How, I Ask, Can You, Seeing that Your Commentaries Contain Such Doctrines, Put them Forward to Prove Your Soundness in the Faith, and to Confute those Ideas which You Reprove? How do Your Words Tend to Reprove those Women whom we have Spoken Of? Besides, Has any Woman Gone So Far as to Say what You Write, Namely, that Women are to be Turned into Men and Bodies into Souls? if Bodies are to be Turned into Spirits, Then, According to You, There Will be no Resurrection not Only of the Flesh but Even of the Body, which You Admit to be the Doctrine Even of those whom You have Set Down as Heretics. Where are we to Look any More for the Body, if it is Reduced to a Spirit? in that Case Everything Will be Spirit, the Body Will be Nowhere. And Again, if the Wives are to be Turned into Men, According to this Suggestion of Yours, that There is to be no Difference of Sex Whatever, by which I Suppose You Mean that the Female Sex Will Entirely Cease, Being Converted into the Male, and the Male Sex Will Alone Remain; I am not Sure that You Would have the Permission of the Women to Speak Here on Behalf of their Sex. But, Even Suppose that they Grant You This, Then with what Consistency Can You Argue that the Male Sex is any Longer Necessary, when the Female is Shown not to be Necessary? for There is a Natural Bond which Unites the Sexes in Mutual Dependence, So That, if one Does not Exist, There is no Need of the Other. And Further, if it is Man Alone who is to Receive at the Resurrection the Form of Clay which was Originally Given in Paradise, what Becomes of that which is Written, "He Made them Male and Female, and Blessed Them"? and Then, If, as Both You Yourself Say, and Also These Poor Women whom You Arraign, There is Neither Man nor Woman, How Can Bodies be Turned into Souls, or Women into Men, Since Paradise Does not Allow the Existence of Either Sex, nor Does the Likeness of Angels, as You Say, Admit It? and I Marvel How You Can Demand from Others a Strict Opinion Upon the Continuance of the Diversity of Sex when You Yourself, as Soon as You Begin to Discuss It, Find Yourself Involved in So Many Knotty Questions that to Evolve Yourself Out of them Becomes Impossible. How Much More Right Would Your Action be if You were to Imitate us whom You Blame in Such Matters as These and Allow God to be the Only Judge of Them, as is Indeed the Truth. It Would be Far Better for You to Confess Your Ignorance of them than to Write Things which in a Little While You have to Condemn. I Should Like to Ask My Accuser Whether He Can Conscientiously Say that He Would ever have Found, I do not Say in Any, Even the Least, Work of Mine, but Even in any Familiar Letter which I Might have Written Carelessly to a Friend, Such Things as that Bodies were to be Turned into Spirits and Wives into Men, were it not that He had Put them Forward as if He Wished them to be Inserted in Brazen Letters on the Gates of Cities, and Recited in the Forum, in the Senate House and in Front of the Rostra. If He had Found any Such Thing in My Writings, Imagine How Many Heads of Accusation He Would have Set Down, How Many Volumes He Would have Compiled, How He Would be Assailing Me with all the Arms and Shafts of that Teeming Breast of His; How He Would have Said: "I Tell You that He is Deceiving You by Speaking of the Resurrection of the Body, for He Denies the Resurrection of the Flesh; or Even if He Confesses the Resurrection of the Flesh He Denies that of the Members and the Sex: But, if You do not Believe Me, Behold and See the Very Words of his Letter, in which He Says that Bodies are to be Turned into Souls and Wives into Men. " Yet, when You Write This, we are not to Call You a Heretic, but are to Give Satisfaction to You as Though You were Our Master. And as for those Women whom You have Attacked with Your Indecent Reproaches, they Will, when they Stand Before the Judgment Seat of Christ, Bring Forward what You have Taught them in These Commentaries as Well as the Things which You have Since Written, with Insults which Show that You had Forgotten Yourself; and Both the one and the Other Will be Read Out There, Where the Favour of Men Will have Ceased, and the Applause for which You Pay by Flattery Will be Silent, and they Will be Judged Together with their Author for These Words and Deeds of Yours Before Christ the Righteous Judge. Gen. I. CBut Now Let us Go on to Discuss what He Writes Further as to God's Judgment, for this Too is a Matter of the Faith. We Shall Find that as He Alters the Faith About the Resurrection of the Flesh in Other Points, So He Does in Reference to God's Judgment. In the First Book of the Commentaries on the Ep. Of Paul to the Ephesians, He Deals with that Passage in which the Apostle Says: "Even as He Chose us in Him Before the Foundation of the World that we Should be Holy and Without Blemish Before Him. " on this He Says: |
24. How, I ask, can you, seeing that your Commentaries contain such doctrines, put them forward to prove your soundness in the faith, and to confute those ideas which you reprove? How do your words tend to reprove those women whom we have spoken of? Besides, has any woman gone so far as to say what you write, namely, that women are to be turned into men and bodies into souls? If bodies are to be turned into spirits, then, according to you, there will be no resurrection not only of the flesh but even of the body, which you admit to be the doctrine even of those whom you have set down as heretics. Where are we to look any more for the body, if it is reduced to a spirit? In that case everything will be spirit, the body will be nowhere. And again, if the wives are to be turned into men, according to this suggestion of yours, that there is to be no difference of sex whatever, by which I suppose you mean that the female sex will entirely cease, being converted into the male, and the male sex will alone remain; I am not sure that you would have the permission of the women to speak here on behalf of their sex. But, even suppose that they grant you this, then with what consistency can you argue that the male sex is any longer necessary, when the female is shown not to be necessary? for there is a natural bond which unites the sexes in mutual dependence, so that, if one does not exist, there is no need of the other. And further, if it is man alone who is to receive at the resurrection the form of clay which was originally given in paradise, what becomes of that which is written, "He made them male and female, and blessed them"? And then, if, as both you yourself say, and also these poor women whom you arraign, there is neither man nor woman, how can bodies be turned into souls, or women into men, since Paradise does not allow the existence of either sex, nor does the likeness of angels, as you say, admit it? And I marvel how you can demand from others a strict opinion upon the continuance of the diversity of sex when you yourself, as soon as you begin to discuss it, find yourself involved in so many knotty questions that to evolve yourself out of them becomes impossible. How much more right would your action be if you were to imitate us whom you blame in such matters as these and allow God to be the only judge of them, as is indeed the truth. It would be far better for you to confess your ignorance of them than to write things which in a little while you have to condemn. I should like to ask my accuser whether he can conscientiously say that he would ever have found, I do not say in any, even the least, work of mine, but even in any familiar letter which I might have written carelessly to a friend, such things as that bodies were to be turned into spirits and wives into men, were it not that he had put them forward as if he wished them to be inserted in brazen letters on the gates of cities, and recited in the forum, in the Senate house and in front of the rostra. If he had found any such thing in my writings, imagine how many heads of accusation he would have set down, how many volumes he would have compiled, how he would be assailing me with all the arms and shafts of that teeming breast of his; how he would have said: "I tell you that he is deceiving you by speaking of the resurrection of the body, for he denies the resurrection of the flesh; or even if he confesses the resurrection of the flesh he denies that of the members and the sex: but, if you do not believe me, behold and see the very words of his letter, in which he says that bodies are to be turned into souls and wives into men." Yet, when you write this, we are not to call you a heretic, but are to give satisfaction to you as though you were our master. And as for those women whom you have attacked with your indecent reproaches, they will, when they stand before the judgment seat of Christ, bring forward what you have taught them in these Commentaries as well as the things which you have since written, with insults which show that you had forgotten yourself; and both the one and the other will be read out there, where the favour of men will have ceased, and the applause for which you pay by flattery will be silent, and they will be judged together with their author for these words and deeds of yours before Christ the righteous judge. Gen. i.27 c25. But now let us go on to discuss what he writes further as to God's judgment, for this too is a matter of the faith. We shall find that as he alters the faith about the resurrection of the flesh in other points, so he does in reference to God's judgment. In the first book of the Commentaries on the Ep. of Paul to the Ephesians, he deals with that passage in which the Apostle says: "Even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and without blemish before him." On this he says:"For the foundation of the world the Greek has kataboles kosmou. The word katabole does not mean the same which we understand by foundation. We, therefore, shall not attempt to render a word for a word, which is here impossible on account of the poverty of our language and also the novelty of the sense, and because, as some one has said, the Greeks have a larger discourse and a happier tongue than ours. We must explain the force of the word by some sort of periphrasis. katabole is properly used when something is thrown down and is cast from a higher into a lower place, or else when anything is taking its beginning. Hence those who lay the first foundations of future houses are said katabeblekenai, that is to have thrown down the first foundations. Paul thus used the word to show that God framed all things out of nothing: he assigned to Him not a creation nor a building up, nor a making but a katabole, that is, a beginning of a foundation. He wishes to show that there was not some other thing antecedent to creatures, and out of which creatures were formed, as is held by the Manichæans and other heretics, who begin with a maker and a material, but that all things were made out of nothing. But, as to our election to be holy and without blemish before him, that is, before God, previously to the making of the world, of which the Apostle speaks, this belongs to the foreknowledge of God, to whom all future things are as if they were already done, and all things are known before they come into being: as Paul is predestinated in the womb of his mother, and Jeremiah before his birth is sanctified, chosen, and confirmed, and, as it type of Christ, is sent to be a prophet of the nations."
Footnotes:
|
![23 but let us come](/left.png) ![26 so far he has](/right.png) ![Top of Page](/botleft.png) ![Top of Page](/botright.png)
|