The Apocriticus (Answers to the Pagan Critic) 4.18–4.24

[The Christian (Macarius) answers the objection on “Those who are well have no need of a physician” (4.10).] In my judgment the answers given are enough. So, if you like, let us examine the question about the sinners who are called and the righteous who are not called, and what is meant about the healthy and the sick who need a physician. Christ here clearly shows two orders: one healthy, namely the righteous, and one sick, which he expressly called sinful. He taught two rational beings and natures, one in need and the other not in need, indicating the angelic and the human condition. The existence of the angels, being righteous, is never called to repentance, for it has no charge for which to repent: it is neighbour to the highest and all-happy blessedness; it has obtained the unclouded abode and measures its achievement by a rule that does not stumble; it contemplates the unmixed and pure ray of the light; it has its lot to dwell in the court above incorruption. It is clean of insolence, blemish, and wrinkle, clean also of stain, deceit, and wickedness; it drives off the disease of sins and needs no correction or any turning back. This bodiless being of those above the world, the bodyguard of indestructible honour, having blameless virtue of conduct, a life without harm, and a love without guile, always with the Righteous One and righteous with him, is never accused; dwelling within the enclosures of immortality it possesses an age without sickness or old age, and having an undefiled and lasting lodging, it lives through the ages with the King of the ages. Human nature, rational too, sharing in intelligible light and having it in its grasp, had the power to fall short in nothing of the angelic glory; but taking the counsel of indolence, it falls away from the Better. Becoming attached to the matter of earth-bound affairs and plastering on itself the rubbish of cares, it was wholly sown in the pit of deceit, made useless in soul and blinded in mind. It lay bedridden, fevered with the sickness of sins, often consumed by the suffering of misfortune. It had no ordinance; it knew no sequence, no order, no reason, no philosophic mind, no diet or way of life of an ascetic rule. It was thrown on the pallet of the body, afflicted; a stranger and alien to holy places, foreign and hostile to heavenly doctrine; not seeing the ray of the court of the blessed; having a thick curtain spread over it, an unseemly dwelling, an unadorned abode. It had been thrown outside the company of the festivals of the godly and fenced off far from divine oversight — so that the all-good providence (which knows how to suffer with others without suffering) almost grieved at so great a change and turn of the rational being, so that it pitied the body that had come into this state through carelessness; so that God, in order that the rational might rise, came down into sympathy, so as to call the unrighteous to righteousness and to heal by grace the one sick with sins; so that the physician might say in good time to the one he had healed, “See, you have become well; sin no more”; so that the untiring one took on the weakness of the one who laboured, the undefiled being the condition of the sufferer, the exalted one what is proper to the lowly, and the blessed one the dough of the accursed; so that the immortal was joined with the mortal; so that the Creator became a door and an entrance for the creature that had been shut out; so that the incorruptible was mystically united with the corruptible; so that the sinless one reclined at table with the very sinful and did not fall with them, but rose with them; so that he carried out the whole economy with an unchangeable nature and principle; so that the one under law was with the lawless, the righteous welcomed the way of life of the unrighteous and took up the instrument of the condemned, and using it as mediator and minister brought into his own health, by the excess of his love for mankind, those who had been cast away and were all but rotting in the disease of disobedience. For this is proper to the all-good nature: not only to rejoice in the righteous it has, nor simply to delight in the healthy, nor to live in splendour with those above the world, but also to bring the unrighteous into the enjoyment of the righteous, to lead the sick by the hand into the health of the strong, to raise those shaken in the world of wickedness to the good order of those above the world, and to make the whole one flock, preserved under a great chief shepherd and abiding on earth, above the earth, and in good order. So one may see how, beginning from the first, he called human nature which had sinned. To Adam he said, “Adam, where are you?” To Cain he said, “You have sinned; be still.” He taught Enosh to call upon the Divine. Another, after he had begotten a son, he called to repentance and made him please God through repentance. He called Noah and through him saved his kin. He called Abraham too through faith, and another, who had offended, he made table-companion and hearth-companion of angels. In short, he called sinners, all who had been struck by the sting of disobedience. Even if you speak of the patriarchs and those about Moses and the prophets themselves, all were called, and through the calling all appeared righteous, since they did not dismiss the calling of the one who called them nor insult the gift of his generosity. But the angels who are with him, being righteous and having the good fortune of the place of righteousness, must not be called (for who would call those who are inside to come in, as though they were outside?); rather, it was fitting in goodness to gather, and in love for mankind to call, those far off and cast far away from the heavenly courts; to apply the medicines of sympathy to the sick, not to the healthy; to supply to the inflamed and gravely distressed what can soothe the pain; and to sit beside those wailing bitterly from plots against them or from their ill condition. If man had kept the law of the first commandment and observed the ordinance of the charge, the Creator would not have become a physician, nor would the Maker have come down to the lowly office of a summoner, since the human race would have been within the heavenly railings, having a life without sickness or corruption. But since, as I said, it neglected the commandment given and disregarded the Master's command, at once the diseases of sins sprang up, and a swarm of wrongs disturbed the soul; fear fell at once on reason, which had been betrayed, in need of a helper and a sympathizing physician. At once the Summoner called back the wrongdoer, saying, “Where are you?” To another he said, “What have you done?” Another he called and separated from men. To another he said, “Go out from your land and from your kindred.” To another he said, “The time of every man has come before me; now then do what I tell you”; and what he said to one he thundered to all, calling all to repentance and correction. To another he said, “Loose the sandal of old habit, for I have come down to deliver the oppressed.” To another, “I am the commander-in-chief of the divine powers; now I have come; and do not be troubled with care for bodily …” To another, “Whom shall I send, and who will go to the people?” To another, “Take my words into your mouth.” Another, calling him son of man, he deified; another he celebrated as a man of desires. All, after the transgression, he called and summoned: now as a physician healing those who were rotting; now as righteous, admonishing the unrighteous to live unrighteously no longer; now as God the Word making the rational gods; now as Christ making them christs; now as the incorruptible making them incorruptible; now, being immortal, guiding mortals to immortality. He called the whole race of men to the rich happiness of blessedness, and he calls them to this day. For do not suppose that he called only at the time when he became man, and that before the incarnation, or after the blessed ascension in the flesh, he forgot to call. He calls and summons all transgressors, saying without limitation of time — or rather in the aorist — “I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners”; that is, “I came also in the time of Adam, I came also to the sons of Noah, I came also to the patriarchs and to all the tribes of men together.” For if he had said, “I am not here,” or “I have not now come to call,” he would rightly have been thought to have called some only at the time when he became man; but as it is, saying, “I did not come,” he shows that the time of his coming is indefinite, from the first and from the beginning, and that he makes his judgment until the consummation. And if many of those called put off answering the call, the caller is in no way to blame. The sun, which summons all men to its brightness, is not the cause of blindness to those who sleep in drunkenness; they themselves are responsible for their darkness by their self-chosen wickedness. In the same way Christ calls all to the kindness of the Father's ray; and if some, drunk with the demon's wickedness, preferred darkness to the blessed light, this conduct must not be fastened on Christ, but on human nature and choice, which has the power to incline to the better and to the base alike, wherever it wishes and wills. So, since this great subject before us has been sufficiently discussed, we must now keep quiet; but if some other saying of the divine teachings is, as it were, gnawing at you in perplexity, put it forward without holding anything back; for this too will be no ordinary exercise.

[The philosopher begins the last series of objections.] He, as though roused from some lofty pastime, stretched out a Homeric verse at us with plenty of laughter, saying: “Homer rightly bade the valour of the Greeks, as being well trained, keep quiet, and made public the unsettled mind of Hector, haranguing the Greeks in verse: ‘Hold, Argives,’ he says, ‘do not shoot, young men of the Achaeans; for Hector of the glancing helm promises to speak a word.’ So now let us all sit here in quiet; for the expounder of the Christian doctrines promises and assures us that he will interpret the dark headings of the Scriptures. Tell us, then, my friend, since we are following what you say: what does the apostle mean by ‘And such were some of you’ (base things, clearly), ‘but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God’? For we marvel, and are truly perplexed in soul at such things: whether a man, once washed of so many defilements and pollutions, will be seen to be pure; whether one who has kneaded into his life the stains of so much folly — sexual immorality, adultery, drunkenness, theft, lying with males, sorcery, and countless base and loathsome deeds — is easily set free merely by being baptized and calling on the name of Christ, and puts off his whole guilt as a snake puts off its old slough. Who would not then dare evils that can be spoken and evils that cannot, and do things that can neither be told in words nor borne in deeds, knowing that he will receive release from so many most accursed deeds merely by believing and being baptized, and hoping to receive pardon afterwards from the one who is to judge the living and the dead? These things urge the hearer to sin; by these he is taught to do what is unlawful on every occasion; these know how to banish even the instruction of the law and to make justice itself utterly powerless against the unjust; these bring a lawless way of life into the world and teach men not to fear impiety at all, since a man puts off a heap of countless wrongs merely by being baptized.” So much for this elegant fiction of the saying.

[The philosopher's objection.] Now as for the monarchy of the only God and the rule of many …, to give an account. For a monarch is not the one who exists alone but the one who alone rules; and clearly he rules over those of the same kind and like himself. So the emperor Hadrian became a monarch, not because he was alone, nor because he ruled over oxen and sheep, which shepherds or herdsmen rule, but because he was king over men of his own race who had the same nature. In the same way God would not properly be called monarch unless he ruled over gods; for this befitted the divine greatness and the heavenly and abundant dignity.

[The philosopher's objection.] If, then, you say that angels stand beside God, impassible and immortal and incorruptible by nature — whom we call gods because they are near the Godhead — what is the dispute about the name, unless it is merely to reckon a difference of naming? For the goddess called Athena by the Greeks the Romans call Minerva, and the Egyptians, Syrians, and Thracians address her otherwise; and surely nothing of the god's title is altered or taken away by the difference of names. Whether, then, one names them gods or angels, the difference is not great, since their nature is attested as divine — as when Matthew writes thus: “And Jesus answered and said, ‘You are wrong, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God; for in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven.’” Since, then, it is agreed that the angels share in the divine nature, those who pay fitting reverence to the gods do not think that the god is in the wood or stone or bronze from which the image is made, nor, if some part of a statue is broken off, do they judge that it takes away from the god's power. For images and temples were set up by the ancients as reminders, so that those who go there may come to the thought of God when they are at leisure, and then, purified, may use prayers and supplications, asking of them what each needs. For if someone makes an image of a friend, he surely does not think that his friend is in it, nor that the limbs of his body are enclosed in the parts of the painting; rather, the honour toward the friend is shown through the image. And the sacrifices offered to the gods do not so much bring them honour as give a sign of the worshippers' choice and that they are not ungrateful toward them. And the forms of statues are rightly human-shaped, since man is thought to be the most beautiful of living things and an image of God. One may confirm this teaching from another saying too, which affirms that God has fingers with which he writes, saying, “And he gave Moses the two tablets written by the finger of God.” Moreover, the Christians too, imitating the construction of temples, build very large houses, into which they come together to pray, though nothing prevents them from doing this in their homes, since the Lord evidently hears from everywhere.

[The philosopher's objection.] And even if one of the Greeks were so light-minded as to think that the gods dwell inside their statues, his idea would be much purer than that of one who believes that the Divine entered into the womb of the virgin Mary, became an unborn child, and, when born, was wrapped in swaddling clothes — an afterbirth full of blood and bile and things still more absurd than these.

[The philosopher's objection.] I could show you from the law too the much-honoured name of the gods, where it cries out and admonishes the hearer with great reverence: “You shall not revile gods, and you shall not speak ill of the ruler of your people.” For it does not speak of gods other than those recognized by us, as we know from “You shall not go after gods,” and again, “If you go and serve other gods.” For that it speaks not of men but of the gods honoured by us is said not only by Moses but also by Joshua his successor, who says to the people, “And now fear him and serve him alone, and put away the gods whom your fathers served.” And Paul too speaks not of men but of bodiless beings: “For although there are so-called gods, many, and lords many, whether on earth or in heaven, yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things.” So you are greatly mistaken in thinking that God is angry if anyone else is called god and receives his title, when rulers do not grudge the same name to their subjects, nor masters to their slaves. It is not right, then, to think God more petty than men. So much, then, on the existence of gods and the duty to honour them.

[The philosopher's objection.] Again, an account must be given of the resurrection of the dead. Why would God do this, and so offhandedly undo the succession of things up to now, by which he ordained that the races should be preserved and not fail, having so laid down the law and designed it from the beginning? Things once decreed by God and preserved through so long an age ought to be everlasting, and neither condemned by their maker nor destroyed, as though made by some man, mortal things fashioned by a mortal. So it is irrational if, when the whole is destroyed, the resurrection should follow; if he will raise a man who died, say, three years before the resurrection, and with him Priam and Nestor, who died a thousand years before, and others before them from the beginning of the human race. And if anyone wishes to consider this too, he will find the matter of the resurrection full of stupidity. For many have often perished at sea and their bodies have been consumed by fish, and many have been eaten by wild beasts and birds; how, then, can their bodies come back? Come, let us examine carefully what has been said. For instance, someone was shipwrecked; mullets fed on his body; then some men caught the fish and ate them, and were killed and eaten by dogs; and when the dogs died, crows and vultures feasted on them entirely. How, then, will the body of the shipwrecked man be gathered together, consumed as it was by so many animals? And again, another consumed by fire, and another that has ended in worms — how can it return to its original condition? But you will tell me that this is possible for God; which is not true. For he cannot do everything. Certainly he cannot make Homer not to have been a poet, or Ilium not to have been taken; nor would he make two doubled, which is four in number, be counted a hundred, even if he resolved on it. Nor can God ever become bad, even if he wished; nor, being good by nature, could he sin. If, then, he is not able to sin or to become bad, this does not happen to God through weakness; for those who have by nature a disposition and fitness for something and are then prevented from doing it are evidently prevented through weakness; but God is by nature good and is not prevented from being bad; yet, though not prevented, he cannot become bad. Consider also how great an absurdity it is if the Creator will look on while heaven, than which no one has conceived any more divine beauty, melts, and the stars fall, and the earth perishes, and yet will raise the rotted and corrupted bodies of men — some of them good men, but others unpleasant, misshapen, and most unsightly even before they died. And even if he could easily raise them with fitting adornment, it is impossible for the earth to hold all who have died since the creation of the world, if they should rise.