TEXT
5
LETTER 40: TO ADELPHIUS, BISHOP AND CONFESSOR, AGAINST THE ARIANS
Introduction
Athanasius's Letter to Adelphius was written ca. 370. Adelphius was the bishop of Onuphis, a town located on the Nile Delta, and he is listed as one of the signees of the Tome to the Antiochenes, which was the product of an Alexandrian synod convened by Athanasius in 362 to deal with the division among pro- Nicene camps in Antioch over Trinitarian terminology. Adelphius is also mentioned among the names of pro-Nicene bishops who had been exiled during the tenure of George of Cappadocia, and presumably it is for this reason that he has been granted the title of “Confessor.” It is difficult to ascertain the precise contents of the doctrine being refuted in this letter, not least because of Athanasius's style of dramatizing his opponent's views by contriving self-damning monologues for them. Moreover, given Athanasius's penchant for depicting anti-Nicene theology as being in organic continuity with all previous doctrinal error, his characterization of the teaching reported by Adelphius as “Arian” cannot spontaneously be taken at face value. Athanasius asserts that these “Arians” have now devised a new variation on their heresy, advancing from disbelief in the genuine divinity of the Word to a denial of the Word's becoming human. He accuses them furthermore of separating the Word from the flesh and of refusing to worship the Incarnate Word.
At first blush, it is difficult to see how such teachings are consistent with what we know of the doctrines of Arius and his supporters, which, even as elsewhere reported by Athanasius himself, do not include a denial of the Incarnation nor an outright refusal to worship Christ. Yet, once we take into account Athanasius's tendency to conflate his opponents’ statements with what he considers to be their logical consequences, both of Athanasius's accusations can be made intelligible. With regard to the denial of the doctrine that the Word has become human, the issue in question is not simply whether an incarnation took place but who it was who became incarnate. Arius and Asterius taught that the Word who became incarnate in Christ is other than the Word and Wisdom who is an uncreated eternal attribute of God. When Athanasius accuses the “Arians” of this letter of “separating the body from the Word” (3, 8), it is likely that he has in mind the cleavage in such doctrine between the human body of Christ and the eternal Word, which is strictly consequent upon the separation of the “created” Word who became incarnate from the eternal Word. Moreover, the letter's preoccupation with worship also seems to evoke a divergence between Nicene and anti-Nicene parties. In Orations against the Arians, Athanasius made much of the point that insofar as the “Arians” worship Jesus Christ and yet assert that the Word is a creature, they are involved in the idolatry of rendering worship to a creature. But there are indications that those who did not believe that the Son was fully divine found ways to interpret Christian worship in a way that circumvented that difficulty. One of the early supporters of Arius, Theognis of Nicaea, explained that worship is rendered to “the Father alone,” even though “we reverence (veneramur) the Son, because we are certain that his glory ascends to the Father.” The later development of “Neo-Arianism,” beginning in the 350s, led to an even stronger emphasis that “the Son ‘properly speaking’ cannot be worshipped,” even if Christian worship is always directed to the unoriginated God through the mediation of the Son.
Between the lines of the following letter, one can plausibly reconstruct an anti- Nicene counter-accusation, namely that it is the Nicene supporters who worship a creature since they do not at all qualify their worship of Christ even while acknowledging that the humanity of Christ is created. Such an accusation would explain why Athanasius, despite his aggressive rhetoric, substantially assumes a defensive posture in this letter: “We do not worship a creature. Never!” Athanasius's response—and herein lies the enduring value of the letter—presents his own Christology in a direction that anticipates the later Christological controversies and shows the direct link between his Christological thinking and that of his successor, Cyril. Central to the Christological vision propounded here is the inseparability of the divinity and humanity of the Incarnate Word as a single subject of salvific agency and a single object of worship. In a typical vein, the position attacked is styled “impious,” and the “right faith” bears the mark of “piety” (eusebeia), which consists in gratitude for the coming of the Word in the flesh.
The text, not available in a critical edition, can be found in Migne's Patrologia Graeca 1072A–1084B.
Text
{1072A} 1. We have read what your Reverence has written, and we truly welcome your piety toward Christ. First of all, we glorify God for having given you the grace to be both right-minded and yet cognizant, as far as possible, of the stratagems of the devil (cf. 2 Cor 2:11). On the other hand, we were amazed at the perversity of the heretics, seeing that they have fallen into such a pit of impiety that they are no longer in possession of their senses and their minds have become completely corrupt. This venture of theirs is at the instigation of the devil and is an imitation of the lawless Jews who, when they were thoroughly refuted, invented new pretexts for themselves in order only to deny the Lord. But they did this only to their own detriment and in order to draw upon themselves what was prophesied against them. In the same way, these also, {1072B} seeing themselves to be shunned on all sides and recognizing that their heresy has become loathsome to everyone, have become inventors of new evils (cf. Rom 1: 30) so that they may not stop their wars against the truth but may {1073A} truly persevere in being enemies of Christ.
Where has this evil of theirs erupted from? Just how did they dare to utter this new slander against the Savior? But it seems that indeed the impious man is useless and “degenerate in matters which pertain to faith” (2 Tim 3:8). At first, they denied the divinity of the only begotten Son of God, while at least making a pretence of confessing his incarnate coming. But now, culminating a gradual decline, they have fallen from this supposition of theirs and become altogether godless, to the extent that they neither acknowledge him to be God nor believe that he has become human. If they had believed this, they would not have said the kinds of things which your Reverence has written against them.
2. But you, truly and dearly beloved, have done what is consistent with ecclesiastical tradition and {1073B} piety toward the Lord by refuting and exhorting and censuring the likes of those. Urged on by their father the devil, “they did not know nor understand,” as it is written, “but wander in darkness” (Ps 82:5). Therefore, let them learn from your Reverence that such a perversity as theirs belongs to Valentinus, Marcion, and Manichaeus. Of these, some substituted appearance for reality and the others separated what is inseparable, denying that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn 1:14). So then why do they not claim their ownership of the heritage of these names, since they are of the same mind as them? It makes sense that they should have the names of those whose perversity they retain, so that from now on they should be called Valentinians and Marcionites and Manichees. Perhaps then {1073C} they will become ashamed because of the bad odor of these names and so they will be enabled to perceive into what depth of impiety they have fallen. Indeed, it would have been just not to answer them at all, in accordance with the apostolic exhortation, “After a first and second warning, break off contact with a heretic, realizing that such a person is perverted and sinful and self-condemned” (Titus 3: 10–11)—especially since the prophet too says of such people, “the fool will speak foolishly and his heart will contrive vain things” (Isa 32:6). But since they too, in the style of their leader, go around like lions seeking whom they can devour among the simple (cf. 1 Pet 5:8), it has become necessary for us to write back to your Reverence so that the brothers may be taught again by your admonition and so may further refute the vacuous discourse of these people.
3. We do not worship a creature. Never! {1073D} Such an error belongs to the pagans and the Arians. But we do worship the Lord of creation, the Word of God who has become incarnate. While that flesh, on its own, {1076A} is a part of creation, it nevertheless became the body of God. And neither do we separate that body from the Word and worship it on its own, nor do we cast the Word far from the flesh when we want to worship him. But knowing, as we said before, that “the Word became flesh” (Jn 1:14) we acknowledge him as God even when he comes in the flesh. Who then would be so senseless as to say to the Lord, “Stand aside from your body so that I may worship you”? Or who would be so impious as to join the Jews who did not understand and say to him, because of the body, “Why do you, a human being, make yourself to be God?” (Jn 10:33).
The leper, however, was not such as these. He worshipped the God who was in the body and recognized that he was God, saying, “Lord, if you wish, you can make me clean” (Mt 8:2). He did not {1076B} consider the Word of God to be a creature on account of the flesh, nor did he disparage the flesh because the Word who wore it was the Maker of all creation. But he worshipped the Creator of all as being in a created temple, and so he was cleansed. Likewise, the hemorrhaging woman, who believed and merely touched the hem of his garment, was healed (Mt 9:18–22, Mk 5:25–34); and the sea with foaming waves heard the Incarnate Word and stopped its storm (Mt 8:23–27 and par.); and the man who was blind from birth was healed by the Word through the spit of the flesh (Jn 9:6). And what is even greater and more wonderful (though maybe this also scandalized these most impious of people), is that when the Lord was hanging on the cross itself (for the body was his, and the Word was in it), the sun became darkened and the earth shook, the rocks were split and the veil {1076C} of the temple was torn, and many of the bodies of the dead saints were raised (cf. Lk 23: 45, Mt 27:51).
4. These things took place, and yet no one made it a point of debate, like the Arians dare to do now, as to whether one must believe in the Word's becoming flesh. Though they saw a human being, they recognized him to be their Maker. When they heard a human voice, they did not say that the Word was a creature because the voice was human. Instead, they trembled and recognized that the human voice was nonetheless being spoken from a holy temple. How then are these impious people not afraid that “since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, they may be handed over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper” (Rom 1:28)? For creation does not worship a creature, {1076D} but neither did it decline to worship its Lord because of his flesh. It discerned its own Maker in the body and “in the name of Jesus every knee” bowed—and will bow —“of those in heaven {1077A} and on earth and under the earth and every tongue shall confess”— even if it displeases the Arians—“that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father” (Phil 2:10–11). For the flesh did not detract from the glory of the Word. Far from it! Rather, it is the flesh which was glorified by the Word. Nor was the Son's divinity diminished because he who is in the form of God received the form of a servant (cf. Phil 2:6–7). Rather, he became the Liberator of all flesh and of all creation (cf. Rom 8:21). And if God sent his Son born of a woman (cf. Gal 4:4), this is not a deed that brings us shame but glory and great grace. He became a human being that we might be divinized in him; he came to be in a woman and was begotten of a virgin in order to transport our errant race into himself and in order that from then on we may become a holy race and {1077B} “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet 1:4), as the blessed Peter has written. And “what the law, weakened by the flesh, was powerless to do, this God has done; by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for the sake of sin, he condemned sin in the flesh” (Rom 8:3).
5. Since the flesh was assumed by the Word in order to liberate all human beings and to raise all from the dead and to make ransom for sin, how can those who devalue it and those who, because of it, slander the Son of God as a creature and as something that was made not appear ungrateful and worthy of all contempt? They might as well cry out to God and say: “Do not send your only begotten Son in the flesh. Do not make him take flesh from the Virgin, {1077C} or he will free us from death and sin. We do not want him to come in a body or he will undergo death on our behalf. We do not want the Word to become flesh, so that by its means he may become the Mediator of our way to You and so that we may dwell in the heavenly mansions (cf. Jn 14:2). Let the gates of heaven be closed shut, so that your Word may not consecrate the way into the heavens for us by the veil of his flesh (cf. Heb 10:20).” These are their words, uttered with the same diabolical presumption which led them to invent such perversities for themselves.
But those who do not want to worship the Word who has become flesh show no gratitude for his humanization. And those who separate the Word from the flesh negate the belief that there is one redemption from sin and {1077D} one destruction of death. Just how will these impious ones ever find the flesh assumed by the Savior all by itself, so that they may dare to say: “We do not worship the Lord with his flesh but we separate the body and worship him alone.” Yet the blessed Stephen saw the Lord standing at the right hand in the heavens (Acts 7:55); and the angels said to the disciples, “He will come in the same way as you have {1080A} seen him going into heaven” (Acts 1:11), and the Lord himself addressed the Father and said, “I wish that where I am, they may also be with me” (Jn 17:24). If the flesh then is inseparable from the Lord, must they not altogether cease this error and henceforth worship the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ? But if they do not worship so and if they do not render service (latreuontas) to the Lord who has come in the flesh, then let them be completely cast out and let them not be counted as Christians but as pagans or Jews.
6. This is their madness and presumption, as we have described it above. But ours is the right faith, which issues from the apostolic teaching and the tradition of the fathers and has its confirmation in both the Old and {1080B} New Testaments. For the prophets say, “Send out your Word and your Truth” (Ps 43: 3) and “Behold, the Virgin will conceive and bear a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which means ‘God is with us’” (Isa 7:14, Mt 1:23). What is this about except God's coming in flesh? Then there is the teaching of the apostolic tradition, where the blessed Peter says, “Christ suffered for us in the flesh” (1 Pet 4:1) and Paul writes, “We await the blessed hope and the appearance of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all sin and to cleanse for himself a people as his own, {1080C} eager to do good works” (Titus 2:13–14). But how did he give himself for us unless he had put on the flesh? For he gave himself for us by making an offering of his flesh, so that in it he may undergo death and “destroy the devil who has the power of death” (Heb 2:14).
Consequently, we always give thanks in the name of Jesus Christ and we do not reject the grace that has come to us through him. For the coming of the Savior in the flesh has become the ransom and salvation of all creation. My dearly beloved ones, let those who love the Lord be mindful of these things. But as for those who have imitated Judas and abandoned the Lord to join Caiaphas, let them find in these words a better teaching than what they have held—if indeed they are willing and have reached the point of being ashamed. Let them know, at least, that when we worship the Lord in the flesh, we are not worshipping a creature but, as we said before, we are worshipping the Creator clothed with a created body.
{1080D} 7. Moreover, we would like your Reverence to pose to them the following question: When Israel was commanded to go up to Jerusalem to worship in the temple of the Lord, where there was the ark and above it the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy-seat (cf. Heb 9:4–5), was this a good deed or a bad one? If they were doing a bad deed, why is it that those who did not heed this law were consigned to punishment? For it is written that the one who disregards it and does not go up is to be cut off from among the people (cf. Lev 17:9, Num 9:13). But if they were doing a good deed, {1081A} through which in fact they were pleasing to God, must not these defiled Arians, whose heresy is the most shameful of all, be utterly deserving of destruction? For in that case, they commend the ancient people for the honor rendered by them to the temple but do not wish to worship the Lord who is in his flesh, as in a temple. And yet the old temple was fashioned from rocks and gold and was merely a shadow, but when the reality arrived the image was henceforth annulled, according to the words of the Lord, and there did not remain a stone upon another stone, that was not thrown down (cf. Mt. 24:2).
Although they saw that the temple was made of stones, the {ancient people} did not think that the Lord speaking in the temple was a creature, nor did they scorn the temple and go far off from it to worship. But, in accordance with the law, they went into the temple and served the Lord who spoke from the temple. This being so, {1081B} how can one not worship the all-holy and all-sacred body of the Lord, which was announced by the angel Gabriel and fashioned by the Holy Spirit and became a garment for the Word? For the Word raised the woman with a fever by extending his bodily hand (cf. Mk 1:30–31) and raised Lazarus by giving utterance to his human voice (Jn 11:43). When he extended his hands upon the cross, he overthrew “the ruler of the power of the air, who is at work in the sons of disobedience” (Eph 2:2) and cleared the way to heaven for us.
8. Therefore, the one who dishonors the temple dishonors the Lord who is in the temple and the one who separates the Word from the body rejects the grace that was granted to us in the Word. As for these most impious Arian fanatics, {1081C} let them not think that the Word is a creature because his body is created. Nor should they impugn his body because the Word is not a creature. Their perversity is overwhelming; they confuse and mix everything up and contrive pretexts just so that they can count the Creator among the creatures.
But let them listen to this: If the Word were a creature, he would not have assumed a created body in order to enliven it. For what help can there be from one creature, itself in need of salvation, to another? But it is because the Word is Creator and is himself the Maker of creatures that “at the end of the ages” (Heb 9: 26) he put on the creature in order that he, the Creator, may restore the creature and consecrate it anew. {1081D} A creature cannot ever be saved by another creature, any more than creatures are created by a creature. This would not have happened unless {1084A} the Word were the Creator.
Therefore, let them not falsify the divine Scriptures nor scandalize the simple ones in the community. If they are willing, let them change their minds and no longer serve the creature instead of God, the creator of all. But if they want to persist in their impieties, let them take their fill of them by themselves and let them grind their teeth like their father the devil, because the faith of the Catholic Church knows that the Word of God is the creator and maker of everything. We know that “in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God” (Jn 1:1) and we worship the Word who has become human for our salvation, not as if he has become equal to the body, but as the Master taking on the form of a servant, {1084B} and as the Creator and Maker coming to be in a creature so that, by granting freedom to all in himself, he may present the world to the Father and give peace to all, in heaven and on earth. Thus do we acknowledge his divinity, which is that of the Father, and we worship his incarnate presence, even if the Arian fanatics burst.
Greet all who love our Lord Jesus Christ. Most truly and dearly beloved, we pray that you may be in good health and that you may commend us to the Lord. If necessary, let Hieracas the presbyter read this.