own satisfaction – all of this did not weaken them. No opportunity for secrecy, hiding away from witnesses, could weaken them, though as some believe this affords the greatest chance of being acquitted of a crime, when immune from accusation. No obligation imposed by the authorities commanding them, and no daring partners or allies could break their resolve, though these can often break even virtuous intentions. No incentives could make them relent, though often these can make even good people relent. No accusations, no threats, no punishments, not even the threat of death could unnerve them. 2. For nothing is so terrible, so cruel, so tragic, as the collapse of the high honor of purity. 3. In divine judgment these two were worthy of such reward, that one was exalted almost to the royal throne, and the other was granted peace with her husband and was vindicated by the death of her enemies. 4. We should always keep these and similar examples before our eyes, meditating on them day and night.

Chapter 11 1. Nothing completely delights the faithful soul as much as the clear conscience of unblemished modesty. The greatest pleasure is to conquer pleasure, and there is no greater victory than the victory of being rescued from passion. 2. Whoever conquers an enemy has power, but over another; whoever restrains lust has power over himself. Whoever defeats an enemy strikes down an external opponent; whoever suppresses passion overcomes an enemy within his house. 3. Every other evil is easier to conquer than sensuality, because no matter what form it takes, it is uncontrollable, and seductive. Of all the things that harm us, nothing is so difficult to subdue as the thing we love.

178

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 11, 4-7 – CHAPTER 12, 1-3

4. Whoever drives away the passions drives away restlessness [metus], since restlessness comes from the passions. 5. Whoever conquers the passions triumphs over sin; whoever conquers the passions has overcome the world itself. Whoever conquers the passions proves that he is a true disciple of Christ. Whoever conquers the passions shows that he tramples under foot an ancient curse of the human race.a Whoever conquers the passions gains everlasting peace for himself. Whoever conquers the passions receives his freedom, which is most difficult even for those of noble birth.b 6. Therefore, brothers and sisters, as these things teach us, we must always meditate on purity, which is easier since it is not dependent on any special knowledge. 7. For it is the will that achieves purity, and without the will purity would be obstructed. If the will perseveres, purity is ours. Then it does not need to be obtained, we simply benefit from what is ours.

Chapter 12 1. For what is purity but an honorable frame of mind that protects the body? This is so that the modesty that is expected of both sexes, having been sealed with austerity, might guard the faithfulness of the human race with regard to pure offspring. 2. In addition, brothers and sisters, the things that we see accompany purity and are related to it are first, godly fear, holy meditation on the teachings, a faithful spirit, and a mind inspired to study sacred religion – nothing that exalts the self beyond the limit, going beyond what is honorable, nothing opulent, nothing deceptively embellished, nothing meant to provoke or employed to flatter the eyes. 3. A woman who tries to stir up the emotions of another person is not modest, even if her virginity is maintained. May those be far from us who do not honor physical beauty, but rather expose it to

A reference to original sin, and possible allusion to Genesis 3:15, Romans 16:20. b  Or perhaps, “…even for the free-born.” a 

179

124

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 12, 3-8

125

dishonor. For a preoccupation with beauty is both a sign of an evil mind and a kind of ugliness. 4. The natural state of the body should remain free from embellishments, and no such violence should be done to the divine work. Any woman who is not satisfied with herself as she is will always be unhappy. Why does she change her hair color? Why does she wear eye shadow? Why does she use tricks to alter the appearance of her face? Finally, why does she look in the mirror, unless it is because she is afraid to be herself? 5. Also, the wardrobe of a modest woman must be modest. The faithful woman should avoid adultery by avoiding fancy colors.a To weave gold into clothing, as if that enhances the value, is to ruin the clothes. What are hard metals doing among the soft threads of the cloth, except to conceal weak shoulders and reveal the futile extravagance of an arrogant spirit? 6. Why are their necks burdened and obscured with exotic jewels that cost an exorbitant amount, even before the craftsman is paid?b A wife does not decorate herself with these, she only reveals her vices.c 7. Why are their fingers and ankles so loaded down with gold that they cannot come and go? Is it that custom demands it, or is it to show off one’s inheritance through empty ostentation? 8. How strange it is that they would accept such a burden! Wives are delicate in every way, except when it comes to carrying the baggage of their vices – in this they are stronger than men.

There is a play on words here, since adulterium can imply a contamination by mixture, so that an extravagantly colored gown could be called “adulterated.” Thus a mixture of colors is an adultery of clothing, which may attract attention and lead to sexual adultery. This may also contain an allusion to Leviticus 19:19 and/or Deuteronomy 22:1, in which the law prohibited the mixing of different kinds of fabric. b  For this and the following sentences, cf. Isaiah 3:16-24. c  Another ongoing play on words is that the word here translated “decorate,” ornare can mean to adorn or to honor. So the irony that Novatian is pointing to is that a woman thinks she is bringing honor to herself by decorating herself in this way, but she is really dishonoring herself. a 

180

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 13, 1-5 – CHAPTER 14, 1-2

Chapter 13 1. But I should return to where I began: both men and women must attend to purity at all times, and with total vigilance must stay within its limits. The nature of the body is such that it is constantly tempted, the flesh is always falling, and it drags purity down with it. 2. Of course there is the excuse that nature, which always drives people toward desire, is the very thing that repairs the ruins of a fallen race.a But sensual flirtation deceives. It does not lead to legitimate union and offspring produced of mutual love, but it casts people into sin. 3. Therefore we must struggle with every kind of virtue against these snares of the flesh, by which the devil inserts himself as both companion and guide. 4. Let everyone take up the works of Christ, as the apostle says.b Insofar as it is possible, let the spirit be in partnership with the flesh to restrain it, and let the senses be detached from anything having to do with the body. Vices should always be punished so that they might be hated and appear ugly before your eyes, and so that your modesty will overcome sin. Penance with grief is its own shameful testimony of sins committed. 5. No one should look too closely at the faces of strangers. Conversation should be brief and laughter should be subdued. For laughter is a sign of a careless and lazy spirit. One should even avoid an honorable association. When a person must evade bodily sin, he must not give in to the body at all. Consider how honorable it is to conquer vice, and how shameful it is to be conquered by it.

Chapter 14 1. It also must be said that adultery is not pleasure, but mutual abuse, for whatever destroys both the spirit and modesty cannot be a source of delight. 2. The spirit must suppress the urgings of Novatian’s point seems to be that one might argue that desire leads to procreation, which is a good. b  Possibly Ephesians 6:10-17. Cf. also Philippians 2:30, I Thessalonians 1:3. a 

181

126

On the Benefit of Purity, CHAPTER 14, 2-4

127

the flesh and restrain bodily impulse. The spirit has this power so that its members might serve under its authority, and like a genuine expert charioteer, it uses the reins of the heavenly teachings to turn back the impulses of the flesh from advancing beyond the lawful limits [metas] of the body.a Otherwise, that chariot of the body will be pulled beyond its boundaries into danger, and both the chariot itself as well as its charioteer may be destroyed. 3. So when this happens, or better yet, before this happens, one must beg for help from God against all agitations and vices. For only God, who thought it fitting to create humanity, is also powerful enough to provide help to humanity.b 4. I have dictated only a little, because I did not intend to write a book, but to send you some advice. Examine the Scriptures, and from their teachings seek out for yourselves even better examples of what I am saying. Dearest brothers and sisters, I wish you well.

a  The image is one of a charioteer approaching the end of the circus. The meta is the conical column that marks the turn. If the charioteer does not use the reins to turn the horses around the corner, effectively making a U-turn, the chariot would presumably continue on in a straight line and go off the track. Although that might not actually happen in practice, in this analogy the body is the chariot and the spirit (or soul) is the charioteer. b  In yet another play on words, Novatian is using a military image. In order to get “helps” (auxilia, which can also mean auxiliary legions) one must beg for help (auxilium) from God – literally, “from the divine camp (castris).”

182

DE SPECTACULIS ON THE SHOWS (AKA: THE SPECTACLES, ON THE PUBLIC SHOWS) NOVATIANUS, AS “ANTI-POPE,” C. 253 – 257 ce

Chapter 1 Novatian, To the People Standing Firm in the Gospela 1. It deeply saddens me and breaks my heart when I have no opportunity to write to you, just as it is also my loss when I cannot speak with you. Therefore, nothing restores so much joy and happiness to me as the chance to be with you again. For I imagine that I am with you when I speak to you though my letters. 2. So although I know that you take whatever I say to be trustworthy, and that you a  I Corinthians 15:1. In the Ante-Nicene Fathers series, this document is included under “Treatises Attributed to Cyprian,” and therefore the text begins with, “Cyprian…” rather than “Novatian.” Roberts, Alexander and James Donaldson, eds. The Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325, vol. 5 (Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886; Reprint, Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), 575–578. There is also a recent English translation in Francese, Christopher and R. Scott Smith, eds. Ancient Rome: An Anthology of Sources (Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2014), 220–226.

183

167

On the Shows, CHAPTER 1, 2-4 – CHAPTER 2, 1-2

168

do not doubt the truth of any of my words, yet even so, evidence confirms my sincerity. Therefore I demonstrate my affection by never passing up a chance to write. 3. As much as I am sure that you are serious in your way of life and faithful to the sacramental vow, nevertheless, there is no shortage of flattering proponents and indulgent patrons of the vices, who defend their right to sin, and what is even worse, they twist the judgment of the heavenly Scriptures into a justification of sin. They claim that the enjoyment of the shows is innocent and without blame, and it is even to be desired because it refreshes the mind.a In this way the force of ecclesiastical discipline is completely emasculated, and therefore it is wrongfully undermined, by the all-corrupting vices. They want to give the vices, not only an excuse, but influence. These few words will not suffice to teach you anything, but simply to remind you who have already been instructed that if a broken bone is not set properly, it may only appear to be healed, and can break again at the same place. 4. For the evil that is hardest to eliminate is the one that easily returns, particularly when the consent of the crowd affirms it and by its justification it is encouraged.

Chapter 2 1. Faithful people and those who call themselves Christians are not ashamed, I repeat, they are not ashamed to use the heavenly Scriptures to defend the tradition of the pagans’ empty superstitions that are incorporated into the shows. But to do so is to argue that divine authority supports idolatry.b 2. For when a show is conducted by pagans in honor of an idol, and it is attended by faithful Christians, then pagan idolatry is affirmed, and the true and Novatian uses a parallelism to describe the opposing argument: attendance at the shows does not require forgiveness of the soul because it is supposed to give refreshment of the mind, [remissionem animi]. b  For the background to this controversy, see Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.1.12, Tertullian, On the Shows/Spectacles 4-13, and Cyprian of Carthage, To Donatus. a 

184

On the Shows, CHAPTER 2, 2-4 – CHAPTER 3, 1-2

divine religion is trampled in defiance of God. I am embarrassed to report their excuses and rationalizations in this matter. 3. They say, “Where are these things mentioned in Scripture? Where are they prohibited? Besides, Elijah is a charioteer of Israel,a and David himself danced before the ark.b We read of harps, lyres, drums, flutes, lutes, and dancing choirs. Similarly, the apostle who fought the good fight describes our spiritual struggle against evil as combat, using images of boxing and wrestling.c And again, when he uses examples from racing, he puts before us the victory crown as the prize.d So why is the faithful Christian not permitted to watch what the divine writings are permitted to relate?” 4. At this point I am justified in saying that it would have been far better for them to be illiterate than to read the Scriptures in this way. For teachings and examples which are written down to encourage the practice of Gospel virtue have been turned into justifications for the vices. These things are written, not so that they may be watched, but so that our minds might be awakened to the greater pursuit of beneficial things, especially since the pagans pursue so many things that are not beneficial.

169

Chapter 3 1. Therefore, the point is to be motivated to practice virtue, not permission or freedom to watch pagan bumbling. If through all kinds of labors and pains defeat can be transformed to the point of reaching earthly gains, the Christian mind should be all the more enflamed to practice the virtue of the Gospel for the sake of divine rewards. 2. So for example, the fact that Elijah is a charioteer of Israel does not support going to the circus; for he did not race in the circus. And the fact that David endorsed dancing in the sight of God does nothing to support the idea of faithful II Kings 2:11. II Samuel 6:14. c  I Corinthians 9:26-27, Ephesians 6:12, II Timothy 4:7. d  I Corinthians 9:24-25, II Timothy 4:7-8. a 

b 

185

170

On the Shows, CHAPTER 3, 2-5 – CHAPTER 4, 1-2

171

Christians sitting in the theaters; for he never danced with the obscene writhing and flailing of lustful Greek drama. The harps, lyres, flutes, drums, and lutes praise God, not an idol. Therefore, this does not provide a pretext for Christians to watch things that are forbidden. 3. Sacred things are being turned into forbidden things by the craftiness of the devil. And this should make us ashamed, even if the sacred writings cannot. In fact, Scripture forbids some things even more by omitting them. Something that is passed over in silence, out of respect, is prohibited all the more. Otherwise, it would seem to have brought the faithful down to the lowest level. For often in teaching it is better for some things to be left unmentioned. 4. In fact, many times the things that are prohibited are the things that are enticing.a So even if these things which are passed over in silence are not included in the divine writings, severity speaks in place of lessons and reason teaches what Scripture omits. 5. Each person should simply deliberate with himself, and speak from the character of his convictions [persona professionis]: then he will never bring shame on himself. For the conscience that will owe nothing to anyone else will have the greater balance.b

Chapter 4 1. What has Scripture prohibited? It is forbidden to watch what it is forbidden to do. I say that Scripture condemns every kind of show when it does away with idolatry, the mother of all the games, and the origin of these futile and frivolous aberrations. 2. For what show takes place without an idol, what game without a sacrifice, what competition is not dedicated to the dead? What is the faithful Christian doing at these events if he is supposed to a  Novatian seems to be implying that sometimes Scripture omits certain prohibited behaviors in order to avoid making us desire them by reading about them. b  Another play on words, between pondero (meaning to weigh, but including to weigh mentally, or consider) and pondus (which means weight, but can also mean authority, significance, and balance).

186

On the Shows, CHAPTER 4, 2-5 – CHAPTER 5, 1

avoid idolatry? How could anyone who gets enjoyment from such shameful things remain holy? The one whose superstitions oppose God proves what he loves by what he watches. 3. In addition, such a person should know that these things are the inventions of demons, not of God. So the one who proudly exorcises demons in the church is praising their pleasures in the shows. And while he once renounced the devil in baptism, all of this is annulled when, after Christ, he rushes to the devil’s show. Thus he renounces Christ just as he once renounced the devil. 4. As I have already said, idolatry is the mother of all the games. Idolatry tempts faithful Christians with sensuality of the eyes and ears, so that they might come to it. Romulus was the first to dedicate circus shows to Consus, as god of the counsel (to carry off the Sabine women), and the rest followed suit. Whenever famine occupied the city, the people cried out and were given games and shows dedicated to Ceres and Bacchus, and later others were dedicated to the rest of the idols and to the dead. 5. Those Greek contests, whether they feature songs or instrumental music or rhetoric or feats of strength, they have as their benefactors various demons. And anything else that attracts the eyes or charms the ears of those who observe, if one were to ask about its origin and foundation, it would reveal that it is based on an idol, or a demon, or the dead. So the devil is the mastermind, because he knew that by itself idolatry is repulsive. It is combined with the shows so that it could be loved as a result of the enjoyment of sensual pleasure.

Chapter 5 1. Is it necessary to go into more detail or to describe the grotesque kinds of sacrifices in the games? In these games, sometimes it even happens that a human being is the sacrificial victim at the hands of a deceitful priesthood. His blood, still warm from the jugular, is drained out into the foaming bowl,a and still reeking, it is sava 

Revelation 16.

187

172

On the Shows, CHAPTER 5, 1-5

173

174

agely thrown in the face of an idol, as if the idol is thirsty and is being given a drink. And by the enjoyment of watching this gory show, the death of certain people is provided so that the spectators will learn to be violent. It is as if the ordinary madness of human nature would be insufficient if it were not also learned at the public expense. 2. A wild beast is raised at great expense to carry out a death sentence against a man, and so that it might act ferocious and crazed as the spectators watch. The wild animal is trained to have these skills. Perhaps it might have been more gentle if its more savage trainer had not taught it to be so violent. 3. Therefore, it should go without saying that whatever pompous things idolatry endorses, the contests themselves are futile, with their rivalries between the colors,a arguments over chariots, and applause for accomplishments. To rejoice over the fact that one horse was faster than the others, to mourn that one was slower, to calculate the ages of a team of horses by finding out which consuls were in office when they first ran, and thus to learn their ages, to track their pedigree, to trace their ancestors back as far as five generations – 4. How useless this whole business is, or more precisely, how shamefully disgraceful! I daresay the same person who calculates the whole lineage of a horse’s offspring from memory and recites it at great speed and without error, if you should ask him about the parents of Christ, he does not know, or if he does know, he is even more unfortunate. Or if I were to ask him what route he took to get to that show, he would confess that he went by way of the brothels, past the nude bodies of prostitutes, down the slippery slope of lust, through state-sanctioned crime, public debauchery, and universal disrespect for everyone. 5. Not that I am criticizing him for what he might have done, but he watched what should never be done, and the show uses lust to lead the eyes to idolatry. He is bold enough to bring the consecrated element with him into a brothel, if he can, since he hurries to the show after being dismissed from church, and as usual, he still carries the Eucharist within him. This unfaithful person circulates the cona 

Tertullian, On the Shows 9.

188

On the Shows, CHAPTER 5, 5 – CHAPTER 6, 1-5 (6)

secrated Body of Christ among the filthy bodies of whores, and he deserves more condemnation from the path he walked than from his enjoyment of the show.

Chapter 6 1. But now I should move on to the indecent banter of the stage. I am embarrassed to report the things that are said, and even more so to critique the things that happen: the plot twists, the deceptions of adulterers, wives having affairs, vulgar jokes, sleazy yesmen, and even toga wearing heads of households acting stupid or obscene. All of this is foolish; some of it is indecent. 2. And no one is off limits from that disgraceful dialogue, not even those in the noble classes or in respectable occupations. Nevertheless, everyone goes to the show. We can see that sin takes pleasure in joining with others to acknowledge vice, or to learn about it. The crowd is running into that brothel of public shame, to the instruction of obscenity, and what is learned in public is put into practice in private. And so it is legal to teach everything that is forbidden by the laws. 3. What is the faithful Christian doing among these things, when he is not even allowed to imagine such vices? Why does he find the portrayal of lust amusing? Is it so that by throwing off modesty itself he may become more courageous in his crimes? If a person makes a habit of watching something, he also learns to do it. Yet those unfortunate women who are being prostituted in the slavery of state-sanctioned lust, they are comforted by lurking in places where their sin is concealed. Those who sell their modesty undoubtedly blush to be noticed. 4. But that public calamity is witnessed by everyone, and by seeing it, they take it with them, and so the obscenity is worse than that of the prostitutes. They are searching for a way that it might be permissible to commit adultery with their eyes! 5 (6). Another sin is joined to this disgrace as a worthy partner. A  man, weakened in the limbs and softened beyond effeminate

189

175

On the Shows, CHAPTER 6, 5 (6) – CHAPTER 7, 1-3 – CHAPTER 8, 1

flaccidity, whose skill it is to convey words with his hands. I do not know what this one is, for he is neither a man nor a woman, but because of him a whole city gets carried away dancing the mythical lusts of the ancients. So even what has been obscured by time can be brought back to memory by the eyes, because we desire what is not allowed.

Chapter 7

176

1. The evils of the present time are not enough to satisfy lust, unless by going to the show one may also engage in the errors of a previous age. It is not allowed – in fact I maintain that faithful Christians are never permitted to go to see all those whom Greece trains in its worthless arts and sends out everywhere to seduce the ears. 2. One person mimics the raucous trumpet blasts of war, another makes mournful sounds by blowing air into pipes, yet another plays a double flute, accompanied by a chorus and the resonant voice of a soloist, as he strains to force the air from his belly to his upper body and expel it. He alternates between relaxing and restraining the air that is emitted and pouring it out through the fixed holes, and interrupting the sound with his fingertips, he works to speak with his fingers, so ungrateful he is to the Creator who gave him the gift of speech. 3. Why must I speak of the useless attention to comedy, or that great foolishness that is the crying of tragedy, or the noise of plucked strings? Even if these things were not dedicated to idols, faithful Christians still must not be attending or observing them, because even if they were not sinful, they contain the greatest vanity, which is least appropriate for the faithful.

Chapter 8 1. Another one of these insanities is seen by idle men as a business. A man damages his own body by feeding it until he gets fat, so

190

On the Shows, CHAPTER 8, 1-3 – CHAPTER 9, 1-2

that he will be sturdier, either to kill or to take a beating. The first victory, then, is to be able to want to eat beyond the limit of the human stomach, which wins for the victor the title and crown of gluttony. It is a scandalous transaction in which an unfortunate face is subjected to blows so that an even more unfortunate stomach can be fed. 2. In addition, those fights are disgusting: one man lying under another man who holds him in a degrading embrace, as they are entangled by entwining their limbs. In such a battle, one might be able to see who won, but decency has lost. See for yourself how one naked man jumps around while another strains with all his might to throw a bronze discus into the air. This is the glory of insanity. In fact, if you remove the spectator, you would expose the futility of it all. These shows must be avoided by faithful Christians, as I have said several times now. Our eyes and ears must be protected from such worthless, destructive, sacrilegious shows. 3. We quickly become accustomed to what we hear, and even more quickly to what we see. For if the human mind is led into vices all by itself, what will happen when it has these role models? And if the nature of the body is to slip and fall of its own free will, what will happen when it is being urged on? The heart must be kept away from these things.

Chapter 9 1. A  Christian has better shows, if he wants them. He has true and beneficial enjoyments, if he will remember them. He has the beauty of the world that he can see and revere, not to mention those things that he cannot yet observe. He should contemplate the rising and setting of the sun, each taking its turn to revive the day and the night, the sphere of the moon marking the seasons by its phases of waxing and waning, and the twinkling of constellations, constantly shining from the heights as they move along in orbit. 2. The whole year is divided into segments by the change of seasons, and the very days are arranged with the nights by the

191

177

On the Shows, CHAPTER 9, 2-3 – CHAPTER 10, 1

178

intervals of the hours. The great mass of the earth is balanced with the mountains, and the rivers are poured out from their springs. The seas are extended from shore to shore by their tides, as the air is extended, existing equally in the highest places and in the midst of everything by a unity of mutual harmony, invigorating all things by its sublime ethereality.a At times the clouds pour out the rains they have gathered, at other times the favorable weather returns when the clouds are once again dissipated. And in each of these dwell its particular inhabitants: in the air, the bird; in the waters, the fish; on the land, humanity. 3. I say that these things, along with the other divine works like them, should be the shows attended by faithful Christians. What theater made by human hands could be compared to these works? Although they may be built into huge structures of stone, mountain peaks are higher; and although the plated ceiling panels may shine with gold, they are outshined by the brightness of the stars. Human works could never be admired by anyone who recognizes that he is a son of God. Anyone who can admire anything other than God causes himself to fall from the highest standards of his integrity.

Chapter 10 1. I say that the faithful Christian should look to the sacred Scriptures. There he will discover sights worthy of the faith. He will see God establishing his world, and making that wonderful handiwork even better with human beings and other animals.b He will observe the world in the merited shipwreck of its sins, and will see the rewards of the pious and the punishments of the impious. He will see the waters dried up before the people,c and on the other hand he will see the waters come out of the rock for the people.d a  The Latin terms carry the connotation that the air, being so thin as to be transparent, yet necessary for life, “strengthens everything with its weakness.” b  Genesis 1-2. c  Exodus 14. d  Exodus 17:1-7.

192

On the Shows, CHAPTER 10, 1-4

He will observe the gathering of food that has descended from the heavens, without the need for plowing or threshing.a 2. He will witness rivers allowing dry crossings by holding back the streams of waters.b He will see in some people faith going up against the fire, a religion that overcomes the wild beasts and makes them tame.c He will even wonder at souls revived from death itself, and reflect on the astonishing cases of lives brought back from the tombs after their bodies were already decayed.d 3. And now in all these things he will see a much better show: that devil who had triumphed over the whole world lying vanquished under the feet of Christ.e How glorious this show is, brothers; how pleasing, how crucial it is always to consider one’s hope and to open the eyes to one’s salvation! 4. This is a show one will see even if his eyesight is lost. This show is not presented by a praetor or consul, but by the one who alone is before all things and above all things, in fact the one from whom all things come, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom be the praise and honor forever and ever. I wish you the best, brothers and sisters. Be well.

Exodus 16. Joshua 3:7-17. c  Daniel 6. This is an allusion to the martyrs of the Decian persecution. In the early Church, the story of Daniel in the lion’s den was a source of encouragement for suffering Christians. d  1 Kings 17:17-24, 2 Kings 4:8-37, 13:20-21, Ezekiel 37:1-14, Matthew 9:18-26, 27:50-53, Luke 7:11-15, John 11:1-44, Acts 9:36-41, 20:9-10. e  Genesis 3:15. a 

b 

193

179

DE CIBIS IUDAICIS ON THE JEWISH FOODS (AKA: JEWISH FOODS, ON THE JEWISH MEATS) NOVATIANUS, AS “ANTI-POPE,” C. 253 – 257 ce

Chapter 1 Novatian, To the People Standing Firm in the Gospela 1. Most holy brothers and sisters, I long for the day when I receive your letters, and I consider it to be one of the most blessed days, for in this time what else could make me happier? And yet, I think that the day when I keep my promise to write letters to you, sending back to you my kindred affection and paying my debt of love, is no less excellent, and equally to be counted among the exceptional days. 2. For nothing, most holy brothers and sisters, holds me bound in chains, or bothers and disturbs me with the stings of anxiety and concern, as much as the possibility that you might think you had suffered any loss brought about by my absence. I am determined to remedy this when I work hard to present myself to you by providing frequent letters. 3. Therefore, although the a 

I Corinthians 15:1.

195

89

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 1, 3-7

90

duty of the office and the administration I have accepted, and the very character of the ministry imposed on me, require that I am obligated to write letters, that obligation is increased all the more by you when you prompt me to respond to your numerous letters. And though I am inclined toward these traditions of love, you urge me even more when you reveal that you tirelessly stand firm in the Gospel. 4. Because of this, in my letters to you I do not intend to teach those who have already learned, so much as to inspire those who are prepared. For you who keep the Gospel pure and clear of all corrupt perversion of doctrine, in truth you also courageously defend it, you do not need anyone to be your teacher. By these things you show that you are disciples of Christ. 5. Therefore, as you run the race I cheer you on,a as you keep watch I help you stay awake,b and as you struggle against the spiritual forces of evil I encourage you.c As you press on toward the prize of the upward calling in Christ I push you,d so that you might hold on to nothing but the teaching and tradition of Christ, trampling under foot and completely rejecting the sacrilegious lies of the heretics as well as the useless fables of the Jews. And because you do this, you have the right to claim the authority of his name. 6. I believe I made it perfectly clear, in two earlier letters, how truly backward the Jews are, and how they are alienated from an understanding of their own law.e In these letters, I have shown how absolutely ignorant they are, and what is the true meaning of circumcision and the true meaning of the Sabbath. Their blindness still overwhelms them to a greater and greater extent. 7. In this letter it will be necessary briefly to explain something about their foods as well, since based on their diet they judge that they alone are holy and all the rest are unclean. I Corinthians 9:24-27, Galatians 5:7, II Timothy 4:7-8, Hebrews 12:1-2. Matthew 25:1-13, 26:41. c  Ephesians 6:12. d  Philippians 3:14. e  These letters are lost, but they are mentioned by Jerome in Illustrious Men 70. The titles of the two documents are listed as On Circumcision and On the Sabbath, however Jerome may not have known anything more about them than what is here in the present treatise. a 

b 

196

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 2, 1-6

Chapter 2 1. To begin, I must establish that the law is spiritual.a Certainly anyone who says that it is not spiritual is a blasphemer. To avoid blasphemy, they should admit that it is spiritual and read it spiritually. For certainly the things that are divine are to be taken as divine, and the things that are holy are to be claimed as holy. 2. But anyone who offers an earthly and human teaching from a sacred and spiritual text is rushing into serious error. One must beware so that this does not happen. 3. Yet one can take precautions against this, if the commands of God are interpreted in a way that is consistent with God and his majesty. His commands are not meant to be obscured, but revealed; his authority should not be rejected, but gladly accepted. However the commands of God are obscured when something is called unclean, because the creation of unclean things would bring dishonor on the Creator. 4. For to pass judgment on his own works would seem as though he has condemned what he has made, things which he had approved as good.b Thus it would also seem as though God is inconsistent, as certain heretics claim. It would appear to indicate that either God blessed things which were not clean, or he blessed things because they were both clean and good, but afterwards condemned them as bad, because apparently they are unclean. 5. Debate over this distortion will go on indefinitely if that interpretation of the Jews continues. They will all be cut offc by his power, and although they improperly delivered this to us, we dismiss it, so that we may render an appropriate interpretation of God’s own works, one that corresponds to divine law and spiritual discernment. 6. But first things first – I should begin at the beginning. Humanity’s first food was only seeds and the fruits of trees.d Then later guilt added the use of bread, as the position of the man’s body confirmed the guilt of his conscience.e For until this time, Romans 7:14. Genesis 1:10, 12, 18, 21, 31. c  Galatians 5:4, 12. d  Genesis 1:29. e  Genesis 3:17-19. a 

b 

197

91

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 2, 6-15

92

innocence had lifted up those whose consciences were clear, to pick their food from the trees. But committing sin brought the people down to the soil of the earth to gather grains. 7. Even later, the use of meat was added.a Divine grace grants to human needs the right kinds of foods suitable to the times. For milder food is required to feed young and immature people, but for the guilty, it took work to make food, obviously for their correction, so that they might not be free to sin again. If innocence had endured, work would not have reprimanded them. 8. And now humanity is no longer tending the Garden of Eden, but must develop the whole world. Therefore, in order to facilitate agriculture, a stronger food is available in meat, so that it might provide more strength to the human body. 9. As I said, all these things are by grace and divine providence. Otherwise, if something insufficient was given to those who are sturdier, they would grow faint and become too weak for their work. Or if something more robust was given to those who are weaker, it would be too much for their bodies and they would not be able to bear it. 10. However, afterwards when the law came along, it prescribed a division among the meats.b Some animals were classified as clean, and permitted for use; others were prohibited as unclean, and those who ate them would be made unclean. 11. Specifically, the clean animals are those that chew their cud and have divided hooves. The unclean animals are those with neither or only one of these characteristics.c 12. It is similar with the fish: only those that are covered in scales and have fins are clean, but the rest are unclean.d 13. Likewise with birds, the law introduces a division by which each is judged either renounced or clean.e 14. So the law created the greatest complication when it established a distinction of animals, and yet all animals were included in one kind of blessing.f 15. Therefore what should we say? That some animals are Genesis 9:3. Leviticus 11, Deuteronomy 14:3-21. c  Leviticus 11:3-8, Deuteronomy 14:6-8. d  Leviticus 11: 9-12, Deuteronomy 14:9-10. e  Leviticus 11:13-19, Deuteronomy 14:11-18. f  Genesis 1:22, Acts 10:15. a 

b 

198

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 2, 15-17 – CHAPTER 3, 1-2

unclean? For what else could “not clean” mean? That the law has removed them from use as food? What then? Are we back to what we already said? Is God therefore the Creator of unclean things, and is the Maker of all things to be blamed for the existence of the unclean things that he made? 16. Certainly to say this is ultimate and absolute insanity. It blames God for introducing things that are unclean, and accuses the divine majesty of making things that are condemned, even though they have also been pronounced very good,a and as good, they were subsequently blessed by this same God so that they might thrive and multiply.b 17. In addition, by command of the same Creator, Noah brought the unclean animals into the ark so that their offspring would be preserved.c Since they were protected, this proves that they are necessary. And since they are necessary, this proves that they are good, even though the division of clean and unclean was applied at that time. On the other hand, if these unclean animals should have been destroyed due to their impurity, their very existence could have been completely eliminated at that time.

Chapter 3 1. Therefore, so far we have shown by apostolic authority that the law is spiritual, and that it must be received spiritually, so that a divine and trustworthy interpretation of the law may be provided.d First and foremost, it must be understood that everything God created is clean, and all creation is purified by his authority.e It is not to be condemned, otherwise the blame falls back on the Creator. 2. Second, the law was given to the children of Israel so that they might make progress and go back to good morals, which they would have learned from their ancestors, but for the fact that they were corrupted in Egypt by contact with a barbarian nation. Genesis 1:31. Genesis 1:22. c  Genesis 7:2-3. d  Romans 7:14. e  Acts 10:15. a 

b 

199

93

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 3, 3-8

94

3. And finally, those Ten Commandments on tablets taught nothing new, but rather they were to remind the people of what they had forgotten, so that righteousness might be breathed into them, and the law might rekindle the fire of morality that had been put out. 4. However, to make progress they would have to understand that the faults which the law had condemned in animals were even more to be avoided in humans. For when an irrational animal is rejected because of some trait, that same trait is condemned all the more in rational humans. And if something that an animal has according to its own nature is declared a kind of impurity, a human is all the more guilty when it is discovered in him against his nature. 5. Therefore, animals were blamed so that people might be corrected. As one can see, people who have the same faults are judged as equal to the animals. Thus we can agree that animals were not condemned due to the guilt of the Creator, but rather the animals taught the people so that they would be able to go back to the pure nature of their own creation. For example, let us look at how the law divides clean and unclean. It says that the clean animals are those that both chew their cud and have divided hooves; the unclean have neither characteristic, or only one of the two.a Yet the one Creator made them all, and the one who made them blessed them.b 6. Therefore I determine that the creation of both is clean, because the one who created them is holy, and because created things have no guilt when they are what they were created to be. For a nature is never sinful, except when it follows a corrupted will. 7. So what does this mean? Human habits, actions and desires are depicted in animals, which when done by people are either clean or unclean. People are clean if they chew their cud, that is, if they always have the divine teachings in their mouth as a kind of food.c 8. They have divided hooves if they walk the path of life with a steady step, in innocence, righteousness, Leviticus 11:3-8, Deuteronomy 14:6-8. Genesis 1:22, Acts 10:15. c  The Latin verb is ruminare, or, to ruminate. a 

b 

200

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 3, 8-16

and with all virtue.a For the journey of those who have divided hooves is always sure-footed. When one part of the hoof slips, it is supported by the other part, and this stability maintains a secure foothold. 9. On the other hand, those people who do neither of these things are unclean. They neither walk steady in the virtues, nor do they ruminate on the divine teachings like food in their mouths. 10. Furthermore, those who do only one of these are also unclean, since they lack one, and do not excel in both. 11. So there are these three possibilities: There are those who do both, who are clean; they are the faithful. There are those who do only one of the two, who are corrupted; these are the Jews and heretics. And there are those who do neither, who are consequently unclean; they are the pagans. 12. Thus in the animals, the law holds up a kind of mirror to human life, in which people might examine the likeness of their actions. The result is that humans stand condemned, for whatever people have committed against their nature is more sinful than what is naturally ordained in animals, yet even they are guilty. 13. For example, fish with coarse scales are clean,b which means that in people rugged, hardy, tough, robust, and serious characteristics are approved. However, those without scales are unclean,c because smooth, slippery, fickle, and effeminate characteristics are denounced. 14. Or what does the law wish to convey when it says you must not eat the camel,d unless it is that by the example of an animal it condemns a wild life, turned this way and that by sins? 15. Or when it prohibits using the pig as food?e Certainly it criticizes a dirty, useless life that revels in filthy sins, investing itself not in generosity of spirit, but only in the flesh. 16. Or what

Literally, “They divide the hoof if…” Novatian’s point is that animals with divided hooves are more sure-footed, therefore to be a person with divided hooves is to walk the straight and narrow path, so to speak. b  Leviticus 11: 9, Deuteronomy 14:9. c  Leviticus 11:10–12, Deuteronomy 14:10. d  Leviticus 11:4, Deuteronomy 14:7. e  Leviticus 11:6–8, Deuteronomy 14:8. a 

201

95

96

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 3, 16-24

about the hare?a The law reprimands effeminate men.b 17. And who would cook the meat of the weasel as food?c But in fact, the law criticizes theft. 18. Who would eat a lizard?d Rather, the law hates an unpredictable, unstable life. 19. Who would eat a gecko?e Rather, the law curses pollution of the mind. 20. Who would eat a hawk, kite, or eagle?f Rather, the law hates robbers [raptores] living by violent crime. 21. Who would eat a vulture? Rather, the law curses those who seek to profit from another person’s death. 22. Or who would eat a raven?g Rather, the law curses impure or dark desires. 23. When the law forbids the ostrich,h it passes judgment on self-indulgence; when it forbids the owl,i it passes judgment on those who hate the light of truth; when it forbids the swan,j it passes judgment on the arrogant who stretch their necks to hold their heads up high; when it forbids the heron,k it passes judgment on those who talk too much, whose tongue is unrestrained; when it forbids the bat,l it passes judgment on those who seek out the darkness of error as if by night. 24. Therefore the law curses these traits, and those like them, in animals, although they are not shameful in animals, since they were born with them. But in humans these traits are disgraceful, because they are against nature, and they are not from creation. On the contrary, they are obtained by seeking after error.

Leviticus 11:6, Deuteronomy 14:7. The Latin reads, reformatos in feminam viros, or literally, “men who have been transformed into female[s].” c  Leviticus 11:27. d  Leviticus 11:29–30. e  Leviticus 11:29–30. f  Leviticus 11:13–14, Deuteronomy 14:12–15. g  Leviticus 11:15, Deuteronomy 14:14. h  Leviticus 11:16, Deuteronomy 14:15. i  Leviticus 11:17–18, Deuteronomy 14:16–17. j  The swan is not specifically mentioned, but perhaps Novatian is thinking of the stork, cf. Leviticus 11:19, Deuteronomy 14:18. k  Leviticus 11:19, Deuteronomy 14:18. l  Leviticus 11:19, Deuteronomy 14:18. a 

b 

202

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 4, 1-5

Chapter 4 1. So therefore these are the conclusions to which we have come. But there are also other reasons why many kinds of foods were withheld from the Jews. To accomplish this, many were called unclean, not to condemn the foods, but so that the people might be restricted. 2. For in the service of God it was appropriate that the people exercise moderation and self-control of appetite. These characteristics are always found to be close to reverence, or rather I should prefer to say that they are related to it like sisters; for luxury is the enemy of holiness. For if modesty is not valued in this way, how will reverence be valued? 3. Luxury dismisses the fear of God, and sensuality throws it away, replacing it with nothing but reckless desires. For when given free rein, such behavior spreads like wild fire; it becomes more and more costly, consuming modesty along with one’s inheritance like a fire burning through tinder. Or it is like an avalanche of falling mountain peaks, which not only falls on the person, but extends beyond him, bringing destruction on others as well. 4. Therefore to be restricted is the cure for the people’s lack of self-control. This is desirable, so that as much as luxury may be eliminated, to that extent good morals might increase. 5. For what else did they deserve, but to be limited in the enjoyment of the meats they might have used, when they dared to prefer the most bitter dishes of Egyptian food to the divine manna, putting the succulent meats of their enemies and masters over their freedom?a Surely it is fitting that anyone who wishes for slavery and who disdains the better food of freedom should be branded in this way.b

Exodus 16:3. Novatian is comparing the brand as a mark of slavery to the stigma (as he sees it) of the Jewish dietary laws, which are presented here as a kind of punishment, and a mark of disobedience and infidelity. a 

b 

203

97

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 5, 1-8

Chapter 5

98

1. Therefore, there was an ancient time when those shadows and types had to be enforced, so that some foods were to be avoided, and even though creation had approved them, the law had prohibited them. 2. Truly, now that Christ, the end of the law has come,a he has revealed all the obscurities of the law and all the mysteries that were concealed by the mists of antiquity. As it was justly said by the eminent teacher, and heavenly instructor, and author of perfect truth, To the clean all things are clean, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is clean, rather, both their minds and their consciences are corrupted.b 3. Similarly, in another place, For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected when received with thanksgiving: for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.c 4. Or again in another passage, The Spirit explicitly says that in the last days some will turn away from the faith, paying attention to seductive spirits, the doctrines of demons, by the hypocrisy of liars with cauterized consciences. They forbid marriage and abstain from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful who know God.d 5. And in yet another passage, Eat everything sold in the market, without asking questions.e 6. From this it is clear that all these foods were restored to their blessed state, now that the law is ended.f Not to restore the solemnity of foods, which were prohibited for a certain situation, but to lift the prohibition now that the freedom of the Gospel has been brought back through manumission. 7. The apostle proclaims, Neither food nor drink are good, but righteousness, peace, and joy.g 8. Similarly, in another place, Food for the stomach and the stomach for food; but God will do away with both the one and the other. However the body is not for immorality [ fornicationi], but for the Romans 10:4. Titus 1:15. c  I Timothy 4:4–5. d  I Timothy 4:1–3. e  I Corinthians 10:25. f  Romans 10:4. g  Romans 14:17. a 

b 

204

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 5, 8-18

Lord, and the Lord is for the body.a 9. God is not worshipped with the stomach or with foods, which the Lord says are to pass away, and which pass into the latrine when nature calls.b For whoever worships God through foods almost has his stomach as a god.c 10. I say that the true and holy and clean food is an acceptable faith, a clear conscience, and an innocent spirit. 11. Whoever feeds on these eats with Christ, and whoever dines like this is the guest of God.d Angels feed on these dishes, and martyrs sit at this table. 12. The law itself speaks on this point, One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of the Lord.e 13. Concerning this Christ said, My food is to do the will of the one who sent me, and to finish his work.f 14. In addition he said, You are looking for me not because you have seen signs but because you have eaten of my bread and you have been filled. But do not work for the food that perishes but for the food that endures for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on him the Father, God, has set his seal.g 15. I say that God is worshipped with righteousness, and selfcontrol, and the rest of the virtues. 16. For Zechariah also records where he said, If you eat or drink, is it not for yourselves that you eat or drink?h This means that food and drink are not meant for God, but for humanity, for God is not flesh, and so flesh does not satisfy him. He is not interested in these pleasures, nor does he enjoy our foods. 17. God rejoices only in our faith, only in innocence, only in truth, only in our virtues. These live, not in the stomach, but in the spirit, and we acquire them by the fear of God and heavenly reverence, not by earthly foods. 18. It follows from this that the apostle was right to criticize those superstitions that worship angels, when he said, …inflated a  I Corinthians 6:13. In Latin, fornicatio suggests specifically sexual immorality, i.e., prostitution or extramarital sex. b  Matthew 15:17, Mark 7:19, I Corinthians 6:13. c  Philippians 3:19. d  Revelation 3:20. e  Deuteronomy 8:3, Matthew 4:4. f  John 4:34. g  John 6:26–27. h  Zechariah 7:6.

205

99

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 5, 18 – CHAPTER 6, 1-4

by his fleshly mind, not holding on to Christ the head, by whom the whole body is bound together, and the members are fastened to each other with a clasp of love and brought together to grow in the Lord.a But they follow the prohibitions, Do not touch, and do not handle,b which certainly seem to have the appearance of reverence, since the body is disregarded.c Nevertheless this does not result in any righteousness at all, if we willingly revert to slavery to the elements, after we have died to them through baptism.d

Chapter 6

100

1. However, just because we are granted freedom with foods, this does not automatically mean that luxury is permitted. Just because the Gospel is more generous with us, it does not mean that self-control is obsolete. 2. What I am saying is that this is not about the stomach, but rather it shows the true meaning [ forma] of the foods. I have clarified what one is allowed to do,e not to promote the depth of greed, but to provide an interpretation of the law. 3. Besides, nothing has restrained indulgence as much as the Gospel, and no one has given laws decreasing the appetite like Christ. We read that he pronounced the poor blessed, the hungry and thirsty happy, and the rich miserable, because they serve the empire of the stomach and the appetite.f They think that the mother of sensuality would never disappoint or abandon her servants, and that their greed is evidence of happiness, but they always have less than they desire. 4. For when Christ gave preference to Lazarus, with his starvation and his sores and living among the dogs, over the rich

Colossians 2:18–19. Colossians 2:21. c  Colossians 2:23. d  Colossians 2:20. e  There may be a play on words here. The phrase quid iuris esset could literally mean, “what right may have existed,” or it could also be taken to mean, “what soup may have been eaten.” f  Matthew 5:3, 6, Luke 6:20–21. a 

b 

206

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 6, 4-9

man,a he was using them as examples to restrain those butchers of salvation, the stomach and the appetite. 5. Likewise, the apostle says, We have food and clothing, we are content with these.b The law has affirmed moderation and self-control; but what the apostle had written would be of too little value to be useful without also offering himself as an example of what he was writing, specifically when he correctly set down that greed is the root of all evils.c For luxury comes first, and then greed follows after it. Whatever the one has consumed with vices, the other makes up for with crimes. In a repeating vicious cycle, luxuries deplete whatever greed had gathered in. 6. Now there is no shortage among us of those who put on a persona by taking the name Christian, but who present themselves as examples and ministers of indulgence; their vices have come to the point where they drink early in the morning, even during times of fasting. They believe it is unchristian to drink after a meal, so instead they pour their wines into their veins when they are still empty and hollow, downing them as soon as they wake up. Apparently for those who drink, the wines taste better if they are not consumed along with food. 7. So you can see a new kind of person: still fasting and yet already drunk, not running to the pub, but carrying the pub around with them. If one of them greets anyone, he does not give him a kiss, instead he drinks to his health. What do they do after eating if they come to breakfast drunk? Or what condition will the sunset leave them in, when the sunrise sees them already tipsy from the wine? 8. But we should not consider what must be deplored as examples for us. That is to say we must accept only those examples that restore our spirit to a better condition, and although the Gospel gives us permission to use all foods, nevertheless it is understood that this permission is granted under the law of moderation and self-control. 9. For this law is especially appropriate for the faithful who are known to pray to God and give him thanks, giving thanks not only Luke 16:19–31. I Timothy 6:8. c  I Timothy 6:10. a 

b 

207

101

On the Jewish Foods, CHAPTER 6, 9 – CHAPTER 7, 1-3

during the day, but even at night. But this cannot happen if one is not vigorous enough to shake off the heaviness of sleep, and if food and wine have put a weight in the gut and the mind into a stupor.

Chapter 7 1. But when it comes to the use of foods, one must still take the greatest care. One must avoid supposing that this liberty goes so far as to grant permission to accept food that has been sacrificed to images. 2. For as it relates to the creation of God, everything is clean, and as long as it is not offered to images, it remains of God. But when it is sacrificed to demons it becomes polluted. 3. As soon as this happens, it is no longer of God, but it is dedicated to an idol. When it is taken as food, the one who takes it is fed by a demon, not by God, and sits down at the table with that image, not with Christ.a Even the Jews are correct on this point. And so we have examined the rationale behind these foods, and considered the counsel of the law, and we have learned of the benefit of the grace of the Gospel, and also preserved the austerity of self-denial, and rejected the impurity of what has been sacrificed to images. Now we must keep the Rule of Truth in all things, giving thanks to God through Jesus Christ, his Son, our Lord, to whom be the praise, and honor, and glory, forever and ever.

a 

I Corinthians 10:20–21.

208

INDEX OF BIBLICAL CITATIONS

Genesis 1 1-2 1:6 1:10 1:12 1:18 1:21 1:22 1:26 1:26-27 1:27 1:29 1:31 2:7 2:8-9 2:16-17 2:17 2:21-23 2:24 3:5 3:15 3:17-19 3:22-24 4:13 5:24 6:8 7:2-3 8:21

9:3 11:7 12:7 16 17:2-4 17:8 18 18:1 19:24 21 21:17 21:17-18 21:19-20 22:12 30:43 31:4-13 32 32:25 32:29 32:31 37 39-41 48:8-16 49:10 49:11

92 192 68 197 197 197 197 198, 199, 200 92 52, 108, 117 92 197 58, 197, 199 52 66 66 52 173 173 53 179, 193 53, 197 53 69 66 66 199 62, 63

Exodus 3:10 3:14

209

198 93 94 95 66 69 96 94, 96 97, 118 98 98 98 98 66 66 100 101 69 102 102 176 176 102 69 107

66 59

Index of Biblical Citations

7:1 13:14 14 16 16:3 17:1-7 20 20:2 31:18 33:20 Leviticus 11 11:3-8 11:4 11:6 11:6-8 11:9 11:9-12 11:10-12 11:13-14 11:13-19 11:15 11:16 11:17-18 11:19 11:27 11:29-30 19:19 20:10 Deuteronomy 4:2 4:24 4:39 5:15 6:4 8:3 13:1 14:3-21 14:6-8 14:7 14:8

14:9 14:9-10 14:10 14:11-18 14:12-15 14:14 14:15 14:16-17 14:18 18:15 22:1 28:66 29:5 32:8 (LXX)

104 66 192 193 203 192 66 66 62, 63 94

198 198, 200 201 202 201 201 198 201 202 198 202 202 202 202 202 202 180 174

90 65 56 62, 63 134 205 90 198 198, 200 201, 202 201

210

201 198 201 198 202 202 202 202 202 69 180 69 67 93

Joshua 1:2 3:7-17

66 193

I Samuel 2:25

82

II Samuel 6:14

185

I Kings 8:39 17:17-24

80 193

II Kings 2:11 4:8-37 13:20-21 19:16 19:19

185 193 193 62, 63 133

Psalms 2:7-8 2:8 8:7 19:6-7 22:16-19 33:13

118 71 139 79 124 63

Index of Biblical Citations

34:15 44:23 45:1 45:1-2 45:7-8 68:17 69:21-22 72:1 80:2 82:1 82:2 82:2-4 82:6 82:7 99:1 103:12 104:9 104:24 104:25 104:32 110:1 116:10 119:91 136:12 139:7-12 139:8-10 148:5 Isaiah 1:20 3:16-24 7:14 8:3 9:5-6 9:6 11:1 11:2 11:10 35:3-6 35:5-6 37:20 40:12 40:22

42:2-3 42:8 43:11 44:6-7 45:1 45:6-7 45:18 45:21 45:21-22 48:11 53:2-3 53:5 53:7 53:7-8 55:11 55:3 55:4-5 61:1 64:3 65:2 66:1 66:2

62, 63 156 86 79, 91, 92 129 68 124 71 67 104 104 104 87, 103 104 67 73 52 56 52 56 70, 75, 118 128 63 62, 63 63 62 56

Jeremiah 17:5

62 180 69, 77, 113 124 96, 99, 124 106, 138 69 129 70 77 70 133 56, 133 56

211

70 57 133 133 118 57 57 133 57 57 70 70 124 70 86 70 70 129 65 70, 124 57, 62, 63 57

82, 88

Ezekiel 1:13 1:15-21 1:18 1:22 10:9-19 10:12 37:1-14

68 68 68 67 68 68 193

Daniel 3:27 6 13

67 193 177

Hosea 1:7 6:3

76 70

Index of Biblical Citations

8:6 13:4

57 133

Joel 3:1-2

127

Amos 4:11

97

Habakkuk 3:3

78

Zechariah 7:6

205

Malachi 3:6

59

Wisdom of Solomon 1:7 6:19

54 86

Matthew 1:1-17 1:23 3:16 4:4 5:3 5:6 5:8 5:10-12 5:32 6:9 6:14-15 6:18-35 7:6 9:2-8 9:4 9:18-26 10:18 10:21-22 10:28 10:29-30

69, 75 77, 113 129 205 206 206 126 156 174 67 82 82 157 80 80 193 156 156 116 67

212

10:32 10:33 10:37 10:38 10:39 11:27 12:8 12:32 15:14 15:17 16:16 16:17 16:19 16:24 16:25 18:20 18:32 19:4-6 19:16 19:17 19:19 20:30-31 22:1-14 22:41-46 23:8 25:1-13 26:41 27:38 27:50-53 28:18 28:19 28:20

154 82, 150 156 156 156 74, 119, 136, 139 75 131 74 205 118 118 73 156 156 82 150 173 135 133, 135 174 69, 75 150 75 134 196 196 133 193 103 67 77

Mark 1:10 2:5-12 2:28 3:29 7:19 10:7-8 10:11-12 10:17 10:18

129 80 75 131 205 173 174 135 133, 135

Index of Biblical Citations

11:25 13:9 13:12-13 15:27 16:15 16:19

82 156 156 133 67 75, 119

Luke 1:35 3:22 3:23-31 3:23-34 4:16-21 5:20-26 6:5 6:20-21 6:22-23 7:11-15 10:22 11:2 12:6-7 12:8 12:9 12:10 14:15-24 14:26 16:18 16:19-31 18:1-8 18:18 18:19 19:10 20:37-38 21:12 21:16-19 23:33 24:51

113 129 69, 75 74 129 80 75 206 156 193 119, 139 67 67 154 150 131 150 156 174 116, 207 130 135 58, 133, 135 53 116 156 156 133 75

John 1:1 1:1-2 1:1-3

86 79, 134 75, 92, 105

1:3 1:4-5 1:10 1:11 1:14 1:15 1:18 1:32-33 2:19 2:25 3:3-7 3:13 3:16 3:19-21 3:31-32 3:34 3:34-35 3:35 4:8 4:10-14 4:21 4:24 4:34 5:17-19 5:19 5:22 5:26 6:26-27 6:38 6:38-39 6:40 6:46 6:51 6:62 7:37-38 8:14-15 8:17-18 8:23 8:38 8:42 8:51

213

79, 81, 84, 86, 90, 91, 92, 119, 136 64 75, 79, 82, 85 79, 81 72, 79, 82, 92, 94, 95, 97, 106, 108, 112, 116, 134 83 83, 94, 99, 124, 136 129 105 80 170 79, 80 138 68 82, 105 129 104 139 64 129 63 61, 63, 64 205 109, 124 83, 105 75 83 205 75, 118 105 88 83 83 75, 83 129 84 118 84, 85 76 75, 85 86

Index of Biblical Citations

8:58 10:11 10:18 10:27-28 10:30 10:31 10:31-36 10:32 10:33 10:36 11:1-44 11:26 11:41-42 11:42 12:28 13:3-8 14:2-3 14:3 14:6 14:7 14:7-9 14:8 14:9 14:10 14:12 14:15-16 14:16-17 14:18 14:23 14:26 14:28 15:1-2 15:9-10 15:15 15:21 15:26 16:7 16:13 16:14 17:3 17:3-4 17:5 19:18

20:17 20:22-23 20:28

75, 86, 98 135 105 87 80, 87, 88, 120, 127 87 87 88 122 88, 122 193 88 140 119 118 97 150 75 76, 123 123, 124 94 123 123, 127 140 125 125 127, 128 128 125 125 75, 118, 125 125 125 125 125 127, 128 128 128 88 89 119 75, 79, 90, 118 133

Acts 1:9-11 4:12 9:36-41 10:15 19:26 20:9-10

75 76 193 198, 199, 200 57 193

Romans 1:3 1:8 1:20 7:14 8:9 8:19-21 8:26 8:35-37 9:5 10:4 10:9-10 11:33 11:36 14:4 14:17 16:20

75, 82 144 58, 66 62, 197, 199 130 53 130 156 80, 134 204 76 68 58 71 204 179

I Corinthians 2:9 2:12 3:6-8 3:16 3:16-17 5:5 6:9 6:13 6:15 6:15-20 6:18 6:19

214

118 127 80, 104, 134

65 130 121 170 130 174 174 205 170 174 174 130, 170

Index of Biblical Citations

7:8-9 7:40 8:6 9:24-25 9:24-27 9:26-27 10:20-21 10:25 11:3 12:3 12:4 12:4-31 14:32 15:1 15:19 15:25-28 15:41 15:50

176 130 134 185 196 185 208 204 173 131 128 129 131 183, 195 82 139 51 73

II Corinthians 3:15-18 3:17 4:13 5:10 6:16 11:2

2:1 4:5 4:10 4:11 4:11-16 5:23 5:25-27 5:25-32 5:28-30 6:10-17 6:12 6:13 6:13-17 6:16

65 134 94 67 129 171 131 129 173 129, 181 185, 196 170 157 149

65 130 128 53 130, 170 131, 171

Philippians 2:6 2:6-8 2:6-11 2:8 2:9 2:12 2:30 3:14 3:19 3:21

109 75, 76 108 110 110 144 181 196 205 139

Galatians 1:1 1:11-12 3:20 4:4 5:4 5:7 5:12 5:17 5:22-23

80 80 133, 134 75 197 196 197 130 130

Colossians 1:15 1:16 1:17 2:11 2:15 2:18-19 2:20 2:21 2:23

94, 105, 106, 138 79, 82 54 107 107 206 206 206 206

Ephesians 1:9-10 1:14 1:20-22 1:22

112 130 103 139

I Thessalonians 1:3 4:3 5:8

215

181 174 157

Index of Biblical Citations

I Timothy 1:1 1:17 2:5 4:1-2 4:1-3 4:4-5 6:8 6:10 6:16 II Timothy 1:9 1:11 4:7 4:7-8 4:8 Titus 1:15 Hebrews 1:3 5:7 7:7 10:26 12:1 12:1-2

82 58, 74 75, 106, 112, 140 131 204 204 207 207 94, 133, 151

112 134 185 185, 196 154

James 1:17 4:8

59 57

I Peter 1:23 3:22

170 103

II Peter 1:4 2:5 3:10-12 3:12

86 66 54 68

I John 1:5-7 4:2 4:12

64 94 83

Revelation 3:20 3:21 4:6 16 19:13 21:1 22:18-19

204

119 140 102 144 155 196

216

205 156 67, 68 187 79, 108 54 90