(NOTE: The electronic text obtained from The Electronic Bible Society was
not completely corrected. EWTN has corrected all mistakes found.)


METHODIUS

FROM THE DISCOURSE ON THE RESURRECTION.(1)

[Translated by the Rev. William R. Clark, M.A., Vicar of St. Mary Magdalen,
Taunton.]

PART I.

   I. God did not make evil,(2) nor is He at all in any way the author of
evil; but whatever failed to keep the law, which He in all justice
ordained, after being made by Him with the faculty of free-will, for the
purpose of guarding and keeping it, is called evil. Now it is the gravest
fault to disobey God, by overstepping the bounds of that righteousness
which is consistent with free-will.

   II. Now the question has already been raised,(3) and answered,(4) that
the "coats of skins"(5) are not bodies. Nevertheless, let us speak of it
again, for it is not enough to have mentioned it once. Before the
preparation of these coats of skins, the first man himself acknowledges
that he has both bones and flesh; for when he saw the woman brought to him:
"This is now," he cried,(6) "bone of m bone and flesh of my flesh." And
again: She shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man.(7) For
this cause shall unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh." For I
cannot endure the trifling of some who shamelessly do violence to
Scripture, in order that their opinion, that the resurrection is without
flesh, may find support; supposing rational bones and flesh, and in
different ways changing it backwards and forwards by allego-rizing. And
Christ confirms the taking of these things as they are written, when, to
the question of the Pharisees about putting away a wife, He answers: "Have
ye not read that He which made them at the beginning made them male and
female; and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father,"(8) and so
on.

  III. But it is evidently absurd to think that the body will not co-exist
with the soul in the eternal state, because it is a bond and fetters; in
order that, according to their view, we who are to live in the kingdom of
light may not be for ever condemned to be bondmen of corruption. For as the
question has been sufficiently solved, and the statement refitted in which
they defined the flesh to be the soul's chain, the argument also is
destroyed, that the flesh will not rise again, lest, if we resume it, we be
prisoners in the kingdom of light.

   IV. In order, then, that man might not be an undying or ever-living
evil, as would have been the case if sin were dominant within him, as it
had sprung up in an immortal body, and was provided with immortal
sustenance, God for this cause pronounced him mortal, and clothed him  with
mortality. For this is what was meant by the coats of skins, in order that,
by the dissolution of the body, sin might be altogether destroyed from the
very roots, that there might not be left even the smallest particle of root
from which new shoots of sin might again burst forth.

   V. For as a fig-tree, which has grown in the  splendid buildings(9) of
a temple, and has reached a great size, and is spread over all the joints
of  the stones with thickly-branching roots, ceases  not to grow, till, by
the loosening of the stones  from the place in which it sprung up, it is
altogether torn away; for it is possible for the stones  to be fitted into
their own places, when the fig tree is taken away, so that the temple may
be preserved, having no longer to support what was the cause of its own
destruction; while the fig-tree, torn away by the roots, dies; in the same
way also, God, the builder, checked by the seasonable application of death,
His own temple, man, when he had fostered sin, like a wild fig-tree,
"killing,"(10) in the words of Scripture, "and  making alive," in order
that the flesh, after sin is withered and dead, may, like a restored
temple, be raised up again with the same parts, uninjured and immortal,
while sin is utterly and entirely destroyed. For while the body still
lives, before it has passed through death, sin must also live with it, as
it has its roots concealed within us even though it be externally checked
by the wounds inflicted by corrections and warnings; since, otherwise, it
would not happen that we do wrong after baptism, as we should be entirely
and absolutely free from sin. But now, even after believing, and after the
time of being touched by the water of sanctification, we are oftentimes
found in sin. For no one can boast of being so free from sin as not even to
have an evil thought. So that it is come to pass that sin is now restrained
and lulled to sleep by faith, so that it does not produce injurious fruits,
but yet is not torn up by the roots. For the present we restrain its
sprouts, such as evil imaginations, "test any root of bitterness springing
up trouble"(1) us, not suffering its leaves to unclose and open into
shoots; while the Word, like an axe, cuts at its roots which grow below.
But hereafter the very thought of evil will disappear.

   VI. But come now, since there is need of many examples in matters of
this kind, let us examine them particularly from this point of view,
without desisting till our argument ends in clearer explanation and proof.
It appears, then, as if an eminent craftsman were to cast over again a
noble image, wrought by himself of gold or other material, and beautifully
proportioned in all its members, upon his suddenly perceiving that it had
been mutilated by some infamous man, who, too envious to endure the image
being beautiful, spoiled it, and thus enjoyed the empty pleasure of
indulged jealousy. For take notice, most wise Aglaophon, that, if the
artificer wish that that upon which he has bestowed so much pains and care
and labour, shall be quite free from injury, he will be impelled to melt it
down, and restore it to its former condition. But if he should not cast it
afresh, nor reconstruct it, but allow it to remain as it is, repairing and
restoring it, it must be that the image, being passed through the fire and
forged, cannot any longer be preserved unchanged, but will be altered and
wasted. Wherefore, if be should wish it to be perfectly beautiful and
faultless, it must be broken up and recast, in order that all the
disfigurements and mutilations inflicted upon it by treachery and envy, may
be got rid of by the breaking up and recasting of it, while the image is
restored again uninjured and unalloyed to the same form as before, and made
as like itself as possible. For it is impossible for an image under the
hands of the original artist to be lost, even if it be melted down again,
for it may be restored; but it is possible for blemishes and injuries to be
put off, for they melt away and cannot be restored; because in every work
of art the best craftsman looks not for blemish or failure, but for
symmetry and correctness in his work. Now God's plan seems to me to have
been the same as that which prevails among ourselves. For seeing  man, His
fairest work, corrupted by envious  treachery, He could not endure, with
His love  for man to leave him in such a condition, lest  he should be for
ever faulty, and bear the blame  to eternity; but dissolved him again into
his  original materials, in order that, by remodelling, all the blemishes
in him might waste, away and  disappear. For the melting down of the statue
in the former case corresponds to the death and  dissolution of the body in
the latter, and the remoulding of the material in the former, to the
resurrection after death in the latter; as also  saith the prophet
Jeremiah, for he addresses the Jews in these words, "And I went down to the
potter's house; and, behold, he wrought a work upon the stones. And the
vessel which he made in his hands was broken; and again he made another
vessel, as it pleased him to make it. And the word of the Lord came to me,
saying, Cannot I do to you as this potter, O house of lsrael? Behold, as
the clay of the potter are ye in my hands."(2)

   VII. For I call your attention to this, that, as I said, after man's
transgression the Great Hand was not content to leave as a trophy of
victory its own work, debased by the Evil One, who wickedly injured it from
motives of envy; but moistened and reduced it to clay, as a potter breaks
up a vessel, that by the remodelling of it all the blemishes and bruises in
it may disappear, and it may be made afresh faultless and pleasing.

   VIII. But it is not satisfactory to say that the universe will be
utterly destroyed, and sea and air and sky will be no longer. For the whole
world will be deluged with fire from heaven, and burnt for the purpose of
purification and renewal; it will not, however, come to complete ruin and
corruption. For if it were better for the world not to be than to be, why
did God, in making the world, take the worse course? But God did not work
in vain, or do that which was worst. God therefore ordered the creation
with a view to its existence and continuance, as also the Book of Wisdom
confirms, saying, "For God created all things that they might have their
being; and the generations of the world were healthful, and there is no
poison of destruction in them."(3) And Paul clearly testifies this, saying,
"For the earnest expectation of the creature(4) waiteth for the
manifestation of the sons of God. For the creature(4) was made subject to
vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him that subjected the same in
hope: because the  creature(4) itself also shall be delivered from the
bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God."(1)
For the creation was made subject to vanity, he says, and he expects that
it will be set free from such servitude, as he intends to call this world
by the name of creation. For it is not what is unseen but what is seen that
is subject to corruption. The creation, then, after being restored to a
better and more seemly state, remains, rejoicing and exulting over the
children of God at the resurrection; for whose sake it now groans and
travails,(2) waiting itself also for our redemption from the corruption of
the body, that, when we have risen and shaken off the mortality of the
flesh, according to that which is written, "Shake off the dust, and arise,
and sit down, O Jerusalem,"(3) and have been set free from sin, it also
shall be freed from corruption and be subject no longer to vanity, but to
righteousness. Isaiah says, too, "For as the new heaven and the new earth
which I make, remaineth before me, saith the Lord, so shall your seed and
your name be;"(4) and again, "Thus saith the Lord that created the heaven,
it is He who prepared the earth and created it, He determined it; He
created it not in vain, but formed it to be inhabited."(5) For in reality
God did not establish the universe in vain, or to no purpose but
destruction, as those weak-minded men say, but to exist, and be inhabited,
and continue. Wherefore the earth and the heaven must exist again after the
conflagration and shaking of all things.

   IX. But if our opponents say, How then is it, if the universe be not
destroyed, that the Lord says that "heaven and earth shall pass away;"(6)
and the prophet, that "the heaven shall perish as smoke, and the earth
shall grow old as a garment;"(7) we answer, because it is usual for the
Scriptures to call the change of the world from its present condition to a
better and more glorious one, destruction; as its earlier form is lost in
the change of all things to a state of greater splendour; for there is no
contradiction nor absurdity in the Holy Scriptures. For not "the world" but
the "fashion of this world" passeth away,(8) it is said; so it is usual for
the Scriptures to call the change from an earlier form to a better and more
comely state, destruction; just as when one calls by the name of
destruction the change from a childish form into a perfect man, as the
stature of the child is turned into manly size and beauty. We may expect
that the creation will pass away, as if it were to perish in the burning,
in order that it may be renewed, not however that it will be destroyed,
that we who are renewed may dwell in a renewed world without taste of
sorrow; according as it is said, "When Thou lettest Thy breath go forth,
they shall be made, and Thou shalt renew the  face of the earth;"(9) God
henceforth providing for the due temperature of that which surrounds it.
For as the earth is to exist after the present age,(10) there must be by
all means inhabitants for it, who shall no longer be liable to death, nor
shall marry, nor beget children, but live in all happiness, like the
angels, without change or decay. Wherefore it is silly to discuss in what
way of life our bodies will then exist, if there is no longer air, nor
earth, nor anything else.

   X. But in addition to what has been said, there is this point worth
consideration, since it misleads very much, if we may be outspoken about
matters of such importance, Aglaophon For you said that the Lord declared
plainly(11) that those who shall obtain the resurrection shall then be as
the angels.(12) You brought this objection: The angels, being without
flesh, are on this account in the utmost happiness and glory. We must then,
as we are to be made equal to the angels, be like them stripped of flesh,
and be angels. But you overlooked this, my excellent friend, that He who
created and set in order the universe out of nothing, ordained the nature
of immortal beings to be distributed not only among angels and ministers,
but also among principalities, and thrones, and powers. For the race of
angels is one, and that of principalities and powers another; because
immortal beings are not all of one order, and constitution, and tribe, and
family, but there are differences of race and tribe. And neither do the
cherubim, departing from their own nature, assume the form of angels; nor,
again, do angels assume the form of the others. For they cannot be anything
but what they are and have been made. Moreover, man also having been
appointed by the original order of things to inhabit the world, and to rule
over all that is in it, when he is immortal, will never be changed from
being a man into the form either of angels or any other; for neither do
angels undergo a change from their original form to another. For Christ at
His coming did not proclaim that the human nature should, when it is
immortal, be remoulded or transformed into another nature, but into what it
was before the fall. For each one among created things must remain in its
own proper place, that none may be wanting to any, but all may be full:
heaven of angels, thrones of powers, luminaries of ministers; and the more
divine spots, and the undefiled and untainted luminaries, with seraphim,
who attend the Supreme Council, and uphold the universe; and the world of
men. For if we granted that men are changed into angels, it would follow
that we say that angels also are changed into powers, and these into one
thing and the other, until our argument proceed too far for safety.

   XI. Neither did God, as if He had made man badly, or committed a
mistake in the formation of him, determine afterwards to make an angel,
repenting of His work, as the worst of craftsmen do; nor did He fashion
man, after He had wished originally to make an angel, and failed; for this
would be a sign of weakness, etc. Why even then did He make man and not
angels, if He wished men to be angels and not men? Was it because He was
unable? It is blasphemy  to suppose so. Or was He so busy in making the
worse as to loiter about the better? This  too is absurd. For He does not
fail in making what is good, nor defers it, nor is incapable of it; but He
has the power to act how and when He pleases, inasmuch as He is Himself
power. Wherefore it was because He intended man to be man, that He
originally made him so. But if He so intended--since He intends what is
good--man is good. Now man is said to be composed of soul and body; he
cannot then exist without a body, but with a body, unless there be produced
another man besides man. For all the orders of immortal beings must be
preserved by God, and among these is man. "For," says the Book of Wisdom,
"God created man to be immortal, and made him to be an image of His own
eternity."(1) The body then perishes not; for man is composed of soul and
body.

   XII. Wherefore observe that these are the very things which the Lord
wished to teach to the Sadducees, who did not believe in the resurrec- tion
of the flesh. For this was the opinion of the Sadducees. Whence it was
that, having contrived the parable about the woman and the seven brethren,
that they might cast doubt upon the resurrection of the flesh, "There came
to Him,"(2) it is said, "the Sadducees also, who say that there is no
resurrection." Christ, then, if there had been no resurrection of the
flesh, but the soul only were saved, would have agreed, with their opinion
as a right and excellent one. But as it was, He answered and said, "In the
resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the
angels in heaven,"(2) not on account of having no flesh, but of not
marrying nor being married, but being henceforth incorruptible. And He
speaks of our being near the angels in this respect, that as the angels in
heaven, so we also in paradise, spend our time no more in marriage-feasts
or other festivities. but in seeing God and cultivating life, under the
direction of Christ. For He did not say "they shall be angels," but like
angels, in being, for instance, crowned, as it is written, with glory and
honour; differing a little from the angels,(3) while near to being angels.
Just as if He had said. while observing the fair order of the sky, and the
stillness of the night, and everything illumined by the heavenly light of
the moon, "the moon shines like the sun." We should not then say that He
asserted that the moon was absolutely the sun, but like the sun. As also
that which is not gold, but approaching the nature of gold, is said not to
be gold, but to be like gold. But if it were gold, it would be said to be,
and not to be like, gold. But since it is not gold, but approaching to the
nature of it, and has the appearance of it, it is said to be like gold; so
also when He says that the saints shall. in the resurrection be like the
angels, we do not understand Him to assert that they will then  be actually
angels, but approaching to the condition of angels. So that it is most
unreasonable to say, "Since Christ declared that the saints in the
resurrection appear as angels, therefore their bodies do not rise,"
although the very words employed give a clear proof of the real state of
the case. For the term "resurrection" is not applied to that which has not
fallen, but to that which has fallen and rises again; as when the prophet
says, "I will also raise up again the  tabernacle of David which has fallen
down."(4)  Now the much-desired tabernacle of the soul is fallen, and sunk
down into "the dust of the earth."(5) For it is not that which is not dead,
but that which is dead, that is laid down. But  it is the flesh which dies;
the soul is immortal. So, then, if the soul be immortal, and the body  be
the corpse, those who say that there is a resurrection, but not of the
flesh, deny any resurrection; because it is not that which remains
standing, but that which has fallen(6) and been laid down, that is set up;
according to that which is written, "Does not he who fills rise again, and
he who turns aside return?"(7)

   XIII. Since flesh was made to border on incorruption and corruption,
being itself neither the one nor the other, and was overcome by corruption
for the sake of pleasure, though it was the work and property of
incorruption; therefore it became corruptible, and was laid in the dust of
the earth. When, then, it was overcome by corruption, and delivered over to
death through disobedience, God did not leave it to corruption. to be
triumphed over as an inheritance; but, after conquering death by the
resurrection, delivered it again to incorruption, in order that corruption
might not receive the property of incorruption, but. incorruption that of
corruption. Therefore the apostle answers thus, "For this corruptible must
put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality."(1) Now the
corruptible and mortal putting on immortality, what else is it but that
which is "sown in corruption and raised in incorruption,"(2)--for the soul
is not corruptible or mortal; but this which is mortal and corrupting is of
flesh,--in order that, "as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall
also bear the image of the heavenly?"(3) For the image of the earthy which
we have borne is this, "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."(4)
But the image of the heavenly is the resurrection from the dead, and
incorruption, in order that "as Christ was raised up from the dead by the
glory of the Father, so we also should walk in newness of life."(5) But if
any one were to think that the earthy image is the flesh itself, but the
heavenly image some other spiritual body besides the flesh; let him first
consider that Christ, the heavenly man, when He appeared, bore the same
form of limbs and the same image of flesh as ours, through which also He,
who was not man, became man, that "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ
shall all be made alive."(6) For if He bore flesh for any other reason than
that of setting the flesh free, and raising it up, why did He bear flesh
superfluously, as He purposed neither to save it, nor to raise it up? But
the Son of God does nothing superfluously. He did not then take the form of
a servant uselessly, but to raise it up and save it. For He truly was made
man, and died, and not in mere appearance, but that He might truly be shown
to be the first begotten from the dead, changing the earthy into the
heavenly, and the mortal into the immortal. When, then, Paul says that
"flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God,"(7) he does not give a
disparaging opinion of the regeneration of the flesh, but would teach that
the kingdom of God, which is eternal life, is not possessed by the body,
but the body by the life. For if the kingdom of God, which is life, were
possessed by the body, it would happen that the life would be consumed by
corruption. But now the life possesses what is dying, in order that "death
may be swallowed up in victory"(8) by life, and the corruptible may he seen
to be the possession of incorruption and immortality, while it becomes
unbound and free from death and sin, but the slave and servant of
immortality; so that the body may be the possession of incorruption, and
not incorruption that of the body.

   XIV. If, then, out of such a drop, small, and previously without any
existence, in its actual state of moistness, contractedness, and
insignificance, in fact out of nothing, man is brought into being, how much
rather shall man spring again into being out of a previously existing man?
For it is not so difficult to make anything anew after it has once existed
and fallen into decay, as to produce out of nothing that which has never
existed. Now, in case we choose to exhibit the seminal fluid discharged
from a man, and place by it a corpse, each by itself, which of them, as
they both lie exposed to view, will the spectators think most likely to
become a man--that drop, which is nothing at all, or that which has already
shape, and size, and substance? For if the very thing which is nothing at
all, merely because God pleases, becomes a man, how much rather shall that
which has existence and is brought to perfection become again a man, if God
pleases? For what was the purpose of the theologian Moses, in introducing,
under a mystical sense, the Feast of Tabernacles in the Book of Leviticus?
Was it that we may keep a feast to God, as the Jews with their low view of
the Scriptures interpret it? as if God took pleasure in such tabernacles,
decked out with fruits and boughs and leaves, which immediately wither and
lose their verdure. We cannot say so. Tell me, then, what was the object of
the Feast of Tabernacles? It was introduced to point to this real
tabernacle of ours, which, after it was fallen down to corruption through
the transgression of the law, and broken up by sin, God promised to put
together again, and to raise up in incorruptibility, in order that we may
truly celebrate in His honour the great and renowned Feast of Tabernacles
at the resurrection; when our tabernacles are put together in the perfect
order of immortality and harmony, and raised up from the dust in
incorruption; when the dry bones,(9) according to the most true prophecy,
shall hear a voice, and be brought to their joints by God, the Creator and
Perfect Ar-tificer, who will then renew the flesh and bind it on, no more
with such ties as those by which it was at first held together, but by such
as shall be for ever undecaying and indissoluble. For I once saw(10) on
Olympus, which is a mountain of Lycia, fire bursting up from the ground
spontaneously on the summit of the mountain; and by it was standing an
Agnos tree, so flourishing, green, and shady, that one might suppose a
never-failing stream of water had nourished its growth, rather than what
was really the case. For which cause, therefore, though the natures of
things are corruptible, and their bodies consumed by fire, and it is
impossible for things which are once of an inflammable nature to remain
unaffected by fire; yet this tree, so far from being burnt, is actually
more vigorous and green than usual, though it is naturally inflammable, and
that too when the fire is glowing about its  very roots. I certainly cast
some boughs of trees from the adjoining wood on to the place where the fire
burst forth, and they immediately caught fire and were burnt to ashes. Now,
then, tell me why it is that which cannot bear even to feel the heat of the
sun, but withers up under it unless it be sprinkled with water, is not
consumed when beset by such fiery heat, but both lives and thrives? What is
the meaning of this marvel? God appointed this as an example and
introduction to the day that is coming, in order that we may know more
certainly that, when all things are deluged with fire from heaven, the
bodies which are distinguished by chastity and righteousness will be taken
up by Him as free from all injury from the fire as from cold water. For
truly, O beneficent and bountiful Lord, "the creature that serveth Thee,
who art the Maker, increaseth his strength against the unrighteous for
their punishment, and abateth his strength for the benefit of such as put
their trust in Thee;"(1) and at Thy pleasure fire cools, and injures
nothing that Thou determinest to be preserved; and again, water burns more
fiercely than fire, and nothing opposes Thine unconquerable power and
might. For Thou createdst all things out of nothing; wherefore also Thou
changest and transformest all things as Thou wilt, seeing they are Thine,
and Thou alone art God.

   XV. The apostle certainly, after assigning the planting and watering to
art and earth and water, conceded the growth to God alone, where he says,
"Neither is he that planteth anything, neither he that watereth; but God
that giveth the increase."(2) For he knew that Wisdom, the first-born of
God, the parent and artificer of all things, brings forth everything into
the world; whom the ancients called Nature and Providence, because she,
with constant provision and care, gives to all things birth and growth.
"For," says the Wisdom of God, "my Father worketh hitherto, and I work."(3)
Now it is on this account that Solomon called Wisdom the artificer of all
things, since God is in no respect poor, but able richly to create, and
make, and vary, and increase all things.

   XVI. God, who created all things, and provides and cares for all
things, took dust from the ground, and made our outer man.

PART II.

THE SECOND DISCOURSE ON THE RESURRECTION.(4)

   For instance, then, the images of our kings here, even though they be
not formed of the more precious materials--gold or silver--are honoured by
all. For men do not, while they treat with respect those of the far more
precious material, slight those of a less valuable, but honour every image
in the world, even though it be of chalk or bronze. And one who speaks
against either of them, is not acquitted as if he had only spoken against
clay, nor condemned for having despised gold, but for having been
disrespectful towards the King and Lord Himself. The images of God's
angels, which are fashioned of gold, the principalities and powers, we make
to His honour and glory.

PART III.

I. FROM THE DISCOURSE ON THE RESURRECTION.(5)

   I. Read the Book on the Resurrection by St. Methodius, Bishop and
Martyr, of which that which follows is a selection, that the body is not
the fetter of the soul, as Origen thought, nor are souls called by the
prophet Jeremiah "fettered" on account of their being within bodies. For he
lays down the principle that the body does not hinder the energies of the
soul, but that rather the body is carried about with it, and cooperates in
whatever the soul commits to it. But how are we to understand the opinion
of Gregory(6) the theologian, and many Others?

   II. That Origen said that the body was given to the soul as a fetter
after the fall, and that previously it lived without a body; but that this
body which we wear is the cause of our sins; wherefore also he called it a
fetter, as it can hinder the soul from good works.

   III. That if the body was given to the soul after the fall as a fetter,
it must have been given as a fetter upon the evil or the good. Now it is
impossible that it should be upon the good; for no physician or artificer
gives to that which has gone wrong a remedy to cause further error, much
less would God do so. It remains, then, that it was a fetter upon evil. But
surely we see that, at the beginning, Cain, clad in this body, committed
murder; and it is evident into

what wickedness those who succeeded him ran. The body is not, then, a
fetter upon evil, nor indeed a fetter at all; nor was the soul clothed in
it for the first time after the fall.

   IV. That man, with respect to his nature, is most truly said to be
neither soul without body, nor, on the other hand, body without soul; but a
being composed out of the union of soul and body into one form of the
beautiful. But Origen said that the soul alone is man, as did Plato.

   V. That there is a difference between man and other living creatures;
and to them are given varieties of natural form and shape, as many as the
tangible and visible forces of nature produced at the command of God; while
to him was given the form and image of God, with every part accurately
finished, after the very original likeness of the Father and the only-
begotten Son. Now we must consider how the saint states this.

   VI. He says that Phidias the statuary, after he had made the Pisaean
image of ivory, ordered oil to be poured out before it, that, as far as he
could secure it, it might be preserved imperishable.

   VII. He says, as was said also by Athenagoras,(1) that the devil is a
spirit, made by God, in the neighbourhood of matter, as of course the rest
of the angels are, and that he was entrusted with the oversight of matter,
and the forms of matter. For, according to the original constitution of
angels, they were made by God, in His providence, for the care of the
universe; in order that, while God exercises a perfect and general
supervision over the whole, and keeps the supreme authority and power over
all--for upon Him their existence depends--the angels appointed for this
purpose take charge of particulars. Now the rest of them remained in the
positions for which God made and appointed them; but the devil was
insolent, and having conceived envy of us, behaved wickedly in the charge
committed to him; as also did those who subsequently were enamoured of
fleshly charms, and bad illicit intercourse with the daughters of men.(1)
For to them also, as was the case with men, God granted the possession of
their own choice. And how is this to be taken?

   VIII. He says that by the coats of skins is signified death. For he
says of Adam, that when the Almighty God saw that by treachery he, an
immortal being, had become evil, just as his deceiver the devil was, He
prepared the coats of skins on this account; that when he was thus, as it
were, clothed in mortality, all that was evil in him might die in the
dissolution of the body.

   IX. He holds that St. Paul had two revelations. For the apostle, he
says, does not suppose paradise to be in the third heaven, in the opinion
of those who knew how to observe the niceties of language, when he says, "I
know such a man caught up to the third heaven; and I know such a man,
whether in the body or out of the body, God knoweth, that was caught up
into paradise."(2) Here he signifies that he has seen two revelations,
having been evidently taken up twice, once to the third heaven, and once
into paradise. For the words, "I know such a man caught up," make it
certain that he was personally shown a revelation respecting the third
heaven. And the words which follow, "And I know such a man, whether in the
body or out of the body, God knoweth, that he was caught up into paradise,"
show that another revelation was made to him respecting paradise. Now he
was led to make this statement by his opponent's having laid it down from
the apostle's words that paradise is a mere conception, as it is above the
heaven, in order to draw the conclusion that life in paradise is
incorporeal.(3)

   X. He says that it is in our power to do, or to avoid doing, evil;
since otherwise we should not be punished for doing evil, nor be rewarded
for doing well; but the presence or absence of evil thoughts does not
depend upon ourselves. Wherefore even the sainted Paul says," For what I
would, that do I not, but what I would not, that I do;"(4) that is to say,
"My thoughts are not what I would, but what I would not." Now he says that
the habit of imagining evil is rooted out by the approach of physical
death,(5)--since it was for this reason that death was appointed by God for
the sinner, that evil might not remain for ever.

   But what is the meaning of this statement? It is to be noted that it
has been made by others of our Fathers as well. What is the meaning, seeing
that those who meet death find in it at the time neither increase nor
decrease of sins?

II. A SYNOPSIS OF SOME APOSTOLIC WORDS FROM THE SAME DISCOURSE.(6)

   I. Read a compendious interpretation of some apostolic words from the
same discourse. Let us see, then, what it is that we have endeavoured to
say respecting the apostle. For this saying of his, "I was alive without
the law once,"(7) refers to the life which was lived in paradise before the
law, not without a body, but with a body, by our first parents, as we have
shown above; for we lived without concupiscence, being altogether ignorant
of its assaults. For not to have a law according to which we ought to live,
nor a power of establishing what manner of life we ought to adopt, so that
we might justly be approved or blamed, is considered to exempt a person
from accusation. Because one cannot lust after those things from which he
is not restrained, and even if he lusted after them, he would not be
blamed. For lust is not directed to things which are before us, and subject
to our power, but to those which are before us, and not in our power. For
how should one care for a thing which is neither forbidden nor necessary to
him? And for this reason it is said, "I had not known lust, except the law
had said, Thou shalt not covet."(1) For when (our first parents) heard, "Of
the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shall not eat of it; for
in the day thou eatest thereof thou shall surely die,"(2) then they
conceived lust, and gathered it. Therefore was it said, I had not known
lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet;" nor would they have
desired to eat, except it had been said, "Thou shalt not eat of it." For it
was thence that sin took occasion to deceive me. For when the law was
given, the devil had it in his power to work lust in me; "for without the
law, sin was dead;"(3) which means "when the law was not given, sin could
not be committed." But I was alive and blameless before the law, having no
commandment in accordance with which it was necessary to live; "but when
the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which
was ordained to life, I found to be unto death."(4) For after God had given
the law, and had commanded me what I ought to do, and what I ought not to
do, the devil wrought lust in me. For the promise of God which was given to
me, this was for life and incorruption, so that obeying it I might have
ever-blooming life and joy unto incorruption; but to him who disobeyed it,
it  would issue in death. But the devil, whom he calls sin, because he is
the author of sin, taking occasion by the commandment to deceive me to
disobedience, deceived and slew me, thus rendering me subject to the
condemnation, "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shall surely
die."(2) "Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just and
good;"(5) because it was given, not for injury, but for safety; for let us
not suppose that God makes anything useless or hurtful. What thou? "Was
then that which is good made death unto me?"(6) namely, that which was
given as a law, that it might be the cause of the greatest good? "God
forbid." For it was not the law of God that became the cause of my being
brought into subjection to corruption, but the devil; that he might be made
manifested who, through that which is good, wrought evil; that the inventor
of evil might become and be proved the greatest of all sinners. "For we
know that the law is spiritual;"(7) and therefore it can in no respect be
injurious to any one; for spiritual things are far removed from irrational
lust and sin. "But I am carnal, sold under sin;"(7) which means: But I
being carnal, and being placed between good and evil as a voluntary agent,
am so that I may have it in my  power to choose what I will. For "behold I
set before thee life and death;"(8) meaning that death would result from
disobedience of the spiritual law, that is of the commandment; and from
obedience to the carnal law, that is the counsel of the serpent; for by
such a choice "I am sold" to the devil, fallen under sin. Hence evil, as
though besieging me, cleaves to me and dwells in me, justice giving me up
to be sold to the Evil One, in consequence of having violated the law.
Therefore also the expressions: "That which I do, I allow not," and "what I
hate, that do I,"(9) are not to be understood of doing evil, but of only
thinking it. For it is not in our power to think or not to think of
improper things, but to act or not to act upon our thoughts. For we cannot
hinder thoughts from coming into our minds, since we receive them when they
are inspired into us from without; but we are able to abstain from obeying
them and acting upon them. Therefore it is in our power to will not to
think these things; but not to bring it about that they shall pass away, so
as not to come into the mind again; for this does not lie in our power, as
I said; which is the meaning of that statement, "The good that I would, I
do not;"(10) for i do not will to think the things which injure me; for
this good is altogether innocent. But "the good that I would, I do not; but
the evil which I would not, that I do;" not willing to think, and yet
thinking what I do not will. And consider whether it was not for these very
things that David entreated God, grieving that he thought of those things
which he did not will: "O cleanse Thou me from my secret faults. Keep Thy
servant also from presumptuous sins. lest they get the dominion over me; so
shall I be undefiled, and innocent from the great offence."(11) And the
apostle too, in another place: "Casting down imaginations, and every high
thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into
captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ."(12)

   II. But if any one should venture to oppose this statement, and reply,
that the apostle teaches that we hate not only the evil which is in
thought, but that we do that which we will not, and we hate it even in the
very act of doing it, for he says," The good which I would, I do not; but
the evil which I would not, that I do;"(1) if he who says so speaks the
truth, let us ask him to explain what was the evil which the apostle hated
and willed not to do, but did; and the good which he willed to do, but did
not; and conversely, whether as often as he willed to do good, so often he
did not do the good which he willed, but did the evil which he willed not?
And how he can say, when exhorting us to shake off all manner of sin, "Be
ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ?"(2) Thus he meant the
things already mentioned which he willed not to do, not to be done, but
only to be thought of. For how otherwise could he be an exact imitation of
Christ? It would be excellent then, and most delightful, if we had not
those who oppose us, and contend with us; but since this is impossible, we
cannot do what we will. For we will not to have those who lead us to
passion, for then we could be saved without weariness and effort; but that
does not come to pass which we will, but that which we will not. For it is
necessary, as I said, that we should be tried. Let us not then, O my soul,
let us not give in to the Evil One; but putting on" the whole armour of
God," which is our protection, let us have "the breastplate of
righteousness, and your feet shod with the preparation of the Gospel (of
peace). Above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able
to quench all the fiery darts of  the wicked. And take the helmet of
salvation,  and the sword of the spirit, which is the Word of God,"(3) that
ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil; "casting down
imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against  the
knowledge of Christ,"(4) "for we wrestle not against flesh and blood;"(5)
for that which I do, I allow not; for what I would, that do I not: but what
I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the
law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that
dwelleth in me. For I know that in me--that is, in my flesh--dwelleth no
good thing."(6) And this is rightly said. For remember how it has been
already shown that, from the time when man went astray and disobeyed the
law, thence sin, receiving its birth from his disobedience, dwelt in him.
For thus a commotion was stirred up, and we were filled with agitations and
foreign imaginations, being emptied of the divine inspiration and filled
with carnal desire, which the cunning serpent infused into us. And,
therefore, God invented death for our sakes, that He might destroy sin,
lest rising up in us immortals, as I said, it should be immortal. When the
apostle says, "for I know that in me--that is, in my flesh--dwelleth no
good thing," by which words he means to indicate that sin dwells in us,
from the transgression, through lust; out of which, like young shoots, the
imaginations of pleasure rise around us. For there are two kinds of
thoughts in us; the one which arises from the lust which lies in the body,
which, as I said, came from the craft of the Evil Spirit; the other from
the law, which is in accordance with the commandment, which we had
implanted in us as a natural law, stirring up our thoughts to good, when we
delight in the law of God according to our mind, for this is the inner man;
but in the law of the devil according to the lust which dwells in the
flesh. For he who wars against and opposes the law of God, that is, against
the tendency of the mind to good, is the same who stirs up the carnal and
sensual impulses to lawlessness.

   III. For the apostle here sets forth clearly, as I think, three laws:
One in accordance with the good which is implanted in us, which clearly he
calls the law of the mind. One the law which arises from the assault of
evil, and which often draws on the soul to lustful fancies, which, he
says," wars against the law of the mind."(7) And the third, which is in
accordance with sin, settled in the flesh from lust, which he calls the
"law of sin which dwells in our members;"(7) which the Evil One, urging on,
often stirs up against us, driving us to unrighteousness and evil deeds.
For there seems to be in ourselves one thing  which is better and another
which is worse. And when that which is in its nature better is about to
become more powerful than that which is worse, the whole mind is carried on
to that which is good; but when that which is worse increases and
overbalances, man is on the contrary urged on to evil imaginations. On
account of which the apostle prays to be delivered from it, regarding it as
death and destruction; as also does the prophet when he says, "Cleanse Thou
me from my secret faults."(8) And the same is denoted by the words, "For I
delight in the law of God after the inward man; but I see another law in my
members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity
to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who
shall deliver me from the body of this death?"(9) By which he does not mean
that the body is death, but the law of sin which is in his members, lying
hidden in us through the transgression, and ever deluding the soul to the
death of unrighteousness. And he immediately adds, clearly showing from
what kind of death he desired to be delivered, and who he was who delivered
him, "I thank God, through Jesus Christ."(1) And it should be considered,
if he said that this body was death, O Aglaophon, as you supposed, he would
not afterwards mention Christ as delivering him froth so great an evil. For
in that case what a strange thing should we have had from the advent of
Christ? And how could the apostle have said this, as being able to be
delivered from death by the advent of Christ; when it was the lot of all to
die before Christ's coming into the world? And, therefore, O Aglaophon, he
says not that this body was death, but the sin which dwells in the body
through lust, from which God has delivered him by the coming of Christ.
"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from
the law of sin and death;" so that "He that raised up Jesus from the dead
shall also quicken your mortal bodies by His Spirit that dwelleth in you;"
having "condemned sin" which is in the body to its destruction; "that the
righteousness of the law"(2) of nature which draws us to good, and is in
accordance with the commandment, might be kindled and manifested. For the
good which "the law" of nature "could not do, in that it was weak," being
overcome by the lust which lies in the body, God gave strength to
accomplish, "sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh;" so that
sin being condemned, to its destruction, so that it should never bear fruit
in the flesh, the righteousness of the law of nature might be fulfilled,
abounding in the obedience of those who walk not according to the lust of
the flesh, but according to the lust and guidance of the Spirit; "for the
law of the Spirit of life," which is the Gospel, being different from
earlier laws, leading by its preaching to obedience and the remission of
sins, delivered us from the law of sin and death, having conquered entirely
sin which reigned over our flesh.

   IV. He(3) says that plants are neither nourished nor increased from the
earth. For he says, let any one consider how the earth can be changed and
taken up into the substance of trees. For then the place of the earth which
lay around, and was drawn up through the roots into the whole compass of
the tree, where the tree grew, must needs he hollowed out; so that such a
thing as they hold respecting the flux of bodies, is absurd. For how could
the earth first enter in through the roots into the trunks of the plants,
and then, passing through their channels into all their branches, be turned
into leaves and fruit? Now there are large trees, such as the cedar, pines,
firs, which annually bear much leaves and fruit; and one may see that they
consume none of the surrounding earth into the bulk and substance of the
tree. For it would be necessary, if it were true that the earth went up
through the roots, and was turned into wood, that the whole place where the
earth lay round about them should be hollowed out; for it is not the nature
of a dry substance to flow in, like a moist substance, and fill up the
place of that which moves away. Moreover, there are fig-trees, and other
similar plants, which frequently grow in the buildings of monuments, and
yet they never consume the entire building into themselves. But if any one
should choose to collect their fruit and leaves for many years, he would
perceive that their bulk had become much larger than the earth upon the
monuments. Hence it is absurd to suppose that the earth is consumed into
the crop of fruits and leaves; and even if they were all made by it, they
would be so only as using it for their seat and place. For bread is not
made without a mill, and a place, and time, and fire; and yet bread is not
made out of any of these things. And the same may be said of a thousand
other things.

   V. Now the followers of Origen bring forward  this passage, "For we
know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved,"(4) and
so forth, to disprove the resurrection of the body, saying that the
"tabernacle" is the body, and  the "house not made with hands" "in the
heavens" is our spiritual clothing. Therefore, says the holy Methodius, by
this earthly house must metaphorically(5) be understood our short-lived
existence here, and not this tabernacle; for if you decide to consider the
body as being the earthly house which is dissolved, tell us what  is the
tabernacle whose house is dissolved? For the tabernacle is one thing, and
the house of the tabernacle another, and still another we who have the
tabernacle. "For," he says, "if our earthly house of this tabernacle be
dissolved"--by which he points out that the souls are ourselves, that the
body is a tabernacle, and that the house of the tabernacle figuratively
represents the enjoyment of the flesh in the present life. If, then, this
present life of the body be dissolved like a house, we shall have that
which is not made with hands in the heavens. "Not made with hands," he
says, to point out the difference; because this life may be said to be made
with hands, seeing that all the employments and pursuits of life are
carried on by the hands of men. For the body, being the workmanship of God,
is not said to be made with hands, inasmuch as it is not formed by the arts
of men. But if they shall say that it is made with hands, because it was
the workmanship of God, then our souls also, and the angels, and the
spiritual clothing in the heavens, are made with hands; for all these
things, also, are the workmanship of God. What, then, is the house which is
made with hands? It is, as I have said, the short-lived existence which is
sustained by human hands. For God said, "In the sweat of thy face shalt
thou eat bread;"(1) and when that life is dissolved, we have the life which
is not made with hands. As also the Lord showed, when He said: "Make to
yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail,
they may receive you into everlasting habitations."(2) For what the Lord
then called "habitations,"(3) the apostle here calls "clothing."(4) And
what He there calls "friends" "of unrighteousness," the apostle here calls
"houses" "dissolved." As then, when the days of our present life shall
fail, those good deeds of beneficence to which we have attained in this
unrighteous life, and in this "world" which "lieth in wickedness,"(5) will
receive our souls; so when this perishable life shall be dissolved, we
shall have the habitation which is before the resurrection--that is, our
souls shall he with God, until we shall receive the new house which is
prepared for us, and which shall never fall. Whence also "we groan," "not
for that we would be unclothed," as to the body, "but clothed upon"(6) by
it in the other life. For the "house in heaven," with which we desire to be
"clothed," is immortality; with which, when we are clothed, every weakness
and mortality will be entirely "swallowed up" in it, being consumed by
endless life. "For we walk by faith, not by sight;"(7) that is, for we
still go forward by faith, viewing the things which are beyond with a
darkened understanding, and not clearly, so that we may see these things,
and enjoy them, and be in them. "Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and
blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit
incorruption."(8) By flesh, he did not mean flesh itself, but the
irrational impulse towards the lascivious pleasures of the soul. And
therefore when he says, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of
God," he adds the explanation, "Neither doth corruption inherit
incorruption." Now corruption is not the thing which is corrupted, but the
thing which corrupts. For when death prevails the body sinks into
corruption; but when life still remains in it, it stands uncorrupted.
Therefore, since the flesh is the boundary between corruption and
incorruption, not being either corruption or incorruption, it was
vanquished by corruption on account of pleasure, although it was the work
and the possession of incorruption. Therefore it became subject to
corruption. When, then, it had been overcome by corruption, and was given
over to death for chastisement, He did not leave it to be vanquished and
given over as an inheritance to corruption; but again conquering death by
the resurrection, He restored it to incorruption, that corruption might not
inherit incorruption, but incorruption that which is corruptible. And
therefore the apostle answers, "This corruptible must put on incorruption,
and this mortal immortality."(9) But the corruptible and mortal putting on
incorruption and immortality, what else is this, but that which is sown in
corruption rising in incorruption ?(10) For, "as we have borne the image of
the earthly, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly."(11) For the
"image of the earthly" which we have borne refers to the saying, "Dust thou
art, and unto dust thou shalt return."(12) And the "image of the heavenly
is the resurrection from the dead and incorruption."

   VI. Now Justin of Neapoils,(13) a man not far removed either from the
times or from the virtues of the apostles, says that that which is mortal
is inherited, but that life inherits; and that flesh dies, but that the
kingdom of heaven lives. When then, Paul says that "flesh and blood cannot
inherit the kingdom of heaven,"(14) he does not so speak as seeming to
slight the regeneration of the flesh, but as teaching that the kingdom of
God, which is eternal life, is not inherited by the body, but the body by
life. For if the kingdom of God, which is life, were inherited by the body,
it would happen that life was swallowed up by corruption. But now life
inherits that which is mortal, that death may be swallowed up of life unto
victory, and that which is corruptible appear the possession of
incorruption; being made free from death and sin, and become the slave and
subject of immortality, that the body may become the possession of
incorruption, and not incorruption of the body.

   VII. Now the passage, "The dead in Christ shall rise first: then we
which are alive," St. Methodius thus explains: Those are our bodies; for
the souls are we ourselves, who, rising, resume that which is dead from the
earth; so that being caught up with them to meet the Lord, we may
gloriously celebrate the splendid festival of the resurrection, because we
have received our everlasting tabernacles, which shall no longer die nor be
dissolved.

   VIII. I saw, he says, on Olympus(1) (Olympus is a mountain in Lycia), a
fire spontaneously arising on the top of the mountain from the earth,
beside which is the plant Puragnos, so flourishing, green, and shady, that
it seemed rather as though it grew from a fountain. For what cause,
although they are by nature corruptible, and their bodies consumed by fire,
was this plant not only not burnt, but rather more flourishing, although in
its nature it is easily burnt, and the fire was burning about its roots?
Then I cast branches of trees out of the surrounding wood into the place
where the fire streamed forth, and, immediately bursting up into flame,
they were converted into cinders. What then is the meaning of this
contradiction? This God appointed as a sign and prelude of the coming Day,
that we may know that, when all things are overwhelmed by fire, the bodies
which are endowed with chastity and righteousness shall pass through it as
though it were cold water.

   IX. Consider, he says, whether too the blessed John, when he says, "And
the sea gave up the dead which were in it: and death and hell delivered up
the dead which were in them,"(2) does not mean the parts which are given up
by the elements for the reconstruction of each one? By the sea is meant the
moist element; by hell,(3) the air, derived from aeide's, because it is
invisible, as was said by Origen; and by death, the earth, because those
who die are laid in it; whence also it is called in the Psalms the "dust of
death,"(4) Christ saying that He is brought "into the dust of death."

   X. For, he says, whatever is composed and consists of pure air and pure
fire, and is of like substance with the angelic beings, cannot have the
nature of earth and water; since it would then be earthy. And of such
nature, and consisting of such things, Origen has shown that the body of
man shall be which shall rise, which he also said would be spiritual.

   XI. And he asks what will be the appearance of the risen body, when
this human form, as according to him useless, shall wholly disappear; since
it is the most lovely of all things which are combined in living creatures,
as being the form which the Deity Himself employs, as the most wise Paul
explains: "For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is
the image and glory of God;"(5) in accordance with which the rational
bodies of the angels are set in order? will it be circular, or polygonal,
or cubical, or pyramidal? For there are very many kinds of forms; but this
is impossible.(6) Well then, what are we to think of the assertion, that
the godlike shape is to be rejected as more ignoble, for he himself allows
that the soul is like the body, and that man is to rise again without hands
or feet?

   XII. The transformation, he says, is the restoration into an impassible
and glorious state. For now the body is a body of desire and of
humiliation,(7) and therefore Daniel was called "a man of desires."(8) But
then it will be transfigured into an impassible body, not by the change of
the arrangement of the members, but by its not desiring carnal pleasures.

   Then he says, refuting Origen, Origen therefore thinks that the same
flesh will not be restored to the soul, but that the form of each,
according to the appearance by which the flesh is now distinguished, shall
arise stamped upon another spiritual body; so that every one will again
appear the same form; and that this is the resurrection which is promised.
For, he says, the material body being fluid, and in no wise remaining in
itself, but wearing out and being replaced around the appearance by which
its shape is distinguished, and by which the figure is contained, it is
necessary that the resurrection should be only that of the forth.

   XIII. Then, after a little, he says: If then, O Origen, you maintain
that the resurrection of the body changed into a spiritual body is to be
expected only in appearance, and put forth the vision of Moses and Elias as
a most convincing proof of it; saying that they appeared after their
departure from life, preserving no different  appearance from that which
they had from the beginning; in the same way will be the resurrection of
all men. But Moses and Elias arose  and appeared with this form of which
you speak,  before Christ suffered and rose. How then could Christ be
celebrated by prophets and apostles as "the first begotten of the dead?"(9)
For if the Christ is believed to be the first begotten of the dead, He is
the first begotten of the dead as having risen before all others. But Moses
appeared to the apostles before Christ suffered, having this form in which
you say the resurrection is fulfilled. Hence then, there is no resurrection
of the form without the flesh. For either there is a resurrection of the
form as you teach, and then Christ is no longer "the first begotten of the
dead," from the fact that  souls appeared before Him, having this form
after death; or He is truly the first begotten,  and it is quite impossible
that any should have been thought meet for a resurrection before Him, so as
not to die again. But if no one arose before Him, and Moses and Elias
appeared to the apostles not having flesh, but only its appearance, the
resurrection in the flesh is clearly manifested. For it is most absurd that
the resurrection should be set forth only in form, since the souls, after
their departure from the flesh, never appear to lay aside the form which,
he says, rises again. But if that remains with them, so that it cannot be
taken away, as with the soul of Moses and Elias; and neither perishes, as
you think, nor is destroyed, but is everywhere present with them; then
surely that form which never fell cannot be said to rise again.

   XIV. But if any one, finding this inadmissible, answers, But how then,
if no one rose before Christ went down into Hades, are several recorded as
having risen before Him? Among whom is the son of the widow of Sarepta, and
the son of the Shunammite, and Lazarus. We must say: These rose to die
again; but we are speaking of those who shall never die after their rising.
And if any one should speak doubtfully concerning the soul of Elias, as
that the Scriptures say that he was taken up in the flesh, and we say that
he appeared to the apostles divested of the flesh, we must say, that to
allow that he appeared to the apostles in the flesh is more in favour of
our argument. For it is shown by this case that the body is susceptible of
immortality, as was also proved by the translation of Enoch. For if he
could not receive immortality, he could not remain in a state of
insensibility so long a time. If, then, he appeared with the body, that was
truly after he was dead, but certainly not as having arisen from the dead.
And this, we may say, if we agree with Origen when he says that the same
form is given to the soul after death; when it is separated from the body,
which is of all things the most impossible, from the fact that the form of
the flesh was destroyed before by its changes, as also the form of the
melted statue before its entire dissolution. Be cause the quality cannot be
separated from the material, so as to exist by itself; for the shape which
disappears around the brass is separated from the melted statue, and has
not longer a substantial existence.

   XV. Since the form is said to be separated in death from the flesh,
come, let us consider in how many ways that which is separated is said to
be separated. Now a thing is said to be separated from another either in
act and subsistence, or in thought; or else in act, but not in subsistence.
As if, for instance, one should separate from each other wheat and barley
which had been mingled together; in as far as they are separated in motion,
they are said to be separated in act in as far as they stand apart when
separated, they are said to be separated in subsistence. They are separated
in thought when we separate matter from its qualities, and qualities from
matter; in act, but not in subsistence, when a thing separated from another
no longer exists, not having a substantive existence. And it may be
observed that it is so also in mechanics, when one looks upon a statue or a
brazen horse melted. For, when he considers these things, he will see their
natural form changing; and they alter into another figure from which the
original form disappears. For if any one should melt down the works formed
into the semblance of a man or a horse, he will find the appearance of the
form disappearing, but the material itself remaining. It is, therefore,
untenable to say, that the form shall arise in nowise corrupted, but that
the body in which the form was stamped shall be destroyed.

   XVI. But he says that it will be so; for it will be changed in a
spiritual body. Therefore, it is necessary to confess that the very same
forth as at first does not arise, from its being changed and corrupted with
the flesh. For although it be changed into a spiritual body, that will not
be properly the original substance, bat a certain resemblance of it,
fashioned in an ethereal body. If, however, it is not the same form, nor
yet the body which arises, then it is another in the place of the first.
For that which is like, being different from that which it resembles,
cannot be that very first thing in accordance with which it was made.

   XVII. Moreover, he says that that is the appearance or form which shows
forth the identity of the members in the distinctive character of the form.

   XVIII. And, when Origen allegorises that which is said by the prophet
Ezekiel concerning the resurrection of the dead, and perverts it to the
return of the Israelites from their captivity in Babylon, the saint in
refuting him, after many other remarks, says this also: For neither did
they(1) obtain a perfect liberty, nor did they overcome their enemies by a
greater power, and dwell again in Jerusalem; and when they frequently
intended to build (the temple), they were prevented by other nations.
Whence, also, they were scarce able to build that in forty-six years, which
Solomon completed from the foundations in seven years. But what need we say
on this subject? For from the time of Nebuchadnezzar, and those who after
him reigned over Babylon, until the time of the Persian expedition against
the Assyrians, and the empire of Alexander, and the war which was stirred
up by the Romans against the Jews, Jerusalem was six times overthrown by
its enemies. And this is recorded by Josephus, who says: "Jerusalem was
taken in the second year of the reign of Vespasian. It had been taken
before five times; but now for the second time it was destroyed. For
Asochaeus, king of Egypt, and after him Antiochus, next Pompey, and after
these Sosius, with Herod, took the city and burnt it; but before these, the
king of Babylon conquered and destroyed it."

   XIX. He says that Origen holds these opinions which he refutes. And
there may be a doubt concerning Lazarus and the rich man. The simpler
persons think that these things were spoken as though both were receiving
their due for the things which they had done in life in their bodies; but
the more accurate think that, since no one is left in life after the
resurrection, these things do not happen at the resurrection. For the rich
man says: "I have five brethren; . . . lest they also come into this place
of torment, "(1) send Lazarus, that he may tell them of those things which
are here. And, therefore, if we ask respecting the "tongue," and the
"finger," and "Abraham's bosom," and the reclining there, it may perhaps be
that the soul receives in the change a form similar in appearance to its
gross and earthly body. If, then, any one of those who have fallen asleep
is recorded as having appeared, in the same way he has been seen in the
form which he had when he was in the flesh. Besides, when Samuel appeared,
it is clear that, being seen, he was clothed in a body; and this must
especially be admitted, if we are pressed by arguments which prove that the
essence of the soul is incorporeal, and is manifested by itself.(3) But the
rich man in torment, and the poor man who was comforted in the bosom of
Abraham, are said, the one to be punished in Hades, and the other to be
comforted in Abraham's bosom, before the appearing of the Saviour, and
before the end of the world, and therefore before the resurrection;
teaching that now already, at the change, the soul rises a body. Wherefore,
the saint says as follows: Setting forth that the soul, after its removal
hence, has a form similar in appearance to this sensitive body; does Origen
represent the soul, after Plato, as being incorporeal? And how should that
which, after removal from the world, is said to have need of a vehicle and
a clothing, so that it might not be found naked, be in itself other than
incorporeal? But if it be incorporeal, must it not also be incapable of
passion? For it follows, from its being incorporeal, that it is also
impassible and imperturbable. If, then, it was not distracted by any
irrational desire, neither was it changed by a pained or suffering body.
For neither can that which is incorporeal sympathize with a body, nor a
body with that which is incorporeal, if,(4) indeed, the soul should seem to
be incorporeal, in accordance with what has been said. But if it sympathize
with the body, as is proved by the testimony of those who appear, it cannot
be incorporeal. Therefore God alone is celebrated, as the unbegotten,
independent, and unwearied nature; being incorporeal, and therefore
invisible; for "no man hath seen God."(5) But souls, being rational bodies,
are arranged by the Maker and Father of all things into members which are
visible to reason, having received this impression. Whence, also, in Hades,
as in the case of Lazarus and the rich man, they are spoken of as having a
tongue, and a finger, and the other members; not as though they had with
them another invisible body, but that the souls themselves, naturally, when
entirely stripped of their covering, are such according to their essence.

   XX. The saint says at the end: The words, "For to this end Christ both
died, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead and
living,"(6) must be taken as referring to souls and bodies; the souls being
the living, as being immortal, and the bodies being dead.

   XXI. Since the body of man is more honourable than other living
creatures, because it is said to have been formed by the hands of God. and
because it has attained to be the vehicle of the reasonable soul; how is it
that it is so short-lived, shorter even than some of the irrational
creatures? Is it not clear that its long-lived existence will be after the
resurrection?


Taken from "The Early Church Fathers and Other Works" originally published
by Wm. B. Eerdmans Pub. Co. in English in Edinburgh, Scotland beginning in
1867. (ANF 6, Roberts and Donaldson). The digital version is by The
Electronic Bible Society, P.O. Box 701356, Dallas, TX 75370, 214-407-WORD.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
  The electronic form of this document is copyrighted.
  Copyright (c) Eternal Word Television Network 1996.
  Provided courtesy of:

       EWTN On-Line Services
       PO Box 3610
       Manassas, VA 22110
       Voice: 703-791-2576
       Fax: 703-791-4250
       Data: 703-791-4336
       FTP: ftp.ewtn.com
       Telnet: ewtn.com
       WWW: http://www.ewtn.com.
       Email address: [email protected]

-------------------------------------------------------------------

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.ratthing.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.