1

The Great Catechetical Oration

CATECHETICAL ORATION.

Prologue.

The catechetical instruction is indeed necessary for those who preside over the mystery of godliness, so that the church might grow by the addition of those who are being saved, as the faithful word of the teaching is brought to the hearing of unbelievers. However, the same manner of teaching will not be suitable for all who approach the word, but it is fitting to adapt the catechesis also according to the differences of religions, looking to the same purpose of the word, but not using the arguments in the same way in each case. For the Judaizer is pre-possessed by some assumptions, and he who lives in Hellenism by others, and both the Anomoean and the Manichaean and the followers of Marcion and Valentinus and Basilides and the rest of the list of those who are led astray by the heresies, each being pre-occupied by their own particular assumptions, make the battle against their notions necessary; for one must adapt the method of healing according to the type of the disease. You will not heal the polytheism of the Greek and the unbelief of the Jew concerning the only-begotten God with the same methods, nor from the same starting points will you overturn, for those led astray by the heresies, their deceitful mythologies concerning the doctrines; for not by the things with which one might correct Sabellius, will he also benefit the Anomoean, nor does the battle against the Manichaean benefit the Jew also, but it is necessary, as has been said, to look to the preconceptions of men and to make the argument according to the error inherent in each, proposing certain principles and reasonable propositions in each discussion, so that through the things agreed upon by both parties, the truth might consequently be revealed. Therefore, whenever the discussion is with one of the Hellenists, it would be well to make this the beginning of the discourse. whether he has supposed that the divine exists, or does he agree with the doctrine of the atheists? If then he should say it does not exist, he will be brought from the things skillfully and wisely ordered throughout the world to confess that through these there is some power which is displayed in these things and which transcends the universe; but if he should not doubt that it exists, but should be carried away by his notions to a multitude of gods, let us use such a line of reasoning with him. Whether does he consider the divine perfect or deficient? And when he, as is likely, testifies to the perfection of the divine nature, let us require him to be perfect in all things contemplated in the Godhead, so that the divine might not be seen as a mixture of opposites, of deficient and perfect. But whether according to power, or according to the concept of the good, or according to what is wise and incorruptible and eternal and whatever other concept befitting God might happen to be added to the contemplation, from this line of reasoning he will reasonably agree that perfection is seen in everything concerning the divine nature. And this being granted, it would no longer be difficult to bring around the thought which is scattered towards a multitude of gods to the confession of one Godhead. For if he should grant that the perfect is acknowledged in every respect concerning the subject, but should say that there are many perfect things characterized by the same attributes, it is absolutely necessary, in the case of things not distinguished by any variation but contemplated in the same attributes, either to point out what is peculiar to each, or, if the mind perceives nothing peculiar where there is no distinguishing mark, not to suppose there is a distinction. For if he should discover the difference neither in terms of more and less, because the concept of perfection does not admit of diminution, nor that in terms of worse and

1

Oratio catechetica magna

ΛΟΓΟΣ ΚΑΤΗΧΗΤΙΚΟΣ.

Πρόλογος.

Ὁ τῆς κατηχήσεως λόγος ἀναγκαῖος μέν ἐστι τοῖς προεστηκόσι τοῦ μυστηρίου τῆς εὐσεβείας, ὡς ἂν πληθύνοιτο τῇ προσθήκῃ τῶν σωζομένων ἡ ἐκκλησία, τοῦ κατὰ τὴν διδαχὴν πιστοῦ λόγου τῇ ἀκοῇ τῶν ἀπίστων προσαγομένου. οὐ μὴν ὁ αὐτὸς τῆς διδασκαλίας τρόπος ἐπὶ πάντων ἁρμόσει τῶν προσιόντων τῷ λόγῳ, ἀλλὰ κατὰ τὰς τῶν θρησκειῶν διαφορὰς μεθαρμόζειν προσήκει καὶ τὴν κατήχησιν, πρὸς τὸν αὐτὸν μὲν ὁρῶντας τοῦ λόγου σκοπόν, οὐχ ὁμοιοτρόπως δὲ ταῖς κατασκευαῖς ἐφ' ἑκάστου κεχρημένους. ἄλλαις γὰρ ὑπολήψεσιν ὁ ἰουδαίζων προείληπται καὶ ὁ τῷ ἑλληνισμῷ συζῶν ἑτέραις, ὅ τε Ἀνόμοιος καὶ ὁ Μανιχαῖος καὶ οἱ κατὰ Μαρκίωνα καὶ Οὐαλεντῖνον καὶ Βασιλείδην καὶ ὁ λοιπὸς κατάλογος τῶν κατὰ τὰς αἱρέσεις πλανωμένων ἰδίαις ἕκαστος ὑπο λήψεσι προειλημμένοι ἀναγκαίαν ποιοῦσι τὴν πρὸς τὰς ἐκείνων ὑπονοίας μάχην· κατὰ γὰρ τὸ εἶδος τῆς νόσου καὶ τὸν τρόπον τῆς θεραπείας προσαρμοστέον. οὐ τοῖς αὐτοῖς θεραπεύσεις τοῦ Ἕλληνος τὴν πολυθείαν καὶ τοῦ Ἰουδαίου τὴν περὶ τὸν μονογενῆ θεὸν ἀπιστίαν, οὐδὲ ἀπὸ τῶν αὐτῶν τοῖς κατὰ τὰς αἱρέσεις πεπλανημένοις ἀνατρέψεις τὰς ἠπατημένας περὶ τῶν δογμάτων μυθοποιίας· οὐ γὰρ δι' ὧν ἄν τις ἐπανορθώσαιτο τὸν Σαβέλλιον, διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν ὠφελήσει καὶ τὸν Ἀνόμοιον, οὐδὲ ἡ πρὸς τὸν Μανιχαῖον μάχη καὶ τὸν Ἰουδαῖον ὀνίνησιν, ἀλλὰ χρή, καθὼς εἴρηται, πρὸς τὰς προλήψεις τῶν ἀνθρώπων βλέ πειν καὶ κατὰ τὴν ἐγκειμένην ἑκάστῳ πλάνην ποιεῖσθαι τὸν λόγον, ἀρχάς τινας καὶ προτάσεις εὐλόγους ἐφ' ἑκάστης διαλέξεως προβαλλόμενον, ὡς ἂν διὰ τῶν παρ' ἀμφοτέ ροις ὁμολογουμένων ἐκκαλυφθείη κατὰ τὸ ἀκόλουθον ἡ ἀλήθεια. οὐκοῦν ὅταν πρός τινα τῶν ἑλληνιζόντων ἡ διάλεξις ᾖ, καλῶς ἂν ἔχοι ταύτην ποιεῖσθαι τοῦ λόγου τὴν ἀρχήν. πότερον εἶναι τὸ θεῖον ὑπείληφεν, ἢ τῷ τῶν ἀθέων συμφέρεται δόγματι; εἰ μὲν οὖν μὴ εἶναι λέγοι, ἐκ τῶν τεχνικῶς καὶ σοφῶς κατὰ τὸν κόσμον οἰκονομουμέ νων προσαχθήσεται πρὸς τὸ διὰ τούτων εἶναί τινα δύναμιν τὴν ἐν τούτοις διαδεικνυμένην καὶ τοῦ παντὸς ὑπερκειμένην ὁμολογῆσαι· εἰ δὲ τὸ μὲν εἶναι μὴ ἀμφι βάλλοι, εἰς πλῆθος δὲ θεῶν ταῖς ὑπονοίαις ἐκφέροιτο, τοιαύτῃ χρησώμεθα πρὸς αὐτὸν τῇ ἀκολουθίᾳ. πότερον τέλειον ἢ ἐλλιπὲς ἡγεῖται τὸ θεῖον; τοῦ δὲ κατὰ τὸ εἰκὸς τὴν τελειότητα προσμαρτυροῦντος τῇ θείᾳ φύσει, τὸ διὰ πάντων αὐτὸν τῶν ἐνθεωρουμένων τῇ θεότητι τέλειον ἀπαιτήσωμεν, ὡς ἂν μὴ σύμμικτον ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων θεωροῖτο τὸ θεῖον, ἐξ ἐλλιποῦς καὶ τελείου. ἀλλ' εἴτε κατὰ τὴν δύναμιν, εἴτε κατὰ τὴν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ ἐπίνοιαν, εἴτε κατὰ τὸ σοφόν τε καὶ ἄφθαρτον καὶ ἀίδιον καὶ εἴ τι ἄλλο θεοπρεπὲς νόημα τῇ θεωρίᾳ προσκείμενον τύχοι, ἐν παντὶ τὴν τελειότητα θεωρεῖσθαι περὶ τὴν θείαν φύσιν κατὰ τὸ εὔλογον τῆς ἀκολουθίας ταύτης συγκαταθήσεται. τούτου δὲ δοθέντος οὐκέτ' ἂν εἴη χαλεπὸν τὸ ἐσκεδασμένον τῆς διανοίας εἰς πλῆθος θεῶν πρὸς μιᾶς θεότητος περι αγαγεῖν ὁμολογίαν. εἰ γὰρ τὸ τέλειον ἐν παντὶ δοίη περὶ τὸ ὑποκείμενον ὁμολογεῖσθαι, πολλὰ δὲ εἶναι τὰ τέλεια διὰ τῶν αὐτῶν χαρακτηριζόμενα λέγοι, ἀνάγκη πᾶσα ἐπὶ τῶν μηδεμιᾷ παραλλαγῇ διακρινομένων ἀλλ' ἐν τοῖς αὐτοῖς θεωρουμένων ἢ ἐπιδεῖξαι τὸ ἴδιον ἤ, εἰ μηδὲν ἰδιαζόντως καταλαμβάνοι ἡ ἔννοια ἐφ' ὧν τὸ διακρῖνον οὐκ ἔστι, μὴ ὑπονοεῖν τὴν διάκρισιν. εἰ γὰρ μήτε παρὰ τὸ πλέον καὶ ἔλαττον τὴν διαφορὰν ἐξευρίσκοι, διότι τὴν ἐλάττωσιν ὁ τῆς τελειότητος οὐ παραδέχεται λόγος, μήτε τὴν παρὰ τὸ χεῖρον καὶ