5

For seeing the knowledge of such things, to direct all zeal and inquiry is a Greek heresy; for all the Stoics define knowledge as the end of contemplation.s

Now indeed some, as you say, scorning the goal set before Christians, the ineffable goods promised to us in the age to come, as a thing of least importance, and having transformed scientific knowledge into spiritual knowledge, introduce it into the church of those who philosophize according to Christ. For they declare those who do not know the mathematical sciences to be impure and imperfect; and from this it is necessary for everyone to hold fast to the Greek studies, and to neglect the evangelical teachings (for from them there could never be a release from the ignorance of the sciences according to them) and for them to withdraw mocking him who says, “be perfect” and “if any is perfect in Christ” and “but we speak among the perfect,” as being one completely without such knowledge. It was not, therefore, a release from this ignorance that I proposed when I called this a saving purity (for I know both of a blameless ignorance and a blameworthy knowledge); therefore, having been released not from this, but from the ignorance concerning God and the divine dogmas, which our theologians have forbidden, and having improved your whole character according to their instructions, you will become full of the wisdom of God, truly an image and likeness of God, perfected through the observance of the evangelical commandments alone. Which also Dionysius, the interpreter of the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, clearly declared in this very way: “For assimilation to and union with God,” he says, “as the divine oracles teach, is perfected only by love for the most venerable commandments and by sacred actions.” (p. 68) But if this saying is not true, but it is from outside education that one can find and see man in the image, as it re-forms his character for the better and removes the darkness of ignorance from the soul, the wise among the Greeks would be more godlike and more capable of seeing God than the fathers before the law and those who prophesied under the law, the majority of whom were called to this dignity from a rustic life. But John, the final crown of the prophets, did he not spend his life from his tenderest years in the desert? Therefore does not each of those who renounce the world look to him as to an archetype, as he is able? It is surely clear to everyone. Where then in the desert were the schools of the vain—or as they themselves say, saving—philosophy? Where were the voluminous books and those who were devoted to them for a lifetime and persuading others? And where in these books are the patterns of such eremitic and virginal lives and the written account of struggles, rousing to imitation those who read them?

And to leave aside this one who is higher among those born of women, for whom, having ascended to so great a height, the education that leads to God, as they say, was of no concern (for he had not even read the sacred books): so that we may leave him aside, He who was before the ages and appeared in them and for this reason came into the world, that he might bear witness to the truth and renew that which is in the image and lead it back to the archetype, how did he not provide this ascent through outside methods? And how did he not say, “ ‘If you wish to be perfect, take up outside education, hasten to the taking up of studies, (p. 70) acquire for yourself the knowledge of existing things’,” but “sell your possessions, give to the poor, take up the cross, be eager to follow me”? And how did he not teach also figures and quantities and the complex distances and conjunctions of the planets, and solve the difficulties of natural problems, so that he might remove the darkness of ignorance from our soul? And why also disciples who were fishermen, unlettered, rustics, but not

5

γάρ ἐπιστήμην τῶν τοιούτων βλέποντες πᾶσαν ἀπαυθύνειν σπουδήν τε καί ζήτησιν αἵρεσίς ἐστιν ἑλληνική˙ οἱ γάρ Στωϊκοί πάντες τέλος τῆς θεωρίας τήν ἐπιστήμην ὁρίζονται.σ

Νῦν δή τινες, ὡς σύ φῄς, τοῦ τοῖς χριστιανοῖς προκειμένου τέλους, τῶν ἐπηγγελμένων ἡμῖν ἐπί τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰῶνος ἀρρήτων ἀγαθῶν, ὡς ἐλαχίστου περιφρονήσαντες καί τήν ἐπιστήμην εἰς γνῶσιν μεταλαβόντες, τῇ τῶν κατά Χριστόν φιλοσοφούντων ἐπεισάγουσιν ἐκκλησίᾳ. Τούς γάρ οὐκ εἰδότας τάς μαθηματικάς ἐπιστήμας ἀνάγνους ἀποφαίνονται καί ἀτελεῖς˙ ἐντεῦθεν δ᾿ ἀνάγκη πάντας τῶν μέν ἑλληνικῶν ἀπρίξ ἀντέχεσθαι μαθημάτων, τῶν δ᾿ εὐαγγελικῶν κατολιγωρεῖν διδαγμάτων (παρ᾿ αὐτῶν γάρ οὐδέποτε γένοιτ᾿ ἄν τῆς τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτούς ἐπιστημῶν ἀγνοίας ἀπαλλαγή) καί τοῦ λέγοντος «γίνεσθι τέλειοι» καί «εἴ τις ἐν Χριστῷ τέλειος» καί «ἡμεῖς δέ λαλοῦμεν ἐν τοῖς τελείοις» καταμωκωμένους ἀναχωρεῖν, ὡς ἀπείρου πεντάπασιν ἐπιστήμης τοιαύτης. Οὐ ταύτης οὖν ἐγώ τῆς ἀγνοίας ἀπαλλαγήν ὑποτιθέμενος, καθαρότητα σωτήριον ἐκάλεσα ταύτην (οἶδα γάρ καί ἀνέγκλητον ἄγνοιαν καί γνῶσιν ἐγκεκλημένην) ˙ οὔκουν ταύτης, ἀλλά τῆς περί Θεοῦ καί τῶν θείων δογμάτων ἀγνοίας ἀπαλλαγείς, ὅσην οἱ καθ᾿ ἡμᾶς ἀπηγόρευσαν θεολόγοι, καί πᾶν ἦθος κατά τάς αὐτῶν βελτιώσας ὑποθήκας, γενήσῃ Θεοῦ σοφίας ἀνάπλεως, εἰκών ὄντως καί ὁμοίωμα Θεοῦ, διά μόνης τῆς τῶν εὐαγγελικῶν ἐντολῶν τηρήσεως τετελεσμένος. Ὅ καί ὁ τῆς Ἐκκλησιαστικῆς ἱεραρχίας ὑποφήτης ∆ιονύσιος κατ᾿ αὐτήν ἀπεφήνατο σαφῶς˙ «ἡ γάρ πρός τόν Θεόν ἀφομοίωσίς τε καί ἕνωσις, ὡς τά θεῖα», φησί, «διδάσκει λόγια, ταῖς τῶν σεβασμιωτάτων ἐντολῶν ἀγαπήσεσι καί ἱερουργίαις μόνως τελεῖται». (σελ. 68) Εἰ δ᾿ οὐκ ἀληθής ὁ λόγος οὗτος, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ τῆς ἔξω παιδείας τό κατ᾿ εἰκόνα τόν ἄνθρωπον εὑρεῖν καί ἰδεῖν ἐστιν, ὡς τούς χαρακτῆρας ἐπί τό κρεῖττον μεταρρυθμιζούσης καί τό σκότος τῆς ἀγνοίας ἐξαιρούσης τῆς ψυχῆς, οἱ καθ᾿ Ἕλληνας σοφοί θεοειδέστεροι ἄν εἶεν καί θεοπτικώτεροι τῶν πρό νόμου πατέρων καί τῶν ἐν τῷ νόμῳ προφητευσάντων, ὧν οἱ πλείους ἐξ ἀγροικικοῦ βίου πρός ταύτην τήν ἀξίαν ἐκλήθησαν. Ἰωάννης δέ, ἡ τῶν προφητῶν ὑστάτη κορωνίς, οὐκ ἐξ ἁπαλῶν ὀνύχων ἐπ᾿ ἐρημίας διετέλει τόν βίον ἀνύων; Οὐ τοίνυν πρός αὐτόν ὡς πρός ἀρχέτυπον ἀφορῶσιν ἕκαστος ὅπως ἔχει δυνάμεως τῶν ἀποταττομένων τῷ κόσμῳ; Παντί που δῆλον. Ποῦ τοίνυν ἐν ἐρημίᾳ διδασκαλεῖα τῆς ματαίας ὡς δ᾿ αὐτοί λέγουσι, σωτηρίαν φιλοσοφίας; Ποῦ πολύπτυχοι βίβλοι καί οἱ ταύταις διά βίου προστετηκότες καί τούς ἄλλους πείθοντες; Ποῦ δέ τῶν βιβλίων τούτων ὑπουῆκαι βίων τοιούτων ἐρημικῶν τε καί παρθενικῶν καί ἀγών ἀνάγραπτος, πρός μίμησιν ἐπαίρων τούς ἐντυγχάνοντας;

Καί ἵνα τοῦτον ἀφῶ τόν ἐν γεννητοῖς γυναικῶν ὑψηλότερον, ᾧ πρός τοσοῦτον ὕψος ἀναβεβηκότι τῆς, ὡς αὐτοί φασιν, ὁδηγούσης πρός Θεόν παιδείας οὐδέν ἐμέλησε (καί γάρ οὐδ᾿ ἱεραῖς οὗτος ἐντετύχηκε βίβλοις)˙ ἵνα τοίνυν τοῦτον ἀφῶμεν, ὁ πρό τῶν αἰώνων ὤν καί μετ᾿ αὐτῶν φανείς καί διά τοῦτο ἐλθών εἰς τόν κόσμον, ἵνα μαρτυρήσῃ τῇ ἀληθείᾳ καί ἀνακαινίσῃ τό κατ᾿ εἰκόνα καί πρός τό ἀρχέτυπον ἐπαναγάγῃ, πῶς οὐ παρέσχε ταύτην τήν διά τῶν ἔξω μεθόδων ἄνοδον; Πῶς δ᾿ οὐκ εἶπεν, « "εἰ θέλεις τέλειος εἶναι, τῆς ἔξω παιδείας ἐπιλαβοῦ, σπεῦσον πρός τήν τῶν μαθημάτων ἀνάληψην, (σελ. 70) περιποιήσαι σεαυτῷ τήν ἐπιστήμην τῶν ὄντων" », ἀλλά «τά ὑπάρχοντα πώλησον, διάδος πτωχοῖς, τόν σταυρόν ἄρον, ἀκολουθεῖν ἐμοί προθυμήθητι»; Πῶς δ᾿ οὐκ ἐδίδαξεν καί σχηματισμούς καί ποσότητας καί τάς πολυπλανεῖς τῶν πλανητῶν ἀποστάσεις τε καί συνόδους, καί τῶν φυσικῶν προβλημάτων τάς ἀπορίας διέλυσεν, ὡς ἄν ἀπό τῆς ἡμετέρας ψυχῆς τό τῆς ἀγνοίας σκότος ἐξέληται; Τί δέ καί μαθητάς ἁλιεῖς, ἀγραμμάτους, ἀγροίκους, ἀλλά μή