24

he sets forth the same thought more clearly, saying: for before the world was, the Word was in the Father. But when God the almighty proposed to make all things in the heavens and on earth, the generation of the world required an effective energy; and for this reason, since there was nothing else besides God—for it is confessed that all things were made by him—then the Word, having come forth, 2.2.41 became the maker of the world, he who previously was preparing it within, intelligibly. And again after all this he adds, saying: and for this reason he does not name himself Son of God, but everywhere calls himself Son of man, in order that through such a confession he might prepare man, by position, through communion with him, to become a son of God, and after the end of the action, again, as Word, he will be united to God, fulfilling that which was foretold by the apostle: «then he himself will be subjected to the one who subjected all things to him, that God may be all in all». For he will then be that which he was before. Through so many words Marcellus has with bare head denied 2.2.42 the Son of God. For if God and the Word in him were one and the same, and no one could ever be his own father just as he could not be his own son, being one and alone, but God was one and alone and the same as his own Word, it is clear that he was not a father, since he had no son, nor a son, since he had no subsisting father. 2.2.43 What sort of things, then, the man has expounded concerning the Son of God neither being nor pre-existing, but being a mere Word existing within God himself, and this Word sometimes being at rest and sometimes acting with effective power, we have learned through the preceding statements. And having set these same things down many times and in various ways in his own writing, he has heaped up a great pile of superfluous words in his treatise. But we, being satisfied with his own refutations of himself from the words which he has adduced, will not even deem worthy of refutation the absurdity of this Judaic 2.2.44 dogma. From here let us pass on to what was said by him concerning the flesh, which he says the Word in God assumed by energy alone, and let us see how he transfers the theology concerning the only-begotten Son of God found in the divine scriptures to the flesh, denying the truly pre-existent Son of God, but theologizing the flesh, which a little later the irreverent man determined would be bereft of the Word. 2.3.1 For the Word «was in the beginning», being nothing other than Word. But the man united to the Word, not being before, became man, as John teaches us, saying, «and the Word became flesh». For this reason, then, he seems to make mention of the Word alone; for whether the divine scripture makes mention of the name of Jesus or of Christ, it seems to name the Word of God that exists with the human flesh. But if anyone should profess to be able to show the name of Christ or Jesus applied to the Word alone even before the New Testament, he will find this spoken prophetically, as is also clear from this: «For», it says, «the kings of the earth stood by and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ». 2.3.2 And after other things he adds: reasonably, therefore, before the descent he was this, which we have often said, Word; but after the descent and the assumption of the flesh he has obtained various appellations, since «the Word became flesh». Observe how through these words Marcellus does not want the name of Jesus and Christ and the other titles to apply to the Word, but to the flesh which he assumed. And the observation is necessary, so that when he again casts off the flesh, he may be refuted as being impious against the Christ of God himself. Indeed, after the aforementioned things, proceeding in order, he writes such things concerning the body of the savior: 2.3.3 and let Asterius not think this is improbable, if his body, being newer, was able to attain such antiquity; but let him consider, that even if the human flesh happens to be newer, nevertheless he who deigned to assume it through a pure virgin

24

τὴν αὐτὴν διάνοιαν λευκότερον τίθησι λέγων πρὸ γὰρ τοῦ τὸν κόσμον εἶναι ἦν ὁ λόγος ἐν τῷ πατρί. ὅτε δὲ ὁ παντοκράτωρ θεὸς πάντα τὰ ἐν οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς προὔθετο ποιῆσαι, ἐνεργείας ἡ τοῦ κόσμου γένεσις ἐδεῖτο δρα στικῆς· καὶ διὰ τοῦτο, μηδενὸς ὄντος ἑτέρου πλὴν τοῦ θεοῦ πάντα γὰρ ὁμολογεῖται ὑπ' αὐτοῦ γεγενῆσθαι, τότε ὁ λόγος προελθὼν 2.2.41 ἐγίνετο τοῦ κόσμου ποιητής, ὁ καὶ πρότερον ἔνδον νοητῶς ἑτοι μάζων αὐτόν. καὶ αὖθις μετὰ πάντα ἐπιφέρει λέγων καὶ διὰ τοῦτο οὐχ υἱὸν θεοῦ ἑαυτὸν ὀνομάζει, ἀλλὰ παν ταχοῦ υἱὸν ἀνθρώπου ἑαυτὸν λέγει, ἵνα διὰ τῆς τοιαύτης ὁμολο γίας θέσει τὸν ἄνθρωπον διὰ τὴν πρὸς αὐτὸν κοινωνίαν υἱὸν θεοῦ γενέσθαι παρασκευάσῃ καὶ μετὰ τὸ τέλος τῆς πράξεως αὖθις, ὡς λόγος, ἑνωθῇ τῷ θεῷ, πληρῶν ἐκεῖνο τὸ ὑπὸ τοῦ ἀποστόλου προειρημένον· «τότε αὐτὸς ὑποταγήσεται τῷ ὑποτάξαντι αὐτῷ τὰ πάντα, ἵνα ᾖ πάντα καὶ ἐν πᾶσιν ὁ θεός». ἔσται γὰρ τηνικαῦτα τοῦθ' ὅπερ πρότερον ἦν. διὰ τοσούτων Μάρκελλος γυμνῇ τῇ κεφαλῇ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ ἐξω2.2.42 μόσατο. εἰ γὰρ ἓν καὶ ταὐτὸν ἦν ὁ θεὸς καὶ ὁ ἐν αὐτῷ λόγος, οὐδεὶς δὲ πώποτε αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ γένοιτ' ἂν πατὴρ ὡς οὐδ' αὐτὸς ἑαυτοῦ υἱὸς εἷς ὢν καὶ μόνος, εἷς δὲ μόνος ἦν καὶ ὁ αὐτὸς τῷ ἑαυτοῦ λόγῳ ὁ θεός, δῆλον ὡς οὐ πατὴρ ἦν μὴ ὑπάρχοντος αὐτῷ υἱοῦ, οὐδὲ υἱὸς μὴ ὑφεστῶτος αὐτῷ πατρός. 2.2.43 ὁποῖα μὲν οὖν περὶ τοῦ μήτε εἶναι μήτε προϋφεστάναι τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ υἱόν, ψιλὸν δὲ λόγον ἔνδον ὑπάρχειν ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ θεῷ, καὶ τοῦτον ποτὲ μὲν ἡσυχάζειν ποτὲ δὲ ἐνεργεῖν δραστικῇ δυνάμει, διεξῆλθεν ὁ ἀνήρ, ἔγνωμεν διὰ τῶν προκειμένων. ταῦτα δὲ αὐτὰ πολλάκις καὶ διαφόρως τῇ ἑαυτοῦ παραθέμενος γραφῇ, πολὺν σωρὸν περιττῶν ῥημάτων συνεφόρησεν τῷ συγγράμματι. ἀλλ' ἡμεῖς γε τοῖς αὐτοῦ καθ' ἑαυτοῦ ἐλέγχοις ἐξ ὧν παρέθετο φωνῶν ἀρκεσθέντες, οὐδ' ἀντιρρήσεως ἀξιώσομεν τὴν τοῦ Ἰουδαϊκοῦ τούτου δόγματος 2.2.44 ἀτοπίαν. ἐντεῦθεν δ' ἐπὶ τὰ εἰρημένα τῷ αὐτῷ περὶ τῆς σαρκός, ἣν ἐνεργείᾳ μόνῃ φησὶν ἀνειληφέναι τὸν ἐν τῷ θεῷ λόγον, μεταβάντες φέρ' ἴδωμεν ὅπως τὴν ἐν ταῖς θείαις γραφαῖς περὶ τοῦ μονογενοῦς υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ φερομένην θεολογίαν ἐπὶ τὴν σάρκα μεταφέρει, αὐτὸν μὲν τὸν ἀληθῶς προόντα τοῦ θεοῦ υἱὸν ἀρνούμενος, τὴν δὲ σάρκα θεολογῶν, ἣν μικρὸν ὕστερον ἔρημον ἔσεσθαι τοῦ λόγου ὁ ἀνευλαβὴς ὡρίζετο· 2.3.1 Ὁ μὲν γὰρ λόγος «ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν», μηδὲν ἕτερον ὢν ἢ λόγος. ὁ δὲ τῷ λόγῳ ἑνωθεὶς ἄνθρωπος, οὐκ ὢν πρότερον, γέγονεν ἄνθρωπος, ὡς διδάσκει ἡμᾶς Ἰωάννης λέγων «καὶ ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο». διὰ τοῦτο τοίνυν τοῦ λόγου μνημονεύων φαίνεται μόνου· εἴτε γὰρ Ἰησοῦ εἴτε Χριστοῦ ὀνόματος μνημονεύει ἡ θεία γραφή, τὸν μετὰ τὸν τῆς ἀνθρωπίνης ὄντα σαρκὸς τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον ὀνομάζειν φαίνεται. εἰ δέ τις καὶ πρὸ τῆς νέας διαθήκης τὸ τοῦ Χριστοῦ ἢ Ἰησοῦ ὄνομα ἐπὶ τοῦ λόγου μόνου δεικνύναι δύνασθαι ἐπαγγέλλοιτο, εὑρήσει τοῦτο προφητικῶς εἰρημένον, ὥσπερ καὶ ἀπὸ τούτου δῆλον· «παρέστησαν» γάρ φησιν «οἱ βασι λεῖς τῆς γῆς καὶ οἱ ἄρχοντες συνήχθησαν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτὸ κατὰ τοῦ κυρίου καὶ κατὰ τοῦ Χριστοῦ αὐτοῦ». 2.3.2 καὶ μεθ' ἕτερα ἐπάγει εἰκότως οὖν πρὸ τῆς καθόδου τοῦτο ἦν, ὅπερ πολλά κις ἔφαμεν, λόγος· μετὰ δὲ τὴν κάθοδον καὶ τὴν τῆς σαρκὸς ἀνά ληψιν διαφόρων καὶ τῶν ἐπηγοριῶν τετύχηκεν, ἐπειδὴ «ὁ λόγος σὰρξ ἐγένετο». τήρει ὅπως διὰ τούτων Μάρκελλος τὸ Ἰησοῦ καὶ Χριστοῦ ὄνομα καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς προσηγορίας οὐ βούλεται κεῖσθαι ἐπὶ τοῦ λόγου, ἀλλ' ἐπὶ τῆς σαρκὸς ἧς ἀνείληφεν. ἀναγκαία δὲ ἡ ἐπιτήρησις, ἵν' ὅταν αὐτὸς πάλιν ἀποβάλῃ τὴν σάρκα ἐλέγχοιτο εἰς αὐτὸν ἀσεβῶν τὸν Χριστὸν τοῦ θεοῦ. μετὰ δὴ τὰ προλεχθέντα ἑξῆς προϊὼν τὰ περὶ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ σωτῆρος τοιαῦτα γράφει 2.3.3 καὶ μὴ τοῦτο ἀπίθανον εἶναι νομιζέτω Ἀστέριος, εἰ νεώ τερον ὂν αὐτοῦ τὸ σῶμα τοσαύτης τυχεῖν ἀρχαιότητος ἐδυνήθη· ἀλλ' ἐννοείτω, ὅτι εἰ καὶ μάλιστα τὴν ἀνθρωπίνην σάρκα νεω τέραν εἶναι συμβαίνει, ὅμως ὁ ταύτην ἀναλαβεῖν δι' ἁγνῆς ἀξιώ σας παρθένου