am the resurrection; I am the gate; I am the good shepherd; and in the Revelation, I am the alpha and omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. We may, therefore, boldly say, that as the gospels are the first fruits (or most excellent part) of the Scriptures, so the gospel of John is the first-fruits of the gospels; the sense of which no person can conceive except he who reclines on the breast of Jesus, and who can receive from Jesus his mother Mary, and make her his own. He must be another John, who was shewn by Jesus as another Jesus. For, he who is perfect does not himself live, but Christ lives in him; and since Christ lives in him, he says to Mary concerning him, Behold thy son, Christ himself."* "This," says he, "we ought to understand, that as the law was a shadow of good things to come, so is the gospel as it is understood by the generality. But that which John calls the everlasting gospel, and which may be more properly called the spiritual, instructs the intelligent very clearly concerning the Son of God. Wherefore the gospel must be taught both corporeally and spiritually; and, when it is necessary, we must preach the corporeal gospel, saying to the carnal, that we know nothing but Jesus Christ and him crucified. But when persons are found confirmed in the spirit, bringing forth fruits in it, and in love with heavenly wisdom, we must impart to them the Logos returning from his bodily state, in that he was in the beginning with God."† "There are," says he, "who partake of the Logos which was from the beginning, the Logos that was with God, and the Logos that was God, as Hosea, Isaiah and Jeremiahi, and any others that speak of him as the Logos of God, and the Ουδείς γαρ εκείνων ακράτως εφανέρωσεν αυτε την θεοτητα ὡς Ιωαννης, παραςησας αυτον λεγοντα, Εγω ειμι το φως τε κόσμε, εγω ειμι ἡ ὁδος, και ἡ αλήθεια, και ἡ ζωη εγω ειμι ή ανάςασις, εγω ειμι ή θύρα, εγω ειμι ὁ ποιμὴν ὁ καλος και εν τη Αποκαλυψει, Εγω ειμι το α και το ω, ἡ αρχη και το τελος, ὁ πρῶτος και δ' εσχατος. Τολμητεον τοινυν είπειν απαρχήν μεν πασων γραφων είναι τα ευαγγελια, των δε ευαγγελίων απαρχην το κατά Ιωάννην, οὗ τον νουν ουδείς δύναται λαβειν μη αναπεσων επι το ςηθός Ιησου, μηδὲ λαβων απο Ιησου την Μαρίαν γενομενην και αυτε μητέρα και τηλικετον δε γενεσθαι δει τον εσομενον αλλον Ιωαννην, ὡς τε οιονει τον Ιωαννην δειχθηναι οντα Ιησεν από Ιησε και γαρ πας ὁ τετελειωμένες ζῇ ουκετι, αλλ' εν αυτῷ ζη Χριςος, και επει ζῇ εν αυτῷ Χριςος, λέγεται περί αυτε τη Μαρία, Ιδε ὁ υἱος σε ὁ Χριςος. "Comment. in Johan." II. p. 5. Ρ. † Και τετο δε ειδηναι εχρην, ότι ώσπερ εςι νομος σκιαν περιέχων των μελλόντων αγαθών, ύπο το κατ' αληθειαν καταγγελλομενο νομε δηλομενων, ούτω και ευαγγέλιον σκιαν μυστηρίων Χριςε διδασκει, το νομιζομενον ύπο παντων των εντυγχανοντων νοεισθαι. Ὁ δε φησιν Ιωαννης ευαγγέλιον αιωνιον, οικείως αν λεχθησομενον πνευματικον, σαφως παρίςησι τοις νοεσι τα παντα ενώπιον περί αυτό το υἱε τε Θεε. Διοπερ αναγκαιον πνευματικώς και σωματικώς χριστιανίζειν, και όπε μεν χρη το σωματικον κηρύσσειν ευαγγελιον, φάσκοντα μηδεν είδεναι τοις σαρκινοις η Ιησεν Χρισον και τετον εσαυρωμένον, τετο ποιητεον· επαν δε εὑρεθωσι κατηρτισ μενοι τῷ πνευματι, και καρποφόρεντες εν αυτῷ, ερώντες τε της ουρανια σοφιας, μεταδοτέον αυτοίς το λογο, επανελθοντος απο το σεσαρκωσθαι, εφ' δ ην εν αρχή προς τον Θεον. Ibid, P. 9. (P.) Logos that was with him; but there are others who know nothing but Jesus Christ and him crucified, the Logos that was made flesh; thinking they have every thing of the Logos when they acknowledge Christ according to the flesh. Such is the multitude of those who are called Christians." Again, he says, "the multitude (i. e. the great mass or body) of believers are instructed in the shadow of the Logos, and not in the true logos of God, which is in the open heaven."† For These humble Christians of Origen, who got no further than the shadow of the Logos, and the simplices and idiota of Tertullian, were probably the simplices credentium of Jerome, who as well as the heretics, he says, "did not understand the Scriptures as became their majesty.' had these simple Christians, within the pale of the church, inferred from what John says of the Logos and from what Christ says of himself that he was, personally considered, equal to the Father, Jerome would hardly have said that they did not understand the Scriptures according to their majesty: for he himself would not pretend to a perfect knowledge of the mystery of the Trinity. "For these simple Christians," he says, "the earth of the people of God brought forth hay, as for the heretics it brought forth thorns." the intelligent, I suppose, it produced richer fruits. For From all these passages, and others quoted before, especially the major pars credentium of Tertullian, I cannot help inferring, that the doctrine of Christ being any thing more than a man, who was crucified and rose from the dead, (the whole doctrine of the incarnation of the eternal Logos, that was in God, and that was God,) was considered as a more abstruse and refined doctrine, with which there was no occasion to trouble the common people; and it is evident that this class of Christians was much staggered by it, and offended when they did hear of it. This could never have been the case if it had been supposed to be the doctrine of the apostles, and to have been delivered by them as the most * Ούτω τοινυν οἱ μεν τινες μετεχεσιν αυτε τε εν αρχη λογο και προς τον Θεον λογο, και Θεου λογο, ώσπερ Ωσηε και Ησαίας και Ιερεμίας, και ει τις ἕτερος τοιυτον ἑαυτον παρεζησεν ὡς τον λογον κυριΒ, η τον λογον γενεσθαι προς αυτον έτεροι δε οἱ μηδεν είδοτες ει μη Ιησεν Χρισον και τετον εςαυρωμενον, τον γενόμενον σαρκα λογον, το παν νομισαντες είναι το λογο Χρισον κατα σαρκα μόνον γνώσκεσι τοιςτον δε εςι το πλήθος των πεπιςευκεναι νομι ζομενων. "Comment in Johan." II. pp. 48, 49. (P.) * Τα δε πλήθη των πεπιτευκεναι νομιζομένων τη σκια το λόγε, και ουχι τῷ αληθινῳ λόγῳ Θες εν τῷ ανεωγοτι ουρανῳ τυγχανοντι, μαθητευεται. Ibid. p. 52. (Ρ.) "Quod dicitur super terram populi mei spinæ et fænum ascendent, referri potest et ad hæreticos, et ad simplices quosque credentium, qui non ita scripturam intelligunt ut illius convenit majestati. Unde singula singulis coaptavimus, ut terra populi Dei hæreticis spinas, imperitis quibusque ecclesiae foenum afferat." In Is. xxxii. 20, Opera, IV. p. 118. (P.) essential article of Christian faith, in which light it is now represented. Such terms as scandalizare, expavescere, &c. used by Tertullian,* and ragaσσe by Origen,† can only apply to the case of some novel and alarming doctrine, something that men had not been accustomed to. In the language of Origen, it had been the corporeal gospel only, and not this spiritual and mysterious one, that they had been taught. ‡ I am, &c. LETTER IX. Of the Light in which the Unitarians were considered in later Ages, and of the State of the Common People at all Times. REV. SIR, Ir appears from what has been advanced in the preceding letters, that, whatever might be the opinion of the more learned Christians, and of course that of the writers, the bulk of the common people were not brought to a belief, or rather a profession, of the doctrine of the Trinity till a pretty late period; and that, if they did not of themselves leave the communion of the orthodox, and raised no disturbance in the church, they were connived at. In fact, they were considered by the more learned as simple, ignorant people, who knew no better, and who acquiesced in the doctrine of the simple humanity of Christ, because they were incapable of comprehending that of his divinity, and the sublime doctrine of three persons in one God. This must have been the case with the oi Toλ201, the many, or multitude, of Athanasius. This writer, considering the violence of his character, speaks of the Unitarians with a good deal of tenderness on account of the difficulty of understanding the doctrine of the Trinity. In my former letters [p. 77] I quoted a passage from him in which he represents them as the oi woλ201, the many, and persons of a low understanding, but by no means as persons out of the church. Contrasting them with the Gnostics and the Arians, he says, "Some persons considering what is human in Christ, seeing him thirsting, labouring, and suffering, and degrading him to a mere man, sin indeed greatly; but they may readily obtain forgiveness if they repent, alleging the weakness of the flesh; and they have See supra, pp. 19, 24. + See supra, p. 109. the apostle himself administering pardon to them, and, as it were, holding out his hand to them, while he says, Truly, great is the mystery of godliness, God was manifest in the flesh."* According to him, many persons within the pale of the church must either have been Unitarians, or have believed the doctrine of the Trinity without understanding it; which in fact is no belief at all. Being consulted what was to be done with respect to the spread of the doctrine of Paulus Samosatensis, after acknowledging that persons of low understandings were chiefly infected with it, and quoting what Paul says of the great mystery of godliness, God manifest in the flesh, he says, "those who understand the subject accurately, are few, but all pious persons may hold the faith delivered to them." But what kind of holding must it be, when they had no perfect understanding of what they held? Gregory Nazianzen also represents the common people as excusable for their errors, and safe, from not being disposed to scrutinize into things. I have also observed many instances in writers so late as Chrysostom, who, notwithstanding the prevalence of a different mode of treating Unitarians, use the term heretics in its ancient and proper sense for the Gnostics only. Here I shall content myself with one from Athanasius. He says, "The heretics make to themselves another Maker of the universe besides the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ." Indeed Athanasius considered the proper Unitarians, in a more favourable light than he did either the Gnostics or the Arians.|| Cyril of Jerusalem complains of heretics, both Unitarians and Arians, in the bosom of the church. "Now," says he, "there is an apostacy; for men have departed from the faith, some confounding the Son with the Father, others Όταν τινες, εις τα ανθρωπινα βλεποντες, ίδωσι τον κύριον διψώντα, η κοπιώντα, η παςχοντα, και μόνον φλυαρήσωσιν ὡς κατ' ανθρωπου το σωτηρος, ἁμαρτάνεσι μεν μεγαλως δύνανται δε όμως ταχέως μεταγινωσκοντες λαμβανειν συγγνώμην, έχοντες προφασιν την τε σώματος ασθενειαν' εχεσι γαρ και τον αποστολον συγγνωμην αυτοις νέμοντα, και οιονει χειρα αυτοίς εν τῷ λεγειν εκτείνοντα, ότι και ομολογομένως μεγα εςι το της ευσεβειας μυςήριον, Θεος εφανερώθη εν σαρκί. "In illud Evangelii Quicunque dixerit," &c. Opera, I. p. 975. (P.) † Ότι την μεν ακρίβειαν αυτης επιζητειν ολίγων εςι, την δε πιςιν κατέχειν άπαντων των TPOS TOY EGY EUTEL Owy. "De Incarnatione, contra P. Samosat." Opera, I. p. 592. (P.) † Τοις μεν γαρ τε λας ταχα αν και συγγινωσκομεν τετο πασχεσιν, οὓς σώζει πολλακις To abaσansor. Oratio xxi. Opera, I. p. 388. (P.) § οἱ δε από των αἱρέσεων αλλον ἑαυτοῖς αναπλαττοντι δημιεργον των παντων παρα του πατερα το κύριο ἡμων Ιησε Χρισε. “ De Incarnatione,” Opera, I. p. 55. (Ρ.) See Opera, I. pp. 975, 977, 978. (P.) daring to say that Christ was created out of nothing. For merly heretics were open, but now the church is full of concealed heretics."* The more zealous of the orthodox bishops might do something more than complain, but in general it may be presumed that they did not trouble themselves about the matter. Complaints of the spread of heresy, both that of the Unitarians, and that of the Arians, in Asia Minor, in the time of Basil, by himself and his contemporaries, are without end. Those opinions prevailed more especially among the common people, though many of the clergy were also infected; and what is remarkable, the malcontents complained loudly of his innovations, both with respect to ancient doctrines and ancient practices. For some time Basil, called the Great, was obliged to give way to the storm, and retire from his diocese, though this it seems was a dangerous step; for, according to him, unremitted vigilance was necessary to guard their flocks from seduction. "If any person," ," he says, " leave his diocese for the shortest time, he leaves the common people exposed." + I think we may learn from Facundus, who wrote so late as the reign of Justinian, that in his time many of the common people were well known to consider Christ as a mere man, and yet were not disturbed on that account. As the As the passage in his writings from which I infer this is a pretty remarkable one, I shall cite it at full length. Speaking of the condemnation of Theodorus, in whose favour he is writing, he says, that"in condemning him they condemned all those who thought as he did, even though they afterwards changed their opinion --What will they do with Martha, and then with Mary, the sisters of Lazarus, who were particularly attached to our Lord while he was upon earth? And yet both of them, first Martha and then Mary, are said to speak to him thus: Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother had not died; who, though they thought that he was the Son of God who was to come into the world, yet would they not have said if thou hadst been here, if they had believed him to be God omnipresent. They therefore only thought as Theodorus is said to have done, and were excommunicated along with him; and how many of this kind do we know, Νυν δε εςιν αποφασία απέςησαν γαρ οἱ ανθρωποι της ορθής πίστεως, και οἱ μεν υἱσπα. τοριαν καταγγέλλωσιν, οἱ δε τον Χριστόν εξ εκ οντων εις το είναι παρενεχθεντα λεγειν τολμωσιν, και προτερον μεν ησαν φανεροι αἱρετικοι, νυν δε πεπληρωται ή εκκλησία nexρUμμεVY aiρETIKWY. Cyrilli Catech. xv. p. 209. See also p. 5. (P.) † Ει γαρ τις και προς το βραχύτατον της εκκλησίας αυτε αποφαιη εκδίοτες αφήσει τις Naas tois epedpeveσ. Basilii Epist. lxx. Opera, III. p. 114. (P.) |