Dialogues (Eranistes) · Part 11

Orth.--They are successors of the divine apostles; some even of those apostles were privileged to hear the holy voice and see the goodly sight. The majority of them too were adorned with the crown of martyrdom. Does it seem right for you to wag the tongue of blasphemy against them?

Eran.--I shrink from doing this; at the same time I do not approve of their great divergence.

Orth.--But now I will bring you an unexpected remedy. I will adduce one of your own beautiful heresy--your teacher Apollinarius, and I will shew you that he understood the text "The Word was made flesh" just as the holy Fathers did. Hear now what he wrote about it in his "Summary."

The testimony of Apollinarius from his "Summary":--

"If no one is turned into that which he assumes, and Christ assumed flesh, then He was not turned into flesh."

And immediately afterward he continues:--

"For also He gave himself to us in relationship by means of the body to save us. Now that which saves is far more excellent than that which is being saved. Far more excellent then than we are, is He in the assumption of a body! But He would not have been more excellent had He been turned into flesh."

A little further on he says:--

"The simple is one, but the complex cannot be one; he then that alleges that He was made flesh affirms the mutation of the one Word. But if the complex is also one, as man, then he who on account of the union with the flesh says the Word was made flesh means the one in complexity."

And again a little further on he says--"To be made flesh is to be made empty, but the being made empty declares not man, but the Son of man, who emptied Himself' not by undergoing change, but by investiture."

There; you see the teacher of your own doctrines has introduced the word investiture' and indeed in his little work upon the faith he says--"We then believe that he was made flesh, while His Godhead remained unchanged for the renewal of the manhood. For in the holy power of God there has been neither alteration nor change of place, nor inclusion"--and then shortly again--"We worship God who took flesh of the blessed virgin, and on this account in the flesh is man, but in the spirit God." And in another exposition he says--"We confess the Son of God to have been made the Son of man, not nominally but verily, on taking flesh of the Virgin Mary."

Eran.--I did not suppose that Apollinarius held these sentiments. I had other ideas about him.

Orth.--Well; now you have learnt that not only the prophets and apostles, and they who after them were ordained teachers of the world, but even Apollinarius, the writer of heretical babbling, confesses the divine Word to be immutable, states that He was not turned into flesh but assumed flesh, and this over and over again, as you have heard. Do not then struggle to throw your master's blasphemy into the shade by your own. For, says the Lord "the disciple is not above his master."

Eran.--Yes, I confess that the divine Word of God is immutable and took flesh. It were the uttermost foolishness to withstand authorities so many and so great.

Orth.--Do you wish to have a solution of the rest of the difficulties?

Eran.--Let us put off their investigation until to-morrow.

Orth.--Very well; our synod is dismissed. Let us depart, and bear in mind what we have agreed upon.

Dialogue II.--The Unconfounded.

Eranistes and Orthodoxus.

Eran.--I am come as I promised. 'Tis yours to adopt one of two alternatives, and either furnish a solution of my difficulties, or assent to what I and my friends lay down.

Orth.--I accept your challenge, for I think it right and fair. But we must first recall to mind at what point we left off our discourse yesterday, and what was the conclusion of our argument.

Eran.--I will remind you of the end. I remember our agreeing that the divine Word remained immutable, and took flesh, and was not himself changed into flesh.

Orth.--You seem to be content with the points agreed on, for you have faithfully called them to mind.

Eran.--Yes, and I have already said that the man that withstands teachers so many and so great is indubitably out of his mind. I was moreover put to not a little shame to find that Apollinarius used the same terms as the orthodox, although in his books about the incarnation his drift has distinctly been in another direction.

Orth.--Then we affirm that the Divine Word took flesh?

Eran.--We do.

Orth.--And what do we mean by the flesh? A body only, as is the view of Arius and Eunomius, or body and soul?

Eran.--Body and soul.

Orth.--What kind of soul? The reasonable soul, or that which is by some termed the phytic, vegetable, that is, vital? for the fable-mongering quackery of the Apollinarians compels us to ask unseemly questions.

Eran.--Does then Apollinarius make a distinction of souls?

Orth.--He says that man is composed of three parts, of a body, a vital soul, and further of a reasonable soul, which he terms mind. Holy Scripture on the contrary knows only one, not two souls; and this is plainly taught us by the formation of the first man. For it is written God took dust from the earth and "formed man," and "breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul." And in the gospels the Lord said to the holy disciples "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell."

And the very divine Moses when he told the tale of them that came down into Egypt and stated with whom each tribal chief had come in, added, "All the souls that came out of Egypt were seventy-five," reckoning one soul for each immigrant. And the divine apostle at Troas, when all supposed Eutychus to be dead, said "Trouble not yourselves for his soul is in him."

Eran.--It is shewn clearly that each man has one soul.

Orth.--But Apollinarius says two; and that the Divine Word took the unreasonable, and that instead of the reasonable, he was made in the flesh. It was on this account that I asked what kind of soul you assert to have been assumed with the body.

Eran.--I say the reasonable. For I follow the Divine Scripture.

Orth.--We agree then that the "form of a servant" assumed by the Divine Word was complete.

Eran.--Yes; complete.

Orth.--And rightly; for since the whole first man became subject to sin, and lost the impression of the Divine Image, and the race followed, it results that the Creator, with the intention of renewing the blurred image, assumed the nature in its entirety, and stamped an imprint far better than the first.

Eran.--True. But now I beg you in the first place that the meaning of the terms employed may be made quite clear, that thus our discussion may advance without hindrance, and no investigation of doubtful points intervene to interrupt our conversation.

Orth.--What you say is admirable. Ask now concerning whatever point you like.