Letters 3.319–3.349

To Asclepius the bishop. Even if under the misrule of Eusebius, as you wrote (for you rightly called his rule misrule), punishment precedes charges and penalties outrun proofs, do not be surprised. For being a nursling of unreason and uninitiated in all justice, he does not hesitate to confound what is just. But it ought not to be so; judgment should grow together with the charges, belief should follow the proofs, and the verdict should come last, making the nature of the offence the measure of the penalty. [Letter 3.320] To the same. [How what is written in Ecclesiastes, "Do not be very righteous," is to be understood.] Since you wished to learn how "Do not be very righteous" is said, I think it has a twofold interpretation: either "Do not be exact in justice, but go beyond it by goodness" (for it is just not to be wronged, but philosophic to bear being wronged); or "Walk the middle road of virtue." For the excesses and defects of the virtues, leading away from the right road, end in sins. And that the most wise exhortation looks to this, what follows will guarantee: "And do not be over-wise," it says, "lest you be astounded." One of the seven much-talked-of sages, either having stolen this, I think, or having coincided with its thought (for theft is the taking of what belongs to others, while coincidence is an accidental likeness of things), declared, "Measure is best"; and another, paraphrasing it, said, "Nothing in excess." And one can see this prevailing not only in the virtues but also in piety. For piety, being the mean between impiety and superstition, rejects both. [Letter 3.321] Since you wished to learn how the virtues too are means, know that prudence stands midway between simplicity and knavery, liberality between prodigality and stinginess, magnanimity between boastfulness and abjectness, courage between rashness and cowardice. One must, then, flee the extremes and pursue the means. [Letter 3.322] Do not seek wealth, excellent friend, the father of arrogance, the begetter of haughtiness, the supplier of pleasures, the maker of all vice, who robs man of friendship with God; but seek virtue, which frees from all evils. And if it has sweat and labours, do not flee it for that reason, but embrace it for that reason above all, considering that in other things too what is acquired with labours and sweat, even if small, is more desirable, while what falls to one of itself is easily despised, even if it is great. [Letter 3.323] To Zosimus the presbyter. Since exhortations have achieved nothing, your madness for vice having proved too strong for correction, we turn again to prayers. May you, then, depart from madness and come to a sound mind.

To Strategius the monk. Those who love virtue and are captured by wisdom, being insatiable in their desire, do not cease kindling this divine torch in themselves, thinking this their work and all else a side matter. What seems great to others seems small to them; they laugh at what is fought over, trample on what is admired, and aim only at things above the world. Since you too have chosen to join such a choir, you ought to keep the eye of the soul sleepless. [Letter 3.325] I greatly wonder how formerly those taught by the divine Word laid their own goods at the service of the common good, but now some of the guides of the Word (for it is not right to condemn all) dare to appropriate what is common. By this absurdity they have made even those accustomed to bear fruit grow numb. For while the church's treasures ought to be stored in the goodwill of the faithful, they do not allow this to happen. If the consecrated and those for whom the priesthood is exercised are occupied with the same things, who will propitiate the Godhead? The treasures of the poor, then, should be stored in the minds of those ruled, and the consecrated should be free for the sacred ministry alone, so that they may make the Godhead favourable to themselves and their subjects. But if the people, seeing those allotted the holiness of the priesthood handling all worldly affairs, have miscarried their reverence, they are not so much to be blamed as those merchants and retailers who set in motion every unjust road of trade. For if these correct their own affairs, there is hope that those of the people will follow. [Letter 3.326] … to learn that good things gladden the more, the more one has laboured before coming to them; but those whose acquisition is easy are easily despised in possession. [Letter 3.327] To Strategius the scholasticus. Even if, relying on the law of Moses, you have decided to retaliate, know that one can also do wrong by retaliating beyond measure. For when someone inflicts penalties greater than the offences, he begins a second wrong. It is better, then, not to retaliate but to practise philosophy; yet it is not unreasonable for one who does not know how to practise philosophy to retaliate in measure. For retaliating beyond measure puts the retaliator in the rank of the one who did wrong at the beginning. So much for that. And know, wise friend, that Moses the lawgiver, checking in advance the unrestrained impulse of the Jews (so that by fear of suffering they might not act), permitted this rather than …

To Aetius the count. Those who are eager to follow their first benefactors in everything, even if they ask for unjust things, seem to me to sin, even if, sharing in an unjust deed, they seem to cover the blame by another just thing, repaying those who did them good. But the one who has received good ought to do good in return by repaying in good things, not by joining in bad ones. For this is not repayment but injustice.

To Macarius the presbyter. [On "Sing to the Lord a new song."] When the accursed demons, with the devil leading them, let nothing remain in order, but, gorged with all injustice and greed and knowing no satiety of insolence, drove people to the extremity of the passions, then indeed the King of all, the Father's Word, hating their tyranny and pitying the others' misfortunes, put on human nature and took his stand in the battle line. Trophies, then, some stood, some were being raised, some were in hope. The barbarian band of demons with its general lamented its misfortunes, while human nature ran back to freedom. That is why the Psalmist urged those set free to sing a new song; for with prophetic eyes he beheld the future.

To Theodosius the bishop. Try, most wise friend, to soothe with pity and gentleness the misfortunes of those who have fallen into trials, press them with mild words toward good cheer, and pry out the roots of despondency. For if they learn from you that trials, if justly brought on them, lighten their sins, and if permitted to come on them though they had done nothing wrong, procure crowns, they will not only banish despondency but be filled with delight.

To Daniel the presbyter. That the blessed presbyter Eustathius utterly mastered the desires for shameful gains and was seen inclining to whatever belonged to manly virtue, your understanding too is not unaware. But that, when he was summoned to the senate above, the slavish (one of whom is the polluted Eustathius the deacon, at whose sharing his name, as you know, he was greatly vexed) rejoiced as at his death, while lovers of virtue grieved at being deprived of his company, learn this from me.

To Heron. [On the change and restoration of Nebuchadnezzar.] When the king of the Babylonians was caught thinking, speaking and acting beyond human nature, he was driven from human company and honour and became a table-companion and housemate of beasts. But when he held the proper opinion about God, then he also received back his own glory. For the limit of the misfortune was the recognition of the One who is greater.

To Martinianus, Zosimus, Maron and Eustathius. Which of you began first to do wrong and break the law no one can easily say, so evenly matched is the vice you have, to the harm of your own heads. As, then, it is not easy to know who led and who followed, so it is not easy to stop your madness; indeed people think it very difficult, since each of you is ambitious to surpass the other in wickedness, not in ignorance (that might perhaps have been pardoned), but knowingly, turned to it by an unrivalled enmity.

To Ischyrion the presbyter. [On what the Lord said to the Samaritan woman, "We worship what we know."] Those persuaded by Eunomius ought properly not even to receive an answer, since he thought himself clever and dared to say that the Son is among the worshippers, and could not understand, or, as I think, through prejudice and love of rule would not say, what is true and what wise and foolish alike understand: that he gave this answer, "We worship what we know," to the opinion of the Samaritan woman, who was talking with him as with a Jew and preferring her own things to those of the Jews. For it is evident that he is among those worshipped. Yet, lest we seem to be accused by them of haughtiness, skirmish with them and say: "You are sick with the utmost folly, being persuaded by a man who dared to teach that the Father is incomparable, and who set aside the divine Paul, who said, 'He did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped.' For the 'greater' which you bring forward to lessen the Son is said by comparison, not from an incomparable superiority. If, then, he came into being from nothing, as you say, not even the 'greater' stands according to you. For what comparison is there between the One who always is and things that came to be from nothing? But if you confess that he was begotten timelessly and without passion from the Father's property, even if you cannot attain the exact meaning for which 'My Father is greater than I' was said (for it was said not for teaching but only for comfort, to the apostles who were dead with fear, as he was about to depart at once, so that they might take courage, since he was going to one who seemed to them greater; and a clear proof of this is that it was said not at another time but only on the very night on which he was to be betrayed, on which he also shaped his words to such lowliness as to say, 'Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will give me twelve legions of angels?' For what need of so many, when one in Hezekiah's time killed a hundred and eighty-five thousand and cut down the Persian power? But, as I said, he spoke to their cowardice and their opinion). If, then, you do not attain this true meaning, but have chosen to stand apart from the impiety of the Anomoeans, you can say what someone said in arguing with them: that the 'greater' stands in that he is the Begetter, and the 'equal' in that he is God and of the same essence."

To the same. If the divine Paul laid down that we compare spiritual things with spiritual (that is, words and names), it befits us too, obeying this rule, to examine the divine Scriptures. First, then, we must consider how "cannot" is said, and so go on to the solution of the question. Hear first the lawgiver Moses; for it is right to lay the foundation of the thought from the Old Covenant and to crown it from the New. What does he say to the people? "You cannot keep the Passover in any of your cities, but in the place that the Lord your God chooses." He put "you cannot" for "it is not allowed, not permitted, not granted, not admissible." For that they could keep the Passover in other cities too is plain; indeed they do so even now, but lawlessly. What, then, is "You cannot"? "It is not lawful for you; you shall not offer; you shall not do it." And that it is said in this sense, hear the apostles too, following the lawgiver and saying, "We cannot but speak of what we have heard and seen." What then? Could they not have kept silent? Certainly they could. What, then, did they mean? "It is not admissible or fitting to consign to silence what ought to be proclaimed brilliantly and clearly." And the Jews too said (and the testimony of enemies is surely weighty), "For that a notable sign has been done is manifest, and we cannot deny it," meaning by "cannot" "it is not admissible." And the Apostle says of God the Father, "in which it is impossible for God to lie," not charging the almighty power with any weakness but with the greatest strength, that the Father of truth does not admit falsehood. And elsewhere, confirming this sense, he said, "If we deny him, he remains faithful, for he cannot deny himself." For this too is a proof not of weakness but of unsurpassable strength, that it is not admissible for the divine nature to deny itself. And if one must bring forward the testimony of the Saviour himself, whose wording the heretics try to interpret maliciously, hear him saying, "The sons of the bridechamber cannot fast while the bridegroom is with them," instead of "it is not admissible, not fitting, not proper, not allowed, not suitable." These things being so said, the Saviour's aim is plain. For "The Son can do nothing of himself" does not charge him with weakness but declares the greatest strength: that he does not admit doing anything contrary to the Father. For since they suspected him of being a rival god and appropriating another's glory, he said this, all but saying: "Do not think that I do anything against the Father's will; this cannot happen. It is not admissible that I act contrary to his purpose; it is not possible for me to oppose the Father." And that this is what it means is plain both from what has been said and from his having put the saying very humbly. For what did he say? "The Son can do nothing of himself." If he had said that he does some things of himself and others not of himself, perhaps it would not be unreasonable to think he said this through weakness. But if he said he can do nothing, this very thing compels even the unwilling to think something lofty and noble, and to leap to a thought worthy of God and of that divine essence, saying: Does he do nothing of himself? Yet the greatest achievement and the sum of all good things, which the patriarchs were in labour with, the prophets foretold and the heavenly peoples were amazed at, he himself did. And the chosen vessel cries, the steward of the divine mysteries, the initiator into the preaching, saying, "Who, being in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant." Does he do nothing of himself? Yet he himself cries plainly, "And the Son gives life to whom he wills." Does he do nothing of himself? Yet he proclaimed the sovereign power and authority to which the centurion bore witness, confirming the doctrine, so that what was said might be thought to come not only from the centurion's opinion but also from the Saviour's own verdict. And to the leper, who brilliantly confessed his power and clearly made his petition about his will, saying, "If you will, you can make me clean," and plainly ascribed full authority to him, he said, confirming the opinion by his decree, "I will; be clean." Does he do nothing of himself? Yet he said to the Canaanite woman, "Be it done for you as you will"; and he rebuked the wind and the sea; he gave sight to the blind man; he braced the paralytic; he raised Lazarus. But if we tried to bring forward everything that proclaims the Son's authority, we could perhaps not stop even if we wished. So let us pass these over and reason from our own case. Does he do nothing of himself? Yet we, than whom nothing could be more paltry, do many things of ourselves, flee vice and pursue virtue. And if we do not act of ourselves, we would deserve neither to be punished for sinning nor to enjoy crowns for doing well. You see that the lowliness of the saying, put with exaggeration, persuades even the unreasonable to accept with pious understanding the height of what is said? And if you examine the contrast too, you will find it said as we have interpreted. For he did not say, "The Son can do nothing of himself unless he receives the ability from the Father"; for that is what ought really to have been contrasted with "cannot" (if indeed the saying was to charge him with weakness); but what? "Unless he sees the Father doing something." You see how it proclaims equal honour, equal power and sameness of essence?

To Heron, member of the city council. Those on the stage, excellent friend, are most eager, not to chasten many by their jests, as you said, deceiving yourself and your hearers, but for many to sin. For they have their prosperity in the vice of the spectators, so that if these became better, their art would perish. They would neither choose to correct those who stumble, nor could they if they wished. For their imitation is by nature directed to harm.

To Theodosius the bishop. Just as an excellent physician, armed with art to help an ailing nature, when manifold forms of disease besiege the body, attends to what is urgent (for the one who overlooks what he could save is plainly the cause of the loss) and keeps for later what admits delay and postponement, so that he may not, thinking he has conquered these, be unknowingly conquered by that which turns even the apparent victory into defeat; so you too, mixing understanding with the science of healing souls, look to what is urgent. For when that is healed, there is hope that the rest will be healed together with it.

To Orion. The pleasures of the body are wheedling, clever at bewitching, at throwing reason out of command and turning everything upside down. But if anger fights on reason's side and obeys it like a shield-bearer his king, they will easily be defeated. For when just anger is roused against them, they will not withstand the threat but will vanish, yielding victory to reason, which ought to win. And this is what the Psalmist commanded and you wished to learn: "Be angry, and do not sin."

To Nemessianus the scholasticus. Just as I define as impious and foolish the pagans and Jews, and any who have emulated them, who declare that the prophets said nothing about the Saviour, so I do not hold blameless those who try to transfer the whole Old Testament to him, since in the fight against us they in a way assist our opponents. For by forcing to apply to him things that are refuted by those opponents as not said about him, they breed suspicion even about what was truly and expressly said about him. It ought not to be so; rather, one should state clearly what was said of him, and allow what concerns other matters to be said of those of which it is said. For this is the rule of both truth and proof. Those who bring forward what is not fitting cause even what is fitting to be overturned. [Letter 3.340] A learned man, upright in character and brilliant in life (I pass over his being adorned with a brilliant rank, for that is a shadow and a dream), met us and reported that he had approached the venerable altar to receive the divine mysteries; but seeing you standing at it, an old man in age, a presbyter in rank, but in the prime of lust and outdoing all notorious for licentiousness, he drew back, not thinking it right to receive the holy mysteries from a foul hand. How my soul was struck when I heard this I will pass over; but what I strongly blamed him for, I will say. "The one who receives," I said, "most wise friend, is not harmed at all, even if the one who gives seems unworthy; nor are the undefiled mysteries defiled, even if the priest outstrips all people in vice. If you disbelieve, consider the raven, the unclean bird that hates its young, by which Elijah, who ran his course to heaven and is a citizen of heaven, was fed." And I said many other things, which I declined to write to you for two reasons: not to add superfluous length to the letter, and not to seem to make too much of a tragedy of your evils. As, then, I blamed him, so I advise you either to repent or to withdraw from the venerable altar, so that you may not by your deeds drive away those who have chosen to approach it. [Letter 3.341] [On what is written, "Man shall not live by bread alone."] Since the Hebrews, fed forty years on the manna, which by human reasoning was not trustworthy for bodily strength, remained in equal vigour and strength, and perhaps enjoyed even greater power (for it was not the food but the divine word that sustained both souls and bodies), the lawgiver said what you wished to learn: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God." Christ too put this forward to beat off the devil's device and shook the tempter's strength. [Letter 3.342] [On the Arians and Eunomians.] The heretics do not notice that they are caught by what they construct, and brilliantly defeated by what they think will win. For if the Son is a creature, not even the "greater" stands for them. For "greater" is said by comparison, not from incomparable superiority. What comparison, then, has the creature with the Creator? Let the wise tell us.

To Peter. An intelligent hearer is no small thing: one who not only interrupts the course of the discourse with wonder, but also perceives what is hard to see and can contribute something of his own. That it is no small thing, God ranked the intelligent hearer among the other great and choice things that he threatened to take away from Jerusalem; he would not have said this if it contributed nothing great. That is why the Proverb-writer said, "The ear of a hearer is the desire of the wise." For it gives him neither many labours nor sweat, but asks only for occasions and seeds; for understanding suffices for the farming.

To Hierax, a man of the highest rank. Know, you precinct of purity, that you are being celebrated throughout the city. For having accomplished an extraordinary deed, you made it more extraordinary by its speed. For being great in itself, its speed showed it greater, or rather greatest, adorning the favour and making it more gracious. Shine, then, in such achievements; for it befits you.

To Harpocras the sophist. [On the power of the divine preaching.] If a man's quickness of mind is preferred to knowledge of letters, what wonder is it if the apostles, being unlearned and illiterate, filled with divine wisdom, overcame both dialecticians and orators? For while it is likely that one who reads does not know the interpretation, it is impossible for one who does not know the shapes of the letters to understand the meaning of what is written. Yet it often happens that the reader does not know the meaning, while the hearer, being sharper and excelling in understanding, knows it, though he does not know the shapes of the letters. For the one for whom grasping what is written is impossible through ignorance of the letters often has understanding at its height when others read. If, then, quickness of mind prevails over knowledge, how will divine wisdom not prevail over the art of words?

To Lampetius the bishop. [On the altar.] Since every argument agreed to by opponents is invincible and incontestable, one must argue with each nation from what is customary among them, as Paul, the steward of Christ's thoughts, did, arguing with the Jews from the Scriptures and with the Athenians from the altar. That is why he also said, "To those outside the law I became as one outside the law." For as one who had not heard the law, he made his exhortation from the altar, not thinking the altar more trustworthy than the Scriptures, but overcoming those who did not believe them from their own doctrines. [Letter 3.347] An ancient saying declares, and a law thought good by all people, not to trample on the fallen, nor slaughter those who lie on the ground, but to respect them as suppliants and stretch out a hand to the captured. And I hear that wild beasts which have some spirit fight off what resists them but respect what has given up. If, then, both among people and among beasts there are limits of enmity and war which one must not overstep, do not yourself be angry with the defeated, nor press upon those lying on the ground as if they were opponents,

To Isaiah. If, fearing that the man you insulted might bring charges first, you thought to anticipate him, overshadow the accusations and cut short the complaints against you, this device is truly clever, not to say knavish; but if you really expect to win, you have suffered something foolish. For he could not be convicted of what you yourself have already been convicted of, according to the truthful testimony of those who wrote.

To Theodosius the presbyter. Know, most admirable friend, that the man who seems to be a friend did what he did without telling or consulting me (for he knew I would not bear it, nor allow him to break a long friendship). That is why he has been disowned from our friendship. [Letter 3.350] [On "Claiming to be wise, they became fools."] You are in danger of not knowing that the poets glorified with incredible myths those who could not distinguish themselves by the advantages of noble birth.