23

"the world was made through him." But if "the world was made through him," 2.2.4 it is clear that he pre-existed the world. Therefore, God was not alone before the constitution of the world, but his only-begotten Son was with him, upon whom the Father looked and rejoiced, as he himself, being wisdom, teaches, saying in Proverbs, "I was she in whom he daily delighted." And the Son himself, gazing at the Father's thoughts, was filled with gladness, which is why he says, "I was rejoicing before him at all times." These are the pious and divine mysteries which the church of Christ, having received, guards. But he who says that before the world came into being there was nothing else besides God alone 2.2.5 presents himself as being one of two things, either a Jew or a Sabellian. For either, by immediately denying the Son and introducing only God, he will be a Jew, denying the Christ; or, by accepting the title of Son as far as a word, but affirming that he is the one God, at once Son and Father, he will revive Sabellius. For if before the world there was nothing else besides God, either he will be Father and Son himself, or he will not even have a Son. 2.3.1 But Marcellus seems to affirm that the Son is this very Logos in God himself, according to which he is conceived as rational; so that he is his own father, and again in turn his own son. Listen then to his own words, by which he writes in this manner: for before all creation there was a certain quietness, as 2.3.2 is likely, since the Logos was in God. For if Asterius has believed that God is the maker of all things, it is clear that he will also agree with us that the one exists always, having never received a beginning of being, while the others have both been made by him and have been made out of non-existing things. You see how, having established that God is without beginning, he said that the Logos, being in him, was in quietness before the creation; and proceeding next he adds: if then he should believe this, it is necessary for him also to agree to that other point, that besides God there was nothing else. The Logos, therefore, being in the Father, had its own glory. 2.3.3 From this, he reasonably says that the Logos is eternal, that is, unbegotten, writing thus: you hear then of the agreement of the Holy Spirit, testifying through many and various persons to the eternity of the Logos. And again, and for this reason he begins from the eternity of the Logos, saying "in the beginning was the Logos," and "the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God." Using three successive testimonies he wishes to show the eternity of the Logos. 2.3.4 And how he said that the Logos was united to God and unbegotten with him, one can hear him saying something like this: we know that the economy according to the flesh pertains to the man, but we have believed that the eternity according to the spirit is united to the Father. 2.4.1 Having in this manner posited that the Logos is in God, he next declares that it is one and the same with him, writing literally thus: for if the examination were only of the spirit, the Logos would reasonably appear to be one and the same with God; but if the addition according to the flesh in the case of the Savior were examined, the Godhead seems to be extended by activity alone; so that it is reasonably a monad that is truly indivisible. 2.4.2 And again, proceeding, he says: it is not, therefore, on account of the exact agreement in all words and deeds, as Asterius said, that the Savior says, "I and the Father are one"; but because it is impossible for either the Logos of God or God to be divided from his own Logos. If, therefore, God and the Logos in him were one and the same, as it seems to Marcellus, he who was born of the holy virgin and was incarnate and became man and suffered the things that have been written and died for our sins was himself the God over all; which very thing the church of God has numbered Sabellius for daring to say among the atheists and blasphemers. 2.5.1 But if Marcellus should say that it was the Logos of God who was incarnate, yet he has defined him to be inseparable from God, positing an indivisible monad, and one hypostasis of God and of the Logos in him, so that according to him one cannot conceive of the one who became man as other than the God over all. But if it is an indivisible monad, and God and the Logos in him are one and the same, then who could one say is the Father, and who the Son, when the underlying reality is one? Thus then Marcellus

23

ὁ κόσμος δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο». εἰ δὲ «ὁ κόσμος δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο», 2.2.4 δῆλον ὡς προϋπῆρχεν τοῦ κόσμου. οὐκ ἄρα μόνος ἦν ὁ θεὸς πρὸ τῆς τοῦ κόσμου συστάσεως, συνῆν δὲ αὐτῷ ὁ μονογενὴς αὐτοῦ υἱός, εἰς ὃν ἀφορῶν ὁ πατὴρ ἔχαιρεν, ὡς διδάσκει αὐτὸς ὢν ἡ σοφία, λέγων ἐν Παροιμίαις «ἐγὼ ἤμην ᾗ προσέχαιρεν καθ' ἡμέραν». καὶ αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ υἱὸς ταῖς πατρικαῖς ἐννοίαις ἐνατενίζων εὐφροσύνης ἐπληροῦτο, διό φησιν «ηὐφραινόμην δὲ ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ ἐν παντὶ καιρῷ». ταῦτα μὲν ἡ Χριστοῦ ἐκκλησία τὰ εὐσεβῆ καὶ θεῖα μυστήρια παραλαβοῦσα φυλάττει. ὁ δὲ λέγων μήπω τοῦ κόσμου γεγονότος μηδὲν ἕτερον εἶναι πλὴν θεοῦ μόνου 2.2.5 δυεῖν θάτερον ἑαυτὸν ὄντα παρίστη, ἢ Ἰουδαῖον ἢ Σαβελλιανόν. ἢ γὰρ αὐτόθεν ἀρνούμενος τὸν υἱόν, θεὸν δὲ μόνον εἰσάγων, Ἰουδαῖος ἔσται τὸν Χριστὸν ἀρνούμενος· ἢ μέχρι λόγου τὴν τοῦ υἱοῦ πρόσρησιν ἀποδεχόμενος, αὐτὸν δ' εἶναι φάσκων τὸν ἕνα θεόν, υἱὸν ὁμοῦ καὶ πατέρα, τὸν Σαβέλλιον ἀνανεώσεται. εἰ γὰρ πρὸ τοῦ κόσμου οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν πλὴν θεοῦ, ἢ αὐτὸς ἔσται πατὴρ καὶ υἱὸς ἢ οὐδ' ἕξει υἱόν. 2.3.1 ἀλλ' ἔοικεν Μάρκελλος, τὸν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ θεῷ λόγον, καθ' ὃν λογικὸς νοεῖται, τοῦτον εἶναι φάσκειν τὸν υἱόν· ὥστε εἶναι αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ πατέρα, καὶ αὖ πάλιν αὐτὸν ἑαυτοῦ υἱόν. ἐπάκουσον γοῦν τῶν αὐτοῦ φωνῶν, δι' ὧν τοῦτον γράφει τὸν τρόπον πρὸ γὰρ τῆς δημιουργίας ἁπάσης ἡσυχία τις ἦν, ὡς 2.3.2 εἰκός, ὄντος ἐν τῷ θεῷ τοῦ λόγου. εἰ γὰρ ποιητὴν ἁπάντων τὸν θεὸν Ἀστέριος πεπίστευκεν εἶναι, δῆλον ὅτι συνομολογήσει ἡμῖν καὶ αὐτὸς τὸν μὲν ἀεὶ ὑπάρχειν, μηδεπώποτε ἀρχὴν τοῦ εἶναι λαβόντα, τὰ δὲ γεγενῆσθαί τε ὑπ' αὐτοῦ καὶ ἐξ οὐκ ὄντων γεγενῆσθαι. ὁρᾷς ὅπως τὸν θεὸν ἄναρχον ὑποστησάμενος τὸν λόγον ἐν αὐτῷ ὄντα ἐν ἡσυχίᾳ εἶναι πρὸ τῆς δημιουργίας ἔφη· καὶ προϊὼν ἑξῆς ἐπιλέγει εἰ τοίνυν τοῦτο πιστεύοι, ἀνάγκη αὐτὸν κἀκεῖνο συνομο λογεῖν ὅτι πλὴν θεοῦ οὐδὲν ἕτερον ἦν. εἶχεν οὖν τὴν οἰκείαν δόξαν ὁ λόγος, ὢν ἐν τῷ πατρί. 2.3.3 ἐντεῦθεν εἰκότως καὶ ἀίδιον, τοῦτ' ἔστιν ἀγένητον, εἶναί φησιν τὸν λόγον, ὧδε γράφων ἀκούεις τοίνυν τῆς συμφωνίας τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος, διὰ πολλῶν καὶ διαφόρων προσώπων τῇ τοῦ λόγου μαρτυρούσης ἀιδιότητι. καὶ πάλιν καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ἄρχεται μὲν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀιδιότητος τοῦ λόγου, «ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος» λέγων «καὶ ὁ λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν θεόν, καὶ θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος». τρισὶν ἐπαλλήλοις μαρτυρίαις χρώ μενος τὴν ἀιδιότητα τοῦ λόγου δεικνύναι βούλεται. 2.3.4 ὅπως δὲ ἡνῶσθαι τῷ θεῷ καὶ συναγέννητον εἶναι αὐτῷ τὸν λόγον ἔφασκεν, πάρεστιν αὐτοῦ ἐπακοῦσαι ὧδέ πη λέγοντος τὴν μὲν κατὰ σάρκα οἰκονομίαν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ διαφέρειν γινώσκομεν, τὴν δὲ κατὰ πνεῦμα ἀιδιότητα ἡνῶσθαι τῷ πατρὶ πεπιστεύκαμεν. 2.4.1 τοῦτον δὴ τὸν τρόπον ἐν τῷ θεῷ δοὺς εἶναι τὸν λόγον, ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸν εἶναι αὐτῷ ἑξῆς ἀποφαίνεται κατὰ λέξιν ὧδε γράφων εἰ μὲν γὰρ ἡ τοῦ πνεύματος ἐξέτασις γίγνοιτο μόνη, ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸν εἰκότως ἂν ὁ λόγος εἶναι τῷ θεῷ φαίνοιτο· εἰ δὲ ἡ κατὰ σάρκα προσθήκη ἐπὶ τοῦ σωτῆρος ἐξετάζοιτο, ἐνεργείᾳ ἡ θεότης μόνῃ πλατύνεσθαι δοκεῖ· ὥστε εἰκότως μονὰς ὄντως ἐστὶν ἀδιαίρετος. 2.4.2 καὶ πάλιν προϊών φησιν οὐ διὰ τὴν ἐν ἅπασιν οὖν λόγοις τε καὶ ἔργοις ἀκριβῆ συμφωνίαν, ὡς Ἀστέριος ἔφη, ὁ σωτὴρ λέγει «ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν»· ἀλλὰ διότι ἀδύνατόν ἐστιν ἢ λόγον θεοῦ ἢ θεὸν τοῦ ἑαυτοῦ μερίζεσθαι λόγου. εἰ δὴ οὖν ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸν ἦν ὁ θεὸς καὶ ὁ ἐν αὐτῷ λόγος, ὡς δοκεῖ Μαρκέλλῳ, ὁ ἐν τῇ ἁγίᾳ παρθένῳ γενόμενος καὶ σαρκωθεὶς καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσας καὶ παθὼν τὰ ἀναγεγραμμένα καὶ ἀποθανὼν ὑπὲρ τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἦν ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων θεός· ὃ δὴ τολμήσαντα φάναι τὸν Σαβέλλιον ἡ ἐκκλησία τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν ἀθέοις καὶ βλασφήμοις κατέλεξεν. 2.5.1 εἰ δὲ λέγοι Μάρκελλος τὸν λόγον εἶναι τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν σαρκωθέντα, ἀλλ' ἀχώριστον αὐτὸν ὡρίσατο εἶναι τοῦ θεοῦ, μονάδα δοὺς ἀδιαίρετον, καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ λόγου, ὡς μηδ' ἕτερον νοεῖν τὸν ἐνανθρωπήσαντα κατ' αὐτὸν ἢ τὸν ἐπὶ πάντων θεόν. εἰ δὲ μονάς ἐστιν ἀδιαίρετος, ἕν τε καὶ ταὐτὸν ὁ θεὸς καὶ ὁ ἐν αὐτῷ λόγος, καὶ τίνα ἂν εἴποι τις πατέρα, τίνα δὲ υἱόν, ἑνὸς ὄντος τοῦ ὑποκειμένου; οὕτω μὲν δὴ Μάρκελλος