To the Monks of the East, Against Cyril’s Chapters

When I look at the state of the church in the present crisis, I see the storm that has lately struck the holy ship: the furious blasts, the beating of the waves, the deep darkness of the night, and besides all this the strife among the sailors, the struggle among the rowers, the drunkenness of the helmsmen, and, last of all, the untimely action of the wicked. Then I remember the laments of Jeremiah, and I cry out with him, “My inmost parts, my inmost parts! I am in pain to the very heart; my heart is pounding within me.” And to clear away the great cloud of despondency with the drops from my eyes, I turn to fountains of tears. In a storm so wild the helmsmen ought to be awake, battling the tempest and taking care for the safety of the ship. The sailors ought to stop their strife and work to avert the danger by prayer and by skill alike. The crew ought to keep the peace, quarreling neither with one another nor with the helmsmen, and ought to beg the Lord of the sea to drive away the darkness with his rod. But now no one is willing to do anything of the kind. As happens in a battle by night, we cannot recognize one another. We leave our enemies alone and waste our weapons on our own side; we wound our comrades as if they were foes. And all the while the onlookers laugh at our drunken folly, enjoy our disasters, and are delighted to see us destroying one another. The blame for all this lies with those who have tried to corrupt the apostolic faith and have dared to add a monstrous doctrine to the teaching of the Gospels. It lies with those who have accepted the impious “Chapters,” which they have sent out with their anathemas to the imperial city, and have confirmed them, as they imagine, by their own signatures. But these “Chapters” have sprung, beyond any doubt, from the sour root of Apollinarius. They are tainted with the error of Arius and Eunomius. Look into them carefully, and you will find that they are not clear of the impiety of Mani and Valentinus either. [a]

In his very first chapter he rejects the plan of salvation carried out on our behalf. He teaches that God the Word did not take on human nature but was himself changed into flesh, and so he lays it down that the incarnation took place not in reality but in appearance and seeming. This is the outcome of the impiety of Marcion, Mani and Valentinus. [e] In his second and third chapters, as if he had quite forgotten what he set down in his preface, he brings in the “hypostatic union” and a “coming together in natural union.” By these terms he presents a kind of mixing and blending of the divine nature with the form of the servant. This comes from the novelty of the Apollinarian heresy. [f]

In his fourth chapter he rejects the distinction between the different expressions used by the evangelists and apostles. He refuses to allow what the teaching of the orthodox Fathers has allowed: that the expressions of divine dignity be understood of the divine nature, while the lowly expressions, spoken in a human way, be applied to the nature that was taken on. From this, right-minded people can easily detect its kinship with impiety. For Arius and Eunomius, who assert that the only Son of God is a creature, made out of nothing, and a servant, have dared to apply to his Godhead what is said in a lowly and human way. By such means they establish the difference of substance and the unlikeness. Besides this, to be brief, he argues that the very Godhead of the Christ, which cannot suffer and cannot change, suffered, and was crucified, died, and was buried. This goes beyond even the madness of Arius and Eunomius, for even those who dare to call the Maker and Creator of the universe a creature have not reached this pitch of impiety. Furthermore, he blasphemes against the Holy Spirit. He denies that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, as the Lord said, and maintains that the Spirit has its origin from the Son. Here we have the fruit of the Apollinarian seed; here we come close to the evil farming of Macedonius. Such are the offspring of the Egyptian, viler children of a vile father. Men entrusted with the healing of souls ought to make this growth miscarry while it is still in the womb, or destroy it as soon as it is born, as dangerous and deadly to mankind. Instead these excellent persons cherish it and promote it with great energy, to their own ruin and to the ruin of all who will listen to them. [g]

We, on the contrary, earnestly desire to keep our inheritance untouched. The faith we have received, the faith in which we ourselves were baptized and in which we baptize others, we strive to keep unharmed and undefiled. We confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, perfect God and perfect man, of a rational soul and a body, was begotten of the Father before the ages as to his Godhead, and in the last days, for us men and for our salvation, was born of the Virgin Mary; and that the same Lord is of one substance with the Father as to his Godhead, and of one substance with us as to his manhood. For there was a union of two natures. That is why we acknowledge one Christ, one Son, one Lord. But we do not destroy the union. We believe that it was made without confusion, in keeping with the Lord’s word to the Jews: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” If, on the contrary, there had been mixing and confusion, and one nature had been made out of both, he would have had to say, “Destroy me, and in three days I will be raised.” But as it is, to show that God according to his nature is distinct from the temple, and that both are one Christ, his words are, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” This plainly teaches that it was not God who was undergoing destruction but the temple. The temple’s nature could be destroyed, while the power of God raised up what was being destroyed.

Furthermore, it is in obedience to the divine Scriptures that we acknowledge the Christ to be God and man. That our Lord Jesus Christ is God is declared by the blessed evangelist John: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him nothing was made that was made.” And again: “That was the true light, which gives light to every man who comes into the world.” And the Lord himself plainly teaches us, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” and, “I and my Father are one,” and, “I am in the Father, and the Father in me.” The blessed Paul, in his letter to the Hebrews, says, “Who, being the radiance of his glory and the exact imprint of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power.” In the letter to the Philippians he says, “Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation and took on himself the form of a servant.” In the letter to the Romans: “Whose are the fathers, and from whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.” And in the letter to Titus: “Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ.” And Isaiah cries out, “To us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulder; and his name will be called Angel of great counsel, Wonderful, Counselor, the mighty God, the powerful one, the Prince of Peace, the Father of the age to come.” And again: “In chains they will come over, and they will fall down before you. They will make supplication to you, saying, ‘Surely God is in you, and there is none else; there is no God.’ Truly you are a God who hides himself, O God of Israel, the Savior.” The name Emmanuel, however, signifies both God and man, for the Gospel interprets it as “God with us,” that is, “God in man,” God in our nature. And the divine Jeremiah too foretells, “This is our God, and no other will be counted alongside him. He has found out the whole way of knowledge and has given it to Jacob his servant and to Israel his beloved. Afterward he showed himself on earth and lived among men.” Countless other passages could be found, in the holy Gospels and in the writings of the apostles as well as in the predictions of the prophets, setting forth that our Lord Jesus Christ is truly God.

That after the incarnation he is spoken of as man, our Lord himself teaches in his words to the Jews: “Why are you trying to kill me?” and, “a man who has told you the truth.” In the first letter to the Corinthians the blessed Paul writes, “For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead”; and to show whom he is speaking of, he explains his words: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” Writing to Timothy he says, “For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” In the Acts, in his speech at Athens, he says, “The times of this ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all men everywhere to repent, because he has appointed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he has ordained; and of this he has given assurance to all men, in that he has raised him from the dead.” The blessed Peter, preaching to the Jews, says, “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did through him in your midst.” And the prophet Isaiah, foretelling the sufferings of the Lord Christ, whom he had called God just before, calls him man in the passage, “A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief,” and, “Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.” I might have collected other passages of holy Scripture that agree with these and put them in my letter, had I not known that you are practiced in the divine sayings, as befits the man called blessed in the Psalms. So I leave the gathering of the evidence to your own diligence and go on with my subject. [m]

We confess, then, that our Lord Jesus Christ is truly God and truly man. We do not divide the one Christ into two persons, but we believe that two natures are united without confusion. In this way we will be able, without difficulty, to refute even the many-sided blasphemy of the heretics. For many and varied are the errors of those who have rebelled against the truth, as we will now point out. Marcion and Mani deny that God the Word took on human nature, and they do not believe that our Lord Jesus Christ was born of a virgin. They say that God the Word himself was shaped into human form and appeared as a man in appearance rather than in reality. Valentinus and Bardesanes admit the birth, but they deny that our nature was taken on, and they claim that the Son of God used the Virgin as a mere channel, so to speak. [n] Sabellius the Libyan, Photinus, Marcellus the Galatian, and Paul of Samosata say that a mere man was born of the Virgin, and openly deny that the eternal Christ was God. [o] Arius and Eunomius hold that God the Word took only a body from the Virgin. Apollinarius adds to the body a soul without reason, as if the incarnation of God the Word had taken place not for the sake of rational beings but of irrational ones. But the teaching of the apostles is that perfect man was taken on by perfect God, as the words prove: “Who, being in the form of God, took the form of a servant.” For “form” is put in place of “nature” and “substance,” and shows that, having the nature of God, he took the nature of a servant. [p]

So when we are disputing with Marcion, Mani and Valentinus, the first inventors of impiety, we try to prove from the divine Scriptures that the Lord Christ is not only God but also man. When, however, we are showing the ignorant that the teaching of Arius, Eunomius and Apollinarius about the plan of salvation is incomplete, we show from the Spirit’s divine sayings that the nature taken on was perfect. The impiety of Sabellius, Photinus, Marcellus and Paul we refute by proving from the evidence of divine Scripture that the Lord Christ was not only man but also eternal God, of one substance with the Father. That he took on a rational soul the Lord himself states in the words, “Now my soul is troubled, and what shall I say? Father, save me from this hour. But for this cause I came to this hour.” And again: “My soul is exceedingly sorrowful, even to death.” And in another place: “I have power to lay down my soul, and I have power to take it again. No one takes it from me.” And the angel said to Joseph, “Take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel, for those who sought the young child’s soul are dead.” And the evangelist says, “Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” Now what increases in stature and wisdom is not the Godhead, which is always perfect, but the human nature, which comes into being in time, grows, and is made perfect. [q]

So we hold that all the human things of the Lord Christ, hunger, I mean, and thirst and weariness, sleep, fear, sweat, prayer, ignorance, and the like, belong to our nature, which God the Word took on and united to himself in bringing about our salvation. But restoring movement to the crippled, raising the dead, supplying the loaves, and all the other miracles we believe to be works of the divine power. In this sense I say that the same Lord Christ both suffers and puts an end to suffering: he suffers as to what was visible, and puts an end to suffering as to the Godhead that dwelt in him beyond all telling. This is proved beyond question by the account of the holy evangelists. From them we learn that when he lay in a manger, wrapped in swaddling cloths, he was announced by a star, worshiped by magi, and praised in song by angels. So we reverently discern that the swaddling cloths, the lack of a bed and all the poverty belonged to the manhood, while the journey of the magi, the guiding of the star and the company of the angels proclaim the Godhead of the unseen one. In the same way he escapes into Egypt and avoids the fury of Herod by flight, for he was man; but, as the prophet says, “He shakes the idols of Egypt,” for he was God by nature. He is circumcised; he keeps the law; he offers the offerings of purification, because he sprang from the root of Jesse. As man he was under the law; afterward he did away with the law and gave the new covenant, because he was the lawgiver and had promised through the prophets that he himself would give it. He was baptized by John, and this shows that he shared what is ours. The Father bears witness to him from on high, and the Spirit points him out, and this proclaims him eternal. [r]

He was hungry, yet he fed many thousands with five loaves: the second is divine, the first human. He was thirsty and asked for water, yet he was the spring of life: the first belongs to his human weakness, the second to his divine power. He fell asleep in the boat, yet he put the storm at sea to sleep: the first belongs to his human nature, the second to his effective and creative power, which has given all things their being. He grew weary as he walked, yet he healed the lame and raised dead men from their tombs: the first belongs to human weakness, the second to a power beyond this world. He feared death, and he destroyed death: the first shows that he was mortal, the second that he was immortal, or rather the giver of life.

“He was crucified,” as the blessed Paul says, “through weakness.” But, as the same Paul says, “yet he lives by the power of God.” Let that word “weakness” teach us that he was not nailed to the tree as the Almighty, the Unbounded, the Unchangeable and Invariable, but that the nature made alive by the power of God was, as the apostle teaches, dead and buried, since death and burial both belong to the form of the servant. “He broke the gates of bronze and cut the bars of iron in two,” and destroyed the power of death, and in three days raised his own temple. These are proofs of the form of God, as the Lord said: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.”

So in the one Christ we see the manhood through the sufferings and grasp the Godhead through the miracles. We do not divide the two natures into two Christs. We know that God the Word was begotten of the Father, and that our nature was taken from the seed of Abraham and David. That is why the blessed Paul, discussing Abraham, says, “He does not say, ‘And to seeds,’ as of many, but as of one, ‘And to your seed,’ which is Christ.” Writing to Timothy he says, “Remember that Jesus Christ, of the seed of David, was raised from the dead according to my gospel.” To the Romans he writes, “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ,” and, “who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh,” and again, “Whose are the fathers, and from whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came.” The evangelist writes, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” The blessed Peter says in the Acts that David, “being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that from the fruit of his loins he would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, foresaw this and spoke of his resurrection.” God says to Abraham, “In your seed all the nations of the earth will be blessed.” And Isaiah says, “A shoot will come out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch will grow out of his roots; and there will rest on him the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of godliness, and the spirit of the fear of the Lord will fill him.” And a little further on: “And in that day there will be a root of Jesse, which will stand as a banner for the people; the Gentiles will seek it, and his rest will be glorious.”

These quotations make it plain that according to the flesh the Christ was descended from Abraham and David and was of the same nature as they, while according to his Godhead he is the everlasting Son and Word of God, begotten of the Father in a way beyond words and beyond human nature, and co-eternal with him as his radiance, his exact imprint and his Word. For as a word is inseparably bound to the mind, and radiance to light, so is the only Son to his own Father. We assert, therefore, that our Lord Jesus Christ is the only Son and the firstborn Son of God: only Son both before the incarnation and after it, but firstborn after being born of the Virgin. For the name firstborn seems in a sense to be the opposite of only Son, since the one son born to anyone is called his only son, while the eldest of several brothers is called firstborn. The divine Scriptures state that God the Word alone was begotten of the Father; but the only Son becomes also firstborn by taking our nature from the Virgin and by deigning to call those who have trusted in him his brothers. So the same one is only Son in that he is God, and firstborn in that he is man. Acknowledging the two natures in this way, we worship the one Christ and offer him one worship, for we believe that the union took place from the very moment of conception in the Virgin’s holy womb. That is why we call the holy Virgin both Mother of God and Mother of man, since the Lord Christ himself is called God and man in the divine Scripture. The name Emmanuel proclaims the union of the two natures. If we acknowledge the Christ to be both God and man, and call him so, who is so senseless as to shrink from using the term “Mother of man” along with “Mother of God”? For we use both terms of the Lord Christ. That is why the Virgin is honored and called “full of grace.” What sensible person, then, would object to naming the Virgin in keeping with the titles of the Savior, when it is on his account that she is honored by the faithful? For he who was born of her is not worshiped on her account; she is honored with the highest titles on account of him who was born of her. [u]

Suppose the Christ were God only and had taken the beginning of his existence from the Virgin: then let the Virgin be styled and named only “Mother of God,” as having given birth to one who is divine by nature. But if the Christ is both God and man, and was God from everlasting, since he did not begin to exist, being co-eternal with the Father who begot him, and in these last days was born as man in his human nature, then let whoever wishes to define doctrine on both sides devise titles for the Virgin, explaining which of them fits the nature and which fits the union. But if anyone wishes to deliver a speech of praise, to compose hymns and to repeat praises, and naturally wants to use the most exalted names, then he is not laying down doctrine, as in the first case, but praising as an orator does, and expressing all possible wonder at the greatness of the mystery. Let him satisfy his heart’s desire; let him use exalted names; let him praise and let him wonder. Many examples of this kind are found in the writings of orthodox teachers. But on every occasion let moderation be kept. All credit to the man who said that “moderation is best,” though he is not of our flock. [v]

This is the confession of faith of the church; this is the teaching of evangelists and apostles. For this faith, by God’s grace, I will not refuse to die many deaths. We have tried to bring this faith to those who are now wandering and going astray. Again and again we challenged them to discussion, eager to show them the truth, but without success. Suspecting that they would probably be plainly refuted, they avoided the encounter; for truly falsehood is rotten and is yoked with obscurity. “Everyone,” it is written, “who does evil does not come to the light, lest his deeds be exposed” by the light. [w] So, since after many efforts I failed to persuade them to recognize the truth, I have returned to my own churches, filled at once with sorrow and with joy: with joy because I myself am free of error, and with sorrow at the sickness of my members. I therefore implore you to pray with all your strength to our loving Lord and to cry out to him: “‘Spare your people, O Lord, and do not give your inheritance to reproach.’ Feed us, O Lord, so that we do not become as we were in the beginning, when you did not rule over us and your name was not called on to help us. ‘We have become a reproach to our neighbors, a scorn and derision to those around us,’ because wicked doctrines have come into your inheritance. They have defiled your holy temple, in that the daughters of strangers have rejoiced over our troubles. A little while ago we were of one mind and one tongue, and now we are divided into many tongues. But, O Lord our God, give us your peace, which we have lost by treating your commandments as nothing. O Lord, we know no other than you; we call you by your name. ‘Make both one, and break down the middle wall of partition,’ that is, the wickedness that has sprung up. Gather us one by one, your new Israel, building up Jerusalem and gathering together the outcasts of Israel. Let us be made once more one flock, and all be fed by you, for you are the good Shepherd ‘who gives his life for the sheep.’ ‘Awake, why do you sleep, O Lord? Arise, do not cast us off forever.’ Rebuke the winds and the sea; give your church calm, and safety from the waves.” [x]

These words, and words like them, I implore you to speak to the God of all; for he is good and full of loving-kindness, and he always fulfills the will of those who fear him. So he will hear your prayer, and he will scatter this darkness, which is deeper than the plague of Egypt. He will give you his own calm of love; he will gather those who are scattered abroad and welcome those who have been cast out. Then will be heard “the voice of rejoicing and salvation in the tents of the righteous.” Then we will cry to him, “We have been glad according to the days in which you afflicted us, and the years in which we have seen evil.” And you, when your prayer has been granted, will praise him in the words, “Blessed be God, who has not turned away my prayer, nor his mercy from me.” [y]

Proof that after the incarnation our Lord Jesus Christ was one Son.

Those who slander me claim that I divide the one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons. But I am so far from holding this opinion that I charge with impiety all who dare to say so. For I have been taught by the divine Scripture to worship one Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, God the Word made flesh. We confess that the same one is both God eternal and made man in the last days for the sake of man’s salvation; made man not by a change in his Godhead but by the taking on of manhood. For the nature of his Godhead is unchangeable and invariable, as is that of the Father who begot him before the ages. And whatever is understood of the substance of the Father will also be found wholly in the substance of the only Son, for he is begotten of that substance. Our Lord taught this when he said to Philip, “He who has seen me has seen the Father,” and again in another place, “All things that the Father has are mine,” and elsewhere, “I and the Father are one.” Very many other passages could be quoted that set forth the sameness of substance. [z]

It follows that he did not become God; he was God. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” He was not man; he became man, and he became man by taking our nature on himself. So says the blessed Paul: “Who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, but made himself of no reputation, and took on himself the form of a servant.” And again: “For truly he did not take on himself the nature of angels, but he took on himself the seed of Abraham.” And again: “Since, then, the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise took part in the same.” So he was both able to suffer and beyond suffering, mortal and immortal: able to suffer and mortal as man, beyond suffering and immortal as God. As God he raised his own flesh, which was dead, as his own words declare: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” As man he was able to suffer and was mortal until the time of his suffering. For after the resurrection, even as man, he is beyond suffering, immortal and incorruptible, and he flashes out divine lightnings. This is not because he has been changed according to the flesh into the nature of the Godhead; he still keeps the distinctive marks of humanity. Nor is his body unbounded, for that belongs to the divine nature alone; it remains bounded as it was before. He teaches this in the words he spoke to the disciples even after his resurrection: “Look at my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Handle me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see that I have.” As he was seen then, so he went up into heaven; so he has promised to come again; so he will be seen both by those who have believed and by those who crucified him, for it is written, “They will look on him whom they pierced.” We therefore worship the Son, but in him we see each nature in its perfection, both the one that took and the one that was taken, the one from God and the other from David. That is why he is called both Son of the living God and Son of David, each nature receiving its proper title. Accordingly the divine Scripture calls him both God and man, and the blessed Paul exclaims, “There is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a ransom for all.” But the one he here calls man, he elsewhere describes as God, for he says, “Looking for that blessed hope and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ.” And in yet another place he uses both names at once: “From whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.” [aa]

So he has said that the same Christ is from the Jews according to the flesh, and God over all as God. In the same way the prophet Isaiah writes, “A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief,” and, “Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows”; and shortly afterward he says, “Who will declare his generation?” This is said not of a man but of God. So too God says through Micah, “You, Bethlehem, in the land of Judah, are not the least among the princes of Judah, for out of you will come a governor who will rule my people Israel, whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting.” By saying, “From you will come forth a ruler,” he shows God’s plan in the incarnation; and by adding, “whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting,” he declares the Godhead begotten of the Father before the ages. [ac] Since we have been taught this by the divine Scripture, and have also found that the teachers who have been illustrious in the church at different times hold the same view, we do our best to keep our inheritance unharmed. We worship one Son of God, one God the Father, and one Holy Spirit, but at the same time we recognize the distinction between flesh and Godhead. And just as we say that those who divide our one Lord Jesus Christ into two sons stray from the road the holy apostles walked, so we declare that those who hold that the Godhead of the only Son and the manhood have been made one nature fall headlong into the opposite ravine. These doctrines we hold; these we preach; for these we fight.

The slander of those who libel me by saying that I worship two sons is refuted by the plain facts of the case. I teach all who come to holy baptism the faith set out at Nicaea. When I celebrate the sacrament of new birth, I baptize those who profess their faith in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, pronouncing each name by itself. And when I am conducting divine service in the churches, it is my custom to give glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit: not sons, but Son. If, then, I hold two sons, which of the two do I glorify, and which is left unhonored? For I have not quite reached such a pitch of stupidity as to acknowledge two sons and leave one of them without any tribute of honor. So even from this fact the slander is proved to be slander, for I worship one Son, the only Son, God the Word made flesh. And I call the holy Virgin “Mother of God,” because she gave birth to Emmanuel, which means “God with us.” And the prophet who foretold Emmanuel wrote of him a little further on, “To us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders; and his name is called Angel of great counsel, Wonderful, Counselor, mighty God, the powerful one, Prince of Peace, Father of the age to come.” Now if the babe born of the Virgin is called “mighty God,” then it is only reasonable that the mother is called “Mother of God.” For the mother shares in the honor of her child, and the Virgin is both mother of the Lord Christ as man and, again, his servant, since he is Lord and Creator and God. [ad]

Because of this difference in terms, the divine Paul says that he is “without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days nor end of life.” He is without father as to his humanity, for as man he was born of a mother alone. He is without mother as God, for he was begotten from everlasting of the Father alone. Again, he is without descent as God, while as man he has a descent, for it is written, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” The divine Luke also gives his descent. So again, as God he has no beginning of days, for he was begotten before the ages; nor does he have an end of life, for his nature is immortal and beyond suffering. But as man he had both a beginning of days, for he was born in the reign of Augustus Caesar, and an end of life, for he was crucified in the reign of Tiberius Caesar. But now, as I have already said, even his human nature is immortal; and as he ascended, so he will come again, according to the words of the angel: “This same Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you have seen him go into heaven.” [ae]

This is the teaching handed down to us by the divine prophets. This is the teaching of the company of the holy apostles. This is the teaching of the great saints of the East and of the West: of the renowned Ignatius, who received his high priesthood from the right hand of the great Peter, and for his confession of Christ was devoured by savage beasts; and of the great Eustathius, who presided over the assembled council and was driven into exile for his fiery zeal for true religion. This teaching was preached by the illustrious Meletius, at the cost of no less toil, for three times he was driven from his flock for the sake of the apostles’ teaching; by Flavian, glory of the imperial see; by the admirable Ephraim, instrument of divine grace, who has left us in the Syriac language a written inheritance of good things; by Cyprian, the illustrious ruler of Carthage and of all Libya, who for Christ’s sake met his death in the fire; by Damasus, bishop of great Rome; and by Ambrose, glory of Milan, who preached and wrote it in the language of Rome. [af] The same was taught by the great lights of Alexandria, Alexander and Athanasius, men of one mind, whose sufferings were celebrated throughout the world. This was the pasture that the great teachers of the imperial city gave their flocks: Gregory, shining friend and champion of the truth; John, teacher of the world; and Atticus, their successor in both see and outlook. With these doctrines Basil, great light of the truth, and Gregory, born of the same parents, and Amphilochius, who received from him the gift of the high priesthood, taught the people of their own day, and they have left the same to us in their writings as a fine inheritance. Time would fail me to tell of Polycarp and Irenaeus, of Methodius and Hippolytus, and the rest of the teachers of the church. In a word, I declare that I follow the divine sayings and, along with them, all these saints. By the grace of the Spirit they dived into the depths of the God-inspired Scripture; they grasped its meaning themselves and made it plain to all who are willing to learn. Difference of language has made no difference in doctrine, for they were channels of the grace of the divine Spirit, drawing their stream from one and the same fountain. [ak]