{"marius-mercator-refutatio-symboli-theodori/17":{"o":"Immo nos tibi catholici dicimus, qui talia ore inpurissimo et lingua scelestissima protulisti, incessabiliter anathema et omnibus consentaneis tuis. uide enim, si euigilare uolueris, quid mali coneris inducere, inperitia an malitia, tu uideris. periura quippe uerba tua sunt ista cum sensu prauissimo et inimico catholicae ueritatis, dei uerbum hominem suscepisse ex semine Abraham et Dauid perfectum, ex anima rationali et corpore constitutum quemque hominem, inquis, secundum nos naturaliter uirtute et potentia spiritus sancti in uirginis utero figuratum, factum ex muliere, factum sub lege, ut omnes nos ex maledicto legis et seruitute redimeret, adoptionem filiorum olim praedestinatam recipientes, inenarrabiliter copulauit sibi atque coniunxit, mortem <quidem> eum secundum legem hominum praeparans experiri, suscitans uero a mortuis et in caelum leuans, sedere fecit ad dexteram dei. et post paululum ibi: ab omni creatura nunc adorabilis suscipit uenerationem, tamquam inseparabilem cum diuina natura habens coniunctionem. uis igitur hoc ex isto sensu conficere, quod sane tuo luas capite, natum iam Christum ex uirgine per spiritum sanctum adhaesisse uel coniunctum esse, ut saepissime garrís, uerbo dei deo atque ex illius societate meritum et uocabulum conquisisse, uocabulo autem tantum, non natura appellandum esse filium dei et cetera habere priuilegia non genuina, sed per gratiam praestita, dissimulans quod scribtura est: uerbum caro factum est, et habitauit in nobis. quod cum audis ab obicientibus tibi, calumniaris, tamquam deum in carnem uersum esse sentientibus, quod absit ut uel quisquam hoc dementissimus dicat et sentiat. factus est enim homo quod non erat, filius dei deus uerbum, non deponens quod erat, sed manens deus in diuinitatis cum patre et spiritu sancto substantia uel natura. numquid enim anima saltem hominis cuiuslibet mixta et conexa corpori amittit uel inmortalitatem naturae suae uel quod inuisibilis, quod incorporea est? non utique. huic uanissimae atque inani calumniae obponenda etiam trium angelorum in Sodomorum euersione descendentium illa fidelissima et sacratissima historia, quae eos exceptos ab Abraham prius et manducasse et pedes lauisse désignât. num illi in adsumptione illa corporum ex angelica uersi et commutati esse substantia in corporum naturam dicendi sunt? auertat hanc dementiam deus. non utique, quia manentes in immortali et incorporea sua natura et substantia, in corporibus constituti ad tempus, diuinitus imperatum sibi officium inpleuerunt. Quis ergo ferat ista garrientem et audiat duos dei filios eum uerbis tantummodo ad decipiendos simplices protestans non dicere, apertis uero sententiis duos palam ostendere diuersi meriti, diuersae dignitatis, diuersi status, diuersae naturae? fallit autem ac decipit, ut diximus, inperitos. quomodo enim dicit duos se non dicere filios neque sentire, diuidens unum ab altero, unum temporalem, alterum uero ab aeterno secundum essentiam et naturam, et illum temporalem participatione et tantum uocabulo honorandum, non autem et natura esse filium dei et deum? nam singulorum status et merita diuidit, alterum natura esse uolens, alterum coniunctione et societate illius qui natura est deus et filius dei, cum utique recordari debuisset Pauli dictum apostoli quo optabam ego ipse anathema esse a Christo pro fratribus meis secun - dum carnem , qui sunt Israhelitae, quorum est adoptio filiorum et testamenta et legis constitutio et obsequia et gloria et promissa , quorum patres et ex quibus Christus secundum carnem natus est, qui est super omnia deus benedictus in saecula. utique super omnia deus qui secundum carnem ex Israhelitis, ex semine Abraham et Dauid per uirginis uterum originem habet, uerbum enim carnem factum esse euangelio teste didicimus, ex quo tempore neque quae infirma sunt et fragilia humanitatis, neque quae diuina atque sublimia et aeterna sunt, ab illa sunt persona uel substantia separanda. et audi Esaiam praedicantem : puer natus est nobis et filius datus est nobis , cuius principatus super hum e rum eius. hic uocabitur ad mirabilis , magni consilii nun tius , deus fortis , pater futuri saeculi, princeps pacis. m u l t i p l i c a b i t u r r e g n u m eius et pacis eius non erit finis, super sedem Dauid patris sui et super regnum eius, ut confirmet illud et c o n r o b o r e t in iudicio et iustitia a modo et usque in aeternum. zelus domini e x e r c i t u u m f a c i e t haec. hic deus fortis utique qui puer, sine dubio pannis in Bethleem inuolutus et in praesepio positus adoratus a magis, Aegyptum postea cum parentibus petiit, ut ex Aegypto secundum alium profetam praecanentem uocaretur dicentem: ex E g y p t o u o c a u i f i l i u m meum. obiciendus quoque ei in faciem Hieremias uociferans: hie deus noster et non a e t i m a b i t u r alius praeter eum deus, qui inuenit omnem uiam iustitiae et dedit eam Iacob puero suo et Israhel dilecto suo. post haec in terris uisus est et inter homines conuersatus est. dicatur, quaeso, nobis, quis iste est qui postmodum in terris uisus est et inter homines conuersatus est? utique uerbum dei, deus homo et homo deus, Iesus Christus, filius unigenitus patris, qui cum in terris in carne constitutus esset et in ipsa uisibilis conuersaretur inter homines, ab hominibus in ipsa passus, crucifixus in ipsa, mortuus in ipsa, resurrexit tertia die cum ipsa iudex uenturus totus. hic natura filius dei est ex deo uerbo et homine cum anima rationali et carne solida atque perfecta, et hae tres substantiae una iam substantia, una quoque persona. substantialiter enim deus hominem, indemutabiliter caro factus, suscepit et gessit nec deposuit nec depositurus est umquam conregnantem et condominantem, uenturus iudicare uiuos et mortuos. quid hie dualitas naturarum? quid substantiarum diuersitas in uno domino Christo magna et impia loquacitate nobis adfertur? nempe ut duos Christos et duos diuersos esse dei fìlios audiamus. et certe homo communis ex anima et corpore constitutus, is ex diuersis sine dubio substantiis et naturis, corporali uidelicet et spiritali, crassa et subtili, [et] uisibili et inuisibili, mortali et inmortali, conuenit in unum, non contra naturam, sed naturaliter et dei institutione, qui ita ut esset, semel et ab initio et in perpetuum sanxit atque disposuit. homo ergo cum est et enuntiatur homo, una natura est et una substantia unaque persona, nec Paulus apostolus cum diceret: primus homo de terra terrenus , secundus homo dominus de caelo et cetera quae in eadem circumstantia latius exequitur, duplicem eum uel duas naturas esse signauit; nec qui dixit: homo cum in honore esset , non intellexit , com paratus est i u m e n t i i n i p i e n t i b u et similis factus est illis, duarum in eo fecit naturarum mentionem. illud quoque praetermittendum non est quod dictum est in Genesi: descendit Iacob in - E g y p t u m cum filiis suis, omnes animae LXXV. item propheta: omnes animae meae sunt. sicut anima patris , ita anima filii mea est ; et anima quae peccat , ipsa sola morietur . et is qui u u a m a c e r b a m m a n d u c a u i t , ipsius o b t u p e c e n t dentes. item alius propheta: lauda , anima mea, dominum , et omnia ossa mea laudem dicent tibi. . . . . . . . , . ., i item a parte corporis: non permanebit , inquit, spiritus meus cum hominibus istis , quoniam sunt caro. item alius: c a r o m e a e x u l t a b i t in spe, et alibi: uidebit omnis caro salutare dei. numquid eis sine animis ista contingent? aut quia superius animae tantum nominatae sunt, corporis societate uel in bonis uel in malis meritis separatae sunt? quis hoc dementissimus dixerit? non utique, sed naturaliter, quamdiu utrumque sibi conexum et cohaerens est, non in dualitate, sed in unitate enuntiatur et significatur natura, id est hominis seu humana natura. nemo igitur sanus mente, cum homo uiuus uel aduersa sustinet uel optatis exultât, dicat non ex utroque constitutum uel dolore adfligi uel laetitia exultare, cum animam nullus dubitet et in sua natura et propria substantia dolore non adfici, quod etiam scriptura diuina nos super hoc euidentius docet dicens: nolite timere eos qui corpus occidunt , animae autem quid faciant , non habent . Quid opus est testimonia plura congerere? aut qui finis erit in his exquirendis? aut cui est uel fuit uel erit aliquando possibile perscrutari omnia et omnia commemorare quibus probetur non nouella hunc, sed uetere partim Pauli Samosateni, partim Ebionis, partim Marcelli Galatae et Photini esse cum impietate distortum? unum tamen pro innumerabilibus euangelicum sibi audiat trabalem: nemo ascendit in caelum nisi qui descendit de caelo, filius hominis qui est in caelo. et certe adhuc crucifigendus Christus ista dicebat, qui descendit de caelo, inquit, et qui est in caelo filius hominis. ita ergo uerbum deus homo et homo deus uerbum et sicut in gloria et maiestate dei unum, ita et his quae ima sunt secundum hominem, unum, et unus dominus Iesus Christus ex utero, qui substantialiter filius dei, unum cum patre et spiritu sancto, deus unus in trinitate, semper et in saecula.","t":"On the contrary, we catholics say to you, who uttered such things with a most impure mouth and a most wicked tongue: anathema, unceasingly, to you and to all who agree with you. For see, if you are willing to wake up, what evil you are trying to bring in, whether from ignorance or malice you must judge. For these are your perjured words, with a most perverse meaning hostile to catholic truth: “God the Word took a perfect man from the seed of Abraham and David, constituted of a rational soul and a body, a man,” you say, “like us by nature, formed in the virgin's womb by the power and might of the Holy Spirit, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem us all from the curse of the law and from slavery, as we receive the adoption of sons predestined long ago. Him he joined and united to himself ineffably, preparing him [indeed] to experience death according to the law of human beings, but raising him from the dead and lifting him into heaven, he made him sit at the right hand of God.” And a little later, in the same place: “He now receives veneration as adorable by every creature, as having an inseparable conjunction with the divine nature.” From this view, then, you want to conclude (may you pay for it on your own head) that Christ, already born of the virgin through the Holy Spirit, adhered or was joined (as you very often chatter) to God the Word, and from fellowship with him acquired merit and a name; that he is to be called Son of God in name only, not by nature; and that he has his other privileges not as his own by birth but granted by grace. You disguise what Scripture says: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” When you hear this from those who object to you, you slander them as though they thought that God was changed into flesh: far be it that anyone, however demented, should say or think this. For the Son of God, God the Word, became man, which he was not, not laying aside what he was, but remaining God in the substance or nature of divinity with the Father and the Holy Spirit. For does even the soul of any man at all, mixed with and joined to a body, lose the immortality of its nature, or its being invisible and incorporeal? Certainly not. Against this most vain and empty slander must also be set that most faithful and most sacred history of the three angels who came down at the overthrow of Sodom, which records that, when Abraham received them, they first ate and had their feet washed. Are they to be said, in taking on those bodies, to have been turned and changed from angelic substance into the nature of bodies? God avert such madness! Certainly not; but, remaining in their immortal and incorporeal nature and substance and placed in bodies for a time, they fulfilled the office divinely commanded them. Who, then, could bear him chattering such things, and hear him protesting in words only, to deceive the simple, that he does not speak of two sons of God, while by his open statements he plainly shows two, of different merit, different dignity, different status and different nature? He misleads and deceives the unskilled, as we said. For how does he say that he neither speaks of nor thinks of two sons, when he divides one from the other, the one temporal, the other from eternity according to essence and nature, and holds that the temporal one is to be honored by participation and in name only, but is not by nature Son of God and God? For he divides the status and merits of each, wanting the one to be Son by nature and the other by conjunction and fellowship with him who is by nature God and Son of God. Yet he surely ought to have remembered the saying of Paul the apostle: “I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kin according to the flesh, who are Israelites; to them belong the adoption of sons, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, the glory and the promises; theirs are the fathers, and from them Christ was born according to the flesh, who is God over all, blessed for ever.” Surely he is God over all who, according to the flesh, has his origin from the Israelites, from the seed of Abraham and David, through the virgin's womb. For we have learned on the testimony of the gospel that the Word became flesh, and from that time neither the weak and frail things of humanity nor the divine, sublime and eternal things are to be separated from that person or substance. And hear Isaiah proclaiming: “A child is born to us and a son is given to us, whose rule is upon his shoulder; he will be called wonderful, messenger of great counsel, mighty God, father of the age to come, prince of peace. His kingdom will be multiplied, and of his peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David his father and over his kingdom, to establish it and strengthen it in judgment and righteousness from now and for ever. The zeal of the Lord of hosts will do this.” This mighty God is surely the one who, as a child, was without doubt wrapped in swaddling clothes in Bethlehem, laid in a manger and worshipped by the magi, and afterwards went to Egypt with his parents, so that he might be called out of Egypt, as another prophet foretold, saying, “Out of Egypt I called my son.” Jeremiah too must be thrown in his face, crying out: “This is our God, and no other shall be reckoned beside him; he found every way of righteousness and gave it to Jacob his servant and to Israel his beloved. After this he was seen on earth and lived among men.” Tell us, I ask, who is this who afterwards was seen on earth and lived among men? Surely the Word of God, God man and man God, Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of the Father, who, when he was placed on earth in the flesh and, visible in it, lived among men, suffered in it at the hands of men, was crucified in it, died in it, rose with it on the third day, and will come whole as judge. He is by nature Son of God, from God the Word and a man with a rational soul and solid and perfect flesh, and these three substances are now one substance and also one person. For God, having become flesh without change, took up and bore the man substantially, and he has not laid him aside nor will he ever lay him aside, as he reigns and rules with him, and will come to judge the living and the dead. What is this duality of natures? What is this difference of substances in the one Lord Christ, which is pressed on us with great and impious loquacity? Surely so that we should hear of two Christs and two different sons of God. And certainly the ordinary man, constituted of soul and body, is without doubt made of different substances and natures, namely bodily and spiritual, gross and subtle, visible and invisible, mortal and immortal, and yet comes together into one, not against nature but naturally and by the institution of God, who once, from the beginning and for ever, ordained and arranged that he should so be. Man, then, when he is and is called man, is one nature, one substance and one person. Nor did the apostle Paul, when he said, “The first man was from the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven,” and the rest that he sets out more fully in the same passage, signify him to be double or two natures; nor did the one who said, “Man, when he was in honor, did not understand; he was compared to senseless beasts and became like them,” make mention of two natures in him. Nor should we pass over what is said in Genesis: “Jacob went down into Egypt with his sons, all the souls seventy-five.” Likewise the prophet: “All souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so the soul of the son is mine; and the soul that sins, it alone shall die. And whoever has eaten the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.” Likewise another prophet: “Praise the Lord, my soul,” and, “All my bones shall speak praise to you.” Likewise on the side of the body: “My spirit shall not remain with these men, because they are flesh.” Likewise another: “My flesh will rejoice in hope,” and elsewhere, “All flesh will see the salvation of God.” Do these things happen to them without souls? Or, because above only souls were named, are they separated from fellowship with the body in good or bad deserts? Who, however demented, would say this? Certainly not; but naturally, as long as both are connected and cohere, the nature is expressed and signified not in duality but in unity, that is, the nature of a man, or human nature. So let no one of sound mind, when a living man either endures adversity or exults in what he desired, say that it is not the one constituted of both who is afflicted with grief or exults with joy, though no one doubts that the soul, in its own nature and proper substance, is not affected by pain, as divine Scripture also teaches us more clearly on this point, saying, “Do not fear those who kill the body but cannot do anything to the soul.” What need is there to heap up more testimonies? Or what end will there be in searching them out? Or to whom is it, or was it, or will it ever be possible to search out all things and mention all the proofs that this man is twisted with an impiety not new but old, partly that of Paul of Samosata, partly of Ebion, partly of Marcellus the Galatian and Photinus? Yet, in place of countless others, let him hear one weighty saying of the gospel: “No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven.” And certainly Christ said this when he was still to be crucified: “who descended from heaven,” he says, “and the Son of Man who is in heaven.” So, then, the Word God is man and man is God the Word; and as he is one in the glory and majesty of God, so he is one also in the lowest things that belong to man: one Lord Jesus Christ from the womb, who is substantially the Son of God, one with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God in Trinity, always and for ever.","f":"Marius Mercator, <i>Refut. symb. Theod.</i> 17 (ACO I.5 1.5:25-28; trans. Sophia Scriptura, https://sophiascriptura.com/p/marius-mercator-refutatio-symboli-theodori/17)."}}