The Epistle to Aristides.

I.

[Africanus on the Genealogy in the Holy Gospels.1    This letter, as given by Eusebius, is acephalous. A large portion of it is supplied by Cardinal Angelo Mai in the Bibliotheca nova Patrum, vol. iv. pp. 231 and 273. We enclose in brackets the parts wanting in Gallandi, who copied Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., i. 7). On this celebrated letter of Africanus to Aristides, consult especially Eusebius (Hist. Eccl., i. 7); also Jerome, comm. on Matt. i. 16; Augustine, Retract., ii. 7; Photius, cod. xxxiv. p. 22; and in addition to these, Zacharias Chrysopol. in Bibl. P. P. Lugd., vol. xix. p. 751.—Some indeed incorrectly allege that this discrepant enumeration and mixing of the names both of priestly men, as they think, and royal, was made properly,2    δικαίως. in order that Christ might be shown rightfully to be both Priest and King; as if any one disbelieved this, or had any other hope than this, that Christ is the High Priest of His Father, who presents our prayers to Him, and a supramundane King, who rules by the Spirit those whom He has delivered, a cooperator in the government of all things. And this is announced to us not by the catalogue of the tribes, nor by the mixing of the registered generations, but by the patriarchs and prophets. Let us not therefore descend to such religious trifling as to establish the kingship and priesthood of Christ by the interchanges of the names. For the priestly tribe of Levi, too, was allied with the kingly tribe of Juda, through the circumstance that Aaron married Elizabeth the sister of Naasson,3    Ex. vi. 23. and that Eleazar again married the daughter of Phatiel,4    Ex. vi. 25. and begat children. The evangelists, therefore, would thus have spoken falsely, affirming what was not truth, but a fictitious commendation. And for this reason the one traced the pedigree of Jacob the father of Joseph from David through Solomon; the other traced that of Heli also, though in a different way, the father of Joseph, from Nathan the son of David. And they ought not indeed to have been ignorant that both orders of the ancestors enumerated are the generation of David, the royal tribe of Juda.5    [Heb. vii. 14.] For if Nathan was a prophet, so also was Solomon, and so too the father of both of them; and there were prophets belonging to many of the tribes, but priests belonging to none of the tribes, save the Levites only. To no purpose, then, is this fabrication of theirs. Nor shall an assertion of this kind prevail in the Church of Christ against the exact truth, so as that a lie should be contrived for the praise and glory of Christ. For who does not know that most holy word of the apostle also, who, when he was preaching and proclaiming the resurrection of our Saviour, and confidently affirming the truth, said with great fear, “If any say that Christ is not risen, and we assert and have believed this, and both hope for and preach that very thing, we are false witnesses of God, in alleging that He raised up Christ, whom He raised not up?”6    1 Cor. xv. 12, etc. And if he who glorifies God the Father is thus afraid lest he should seem a false witness in narrating a marvellous fact, how should not he be justly afraid, who tries to establish the truth by a false statement, preparing an untrue opinion? For if the generations are different, and trace down no genuine seed to Joseph, and if all has been stated only with the view of establishing the position of Him who was to be born—to confirm the truth, namely, that He who was to be would be king and priest, there being at the same time no proof given, but the dignity of the words being brought down to a feeble hymn,—it is evident that no praise accrues to God from that, since it is a falsehood, but rather judgment returns on him who asserts it, because he vaunts an unreality as though it were reality. Therefore, that we may expose the ignorance also of him who speaks thus, and prevent any one from stumbling at this folly, I shall set forth the true history of these matters.]

............Οἱ μὲν οὖν ἤτοι τὴν εὐαγγελικὴν ἱστορίαν ἠγνοηκότες ἢ συνεῖναι μὴ δυνηθέντες δοξολογούσῃ πλάνῃ τὴν ἀγνωσίαν ἐπύκνωσαν εἰπόντες, ὅτι δικαίως γέγονεν ἡ διάφορος αὕτη τῶν ὀνομάτων καταρίθμησίς τε καὶ ἐπιμιξία τῶν τε ἱερατικῶν ὡς οἴονται καὶ τῶν βασιλικῶν, ἵνα δειχθῇ δικαίως ὁ Χριστὸς ἱερεύς τε καὶ βασιλεὺς γενόμενος, ὥσπερ τινὸς ἀπειθοῦντος ἢ ἑτέραν ἐσχηκότος ἐλπίδα, ὅτι Χριστὸς ἀΐδιος μὲν [ὑπάρχει] ἱερεὺς πατρός, τὰς ἡμετέρας πρὸς αὐτὸν εὐχὰς ἀναφέρων, βασιλεὺς δὲ ὑπερκόσμιος, οὓς ἠλευθέρωσε νέμων τῷ πνεύματι, συνεργὸς εἰς τὴν διακόσμησιν τῶν ὅλων γενόμενος. καὶ τοῦτο ἡμῖν προσήγγειλεν οὐχ ὁ κατάλογος τῶν φυλῶν, οὐχ ἡ μῖξις τῶν ἀναγράπτων γενῶν, ἀλλὰ πατριάρχαι καὶ προφῆται. μὴ οὖν κατίωμεν εἰς τοσαύτην θεοσεβείας σμικρολογίαν, ἵνα τῇ ἐναλλαγῇ τῶν ὀνομάτων τὴν Χριστοῦ βασιλείαν καὶ ἱερωσύνην συνιστῶμεν, ἐπεὶ τῇ Ἰούδα φυλῇ τῇ βασιλικῇ ἡ τοῦ Λεϋὶ φυλὴ [ἡ] ἱερατικὴ συνεζύγη, τοῦ Ναασσὼν ἀδελφὴν τὴν Ἐλισάβετ Ἀαρὼν ἀρξαμένου καὶ πάλιν Ἐλεάζαρ τὴν θυγατέρα Φατιὴλ καὶ ἐνθένδε παιδοποιησαμένων. ἐψεύσαντο οὖν οἱ εὐαγγελισταὶ συνιστάντες οὐκ ἀλήθειαν, ἀλλ' εἰκαζόμενον ἔπαινον, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ὁ μὲν διὰ Σολομῶνος ἀπὸ Δαβὶδ ἐγενεαλόγησεν ἐπὶ Ἰακὼβ τὸν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ πατέρα, ὁ δὲ ἀπὸ Νάθαν τοῦ Δαβὶδ ἐπὶ Ἡλὶ τὸν τοῦ Ἰωσὴφ ὁμοίως ἄλλως πατέρα. καίτοι ἀγνοεῖν αὐτοὺς οὐκ ἐχρῆν, ὡς ἑκατέρα τῶν κατηριθμημένων τάξις τὸ τοῦ Δαβίδ ἐστι γένος, ἡ τοῦ Ἰούδα φυλὴ βασιλική. εἰ γὰρ προφήτης ὁ Νάθαν, ἀλλ' ὅμως καὶ Σολομὼν ὅ τε τούτων πατὴρ ἑκατέρου: ἐκ πολλῶν δὲ φυλῶν ἐγένοντο προφῆται, ἱερεῖς δὲ οὐδένες τῶν δώδεκα φυλῶν, μόνοι δὲ λεϋῖται. μάτην αὐτοῖς ἄρα πέπλασται τὸ ἐψευσμένον. μὴ δὴ κρατοίη τοιοῦτος λόγος ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ Χριστοῦ καὶ θεοῦ πατρὸς ἀκριβοῦς ἀληθείας, ὅτι ψεῦδος σύγκειται εἰς αἶνον καὶ δοξολογίαν Χριστοῦ. τίς γὰρ οὐκ οἶδε κἀκεῖνον τὸν ἱερώτατον τοῦ ἀποστόλου λόγον κηρύσσοντος καὶ διαγγέλλοντος τὴν ἀνάστασιν τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν καὶ διϊσχυριζομένου τὴν ἀλήθειαν, μεγάλῳ φόβῳ λέγοντος, ὅτι εἰ Χριστὸν λέγουσί τινες μὴ ἐγηγέρθαι [οὐδὲ Χριστὸς ἐγήγερται], ἡμεῖς δὲ τοῦτο καί φαμεν καὶ πεπιστεύκαμεν καὶ αὐτὸ καὶ ἐλπίζομεν καὶ κηρύσσομεν, καταψευδομαρτυροῦμεν τοῦ θεοῦ, ὅτι ἤγειρε τὸν Χριστόν, ὃν οὐκ ἤγειρεν. εἰ δὲ οὕτως ὁ δοξολογῶν θεὸν πατέρα δέδοικε, μὴ ψευδολόγος δοκοίη ἔργον παράδοξον διηγούμενος, πῶς οὐκ ἂν δικαίως φοβηθείη ὁ διὰ ψευδολογίας ἀληθείας σύστασιν ποριζόμενος, δόξαν οὐκ ἀληθῆ συντιθείς; εἰ γὰρ τὰ γένη διάφορα καὶ μηδὲν καταφέρει γνήσιον σπέρμα ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰωσήφ, εἴρηται δὲ μόνον εἰς σύστασιν τοῦ γεννηθησομένου, ὅτι βασιλεὺς καὶ ἱερεὺς ἔσται ὁ ἐσόμενος, ἀποδείξεως μὴ προσούσης, ἀλλὰ τῆς τῶν λόγων σεμνότητος εἰς ὕμνον ἀδρανῆ φερομένης, δῆλον ὡς τοῦ θεοῦ μὲν ὁ ἔπαινος οὐχ ἅπτεται ψεῦδος ὤν, κρίσις δὲ τῷ εἰρηκότι τὸ οὐκ ὂν ὡς ὂν κομπάσαντι. ἵνα οὖν καὶ τοῦτο μὲν τοῦ εἰρηκότος ἐλέγξωμεν τὴν ἀμαθίαν, παύσωμεν δὲ τοῦ μηδένα ὑπ' ἀγνοίας ὁμοίας σκανδαλισθῆναι, τὴν ἀληθῆ τῶν γεγονότων ἱστορίαν ἐκθήσομαι.