A somewhat similar caution is necessary with regard to the analogy drawn out (41, &c.) between the Incarnation and the Union of the Word with the Universe. ‘The treatise itself (17. I, éerés kar’ odciav, and see notes on 41) supplies the necessary corrective in this case. It may be pointed out here that the real difference between Athanasius and the neo-Platonists was not so much upon the Union of the Word with any created Substance, which they were prepared to allow, as upon the exclusive Union of the Word with Man, in Contrast to His essential distinctness from the Universe. This difference goes back to the doctrine of Creation, which was fixed as a great gulf between the Christian and the Platonist view of the Universe. The relation of the latter to the Word is fully discussed in the third part of the contra Gentes, the teaching of which must be borne in mind while reading the forty-first and following chapters of the present treatise.
Lastly, the close relation between the doctrine of Creation and that of Redemption marks off the Soteriology of this treatise from that of the middle ages and of the Reformation. Athanasius does not leave out of sight the idea of satisfaction for a debt. To him also the Cross was the central purpose (20. 2, cf, 9. 1, 2, &c.) of His Coming. But the idea of Restoration is most prominent in his determination of the necessity of the Incarnation.
VOIalV. D 34 INTRODUCTION TO THE TREATISE ON THE God could have wiped out our guilt, had He so pleased, by a word (44): but human nature required to be healed, restored; recreated. This (dvaxrioat) is the foremost of the three ideas (7. 5) which sum up his account of the ‘dignus tanto Vindice nodus*.
The ¢vanslation which follows is that printed in 1885 (D. Nutt, second edition, 1891) by the editor of this volume, with a very few changes (chiefly 2. 2, 8. 4, 34. 2, 44. 7; 8): it was originally made for the purpose of lectures at Oxford (1879—1882), and the analytical headings now prefixed to each chapter are extracted verbatim from notes made for the same course of lectures. The zofes have mostly appeared either in the former edition of the translation, or appended.to the Greek text published (D. Nutt, 1882) by the translator. A few, however, have now been added, including some references to the Sermo Major, which borrows wholesale from the present treatise (Prolegg. ch. III. § 1. 37). Two other English translations have appeared, the one (Parker, 1880) previous, the other (Religious Tract Society, n.d.) subsequent to that of the present translator. The ¢ext followed is that of the Benedictine editors, with a few exceptions. Of those that at all affect the sense, 43. 6 (kai rd oépa) and 51. 2 (kara ras eid’) are due to Mr. Marriott (Axalecta Christiana, Oxf. 1844). For the others (13. 2, omission of pn, 28. 3, xara rod wipos rejecting conjectures of Montf. and Marriott, 42. 6, omission of memouxévat 57. 3, kui ra for ra kai) the present editor is alone responsible.
SYNOPSIS OF THE TREATISE.
§ 1.—lntroduction. The Redemptive work of the Word based on His initial relation to the Creature tig6 FIRST PART.—THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD. §§ 2, 3.—Dactrine of Creatior: (1) Three erroneous views (2) rejected: The Epicurean (materialistic) as failing to recognize a differentiating Principle. ces Ah chee EE BS IIR IE OE OR Re 36 The Platonic (matter pre-existent) as not satisfying the idea of God...37 The Gnostic (dualistic) as contradictory to Scripture...s0ee00- 37 (2) The true doctrine (3) and its application to the Creation of Man...37 This directly brings us to a 8$ 4--10.—Fiurst Reason for the Incarnation: By departing from the Word, men lost the Principle of Life, and were WASHING A WAS! (40'S) ue acrtmoct ese ce tencn ts Mame ae teeter ten aoe ae EEE ee 38 God\couldmeitheravert nonsutter this\(6)\ save ete eee eee 39 The latter would argue weakness, the former changeableness (7) on Gods. partie Sc ccevaniteasteonpanes tree tent vc de caa choco Ghia ace ee Ee Reem a ee 39 The Word alone could solve this dilemma (7. 4). This done by His becoming man (8) and dying for us all (9). Reasonableness, and results OW UISE(TO) Sranreccebenactent ns sdeceecasentcea arama seeencoc eee etme cette eee 40 §§ 11—16. —Second Reason for the Incarnation: In departing from the Word, men had also lost the Principle of Reason, by which they knew God. In spite of God’s witness to Himself, they were sunk into superstition and mental degradation (11, 12)...ccceceeeeccceceeee 42 How none but the Word could remedy this (13, 14)...c00ceeccceecceseeeeee 43 Tlow He actually did so (15, 16). The Incarnation, a revelation of the Invisible Godhead = Beir ehe eel aaah “lls cies osiecei ccicsce stata aaan eae eR EER eee ee eee eee 44 (§§ 17, 18 explain this in further detail) 45 * The Soteriology of Athanasius is well drawn out, and usefully compared with that of Anselm and of more modern theologians in Norris’ Rudiments of Theology, Appendix, ch. iii. (Rivington’s, 1876), See also the discussion above, Prolegomena, ch. iv. § 2.
INCARNATION OF THE WORD. 35 PAGE § 19.—Transition to Second Part: The Incarnation an irresistible revelation of God. This is especially true of the: Deathsom@hristmmnnar ere cme eee eee ere. fete IR. 46 SECOND PART.—THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. fits Death ¢ § 20. Ne VW DYE CESSATY MMe eaee to seu cere ar act ne Tern eee meee Ee En eRe Neen oy te 47 §§ 21—25. 2.—Why death by Groce a.—Why public, and not natural, but at the hands of others (21—23)...47 SANIT WEE OF 130 OVA GAOOSING (COA) ococopconsooaonacondaneacao neuron onscdoacebso 49 Toile Ne Crroes, Oral Geos (AEN sacusoos onancoooonsnesoooonmecsesancadenaae 49 fis rising again: § 26. Cee NV MYON the thind Ga yendscese dco ttre: tinttenc core eee 50 § 27. 2. Changed relation of Death toymamkind sss-s0ccsssseeeyeseeeteee nee tee 50 §§ 28—32. 3-—Keality of His Resurrection— This a lolbe tested bypl xpenience (25) eereanecnrarcsncancenaesceeseekemeeeearetns 51 8.—Implied by its visible effects (29—31. 3)...-.ccee cc csece vues Sea chepiinsesier 51 y-—Involved in the Nature of the Incarnate Word (31. 4)...c00eecee ee 53 6.—Confirmed by what we see; as is the case with all truth about the munseen! Godt tel == 5) ik. wetnecn, crete ee cn ene NM me EN, Sp UA aia 53 Summary of what is thus proved to be true (32. 6)...2.c0ecserssescnseesrene 53 THIRD PART.—REFUTATION OF CONTEMPORARY UNBELIEF. §§ 33-40. A.—Refutation of Fews: §§ 33—39- 1.—From principles admitted by them—i.e., from prophecies relating to the MieSsialhteer atte. cedunctoa neni teia tele Ss opens otor acinee adees ni astequigtnennoecks 54 ($0 forms theistep to the mext section) Micron. qscs--peceste sensed 57 § 40. 2.—From facts: cessation of the Jewish dispensation, as foretold by Daniel 57 §§ 41—55.- B.—Refutation of Gentiles: 8§ 41—45. 8.—From principles admitted by them— §§ 41, 42. a.—The Word, whose existence contemporary philosophy allowed, might reasonably be supposed to unite Himself to some particular nature: COUSeGIIENt ly wtON MIM Anen ative Mean erect anette ee neeeeenst cere 58 § 43. f8.—Reasons for His Union with Man in particular...:scecoseseseaee 59 § 44. +y.—Reasons why man should not be restored by a mere flat...5 60 ° § 45. a hesults of therschemeractually adoptedis aa.ulnuarteaneheri cee er ste sieti 61 §§ 46—55.- 2.—Refutation of Gentiles from facts— §§ 46—50 a,—Discredit and decay, since the coming of Christ, of philosophic and jaroj opel aban OeVedn UIST a & ochonrenadebabsngodors sdhgagjacnacsoocosducancsecadaanencoce 61 88 51, 52. f:— Influence ot(Christian! morals Onl SOCIELY 1.ta.sr etree sseaecue sh asseetaacier. 64. § 53. 7 —Imninence of Christrom the imadividual rere.csthscatestsceceere sccter eeeee aa 65 8§ 54, 55. 5.—Nature and glory of Christ’s Work: summary of His victory over PACAMISMgnue targa atncaaeemr rt suas. ceeemeceechaentetirsn pataeeann es cameeneas 65 §§ 56, 57- CONCLUSION: the enquirer referred to the Scriptures. Indispensable moral conditions of the investigation of Spiritual Truth...66 D2 ON THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD.
$1. Lntroductory.—The subject of this treatise: the humiliation and incarnation of the Word. Presupposes the doctrine of Creation, and that by the Word. The Father has saved the world by Him through Whom He first made tt.
WHEREAS in what precedes we have drawn out—choosing a few points from among many— a sufficient account of the error of the heathen concerning idols, and of the worship of idols, and how they originally came to be invented; how, namely, out of wickedness men devised for themselves the worshipping of idols: and whereas we have by God’s grace noted somewhat also of the divinity of the Word of the Father, and of His universal Providence and power, and that the Good Father through Him orders all things, and all things are moved by Him, and in Him are quickened: come now, Macarius? (worthy of that name), and true lover of Christ, let us follow up the faith of our religion 2, and set forth also what relates to the Word’s becom- ing Man, and to His divine Appearing amongst us, which Jews traduce and Greeks laugh to scorn, but we worship; in order that, all the more for the seeming low estate of the Word, your piety toward Him may be increased and multiplied. 2. For the more He is mocked among the unbelieving, the more witness does He give of His own Godhead; inasmuch as He not only Himself demonstrates as possible what men mistake, thinking impossible, but what men deride as unseemly, this by His own goodness He clothes with seemliness, and what men, in their conceit of wisdom, laugh at as merely hu- man, He by His own power demonstrates to be divine, subduing the pretensions of idols by His t See Contra Gentes, i. Vhe word (Makdpre) may be an ad- jective only, but its occurrence in Jo¢h places seems decisive. The name was very common (4/o/. c. Av. passim). ‘Macarius’ was a Christian, as the present passage shews: he is presumed (c. Gent.
i. 7) to have access to Scripture. 2 mys evocBelas. See r Tim. iii. 16, and note 1 on De Deer. 1.
supposed humiliation—by the Cross—and those who mock and disbelieve invisibly winning over to recognise His divinity and power. 3. But to treat this subject it is necessary to recall what has been previously said; in order that you may neither fail to know the cause of the bodily appearing of the Word of the Father, so high and so great, nor think it a consequence of His own nature that the Saviour has worn a body; but that being incorporeal by nature, and Word from the beginning, He has yet of the loving- kindness and goodness of His own Father been manifested to us in a human body for our salva- tion. 4. It is, then, proper for us to begin the treatment of this subject by speaking of the crea- tion of the universe, and of God its Artificer, that so it may be duly perceived that the renewal of creation has been the work of the self-same Word that made it at the beginning. For it will appear not inconsonant for the Father to have wrought its salvation in Him by Whose means He made it.
S$ 2. Erroneous views of Creation rejected. (1) Epicurean ( fortuitous generation), But diver- sity of bodies and parts argues a creating tntel- lect. (2.) Platonists ( pre-existent matter.) But this subjects God to human limitations, making Fim not a creator but a mechanic. (3) Gnostics (an alien Demiurge). Rejected from Scripture.
Of the making of the universe and the creation of all things many have taken different views, and each man has laid down the law just as he pleased. For some say that all things have come into being of themselves, and in a chance fashion; as, for example, the Epi- cureans, who tell us in their selfcontempt, that universal providence does not exist speaking right in the face of obvious fact and experience. 2. For if, as they say, everything ° INCARNATION OF THE WORD.
has had its beginning of itself, and indepen- dently of purpose, it would follow that every- thing had come into3 mere being, so as to be alike and not distinct. For it would follow in virtue of the unity of body that everything must be sun or moon, and in the case of men it would follow that the whole must be hand, or eye, or foot. But as it is this is not so. On the contrary, we see a distinction of sun, moon, and earth; and again, in the case of human bodies, of foot, hand, and head. Now, such separate arrangement as this tells us not of their having come into being of them- selves, but shews that a cause preceded them; from which cause it is possible to apprehend’ God also as the Maker and Orderer of all. 3. But others, including Plato, who is in such repute among the Greeks, argue that God has made the world out of matter previously exist- ing and without beginning. For God could have made nothing had not the material ex- isted already; just as the wood must exist ready at hand for the carpenter, to enable him to work at all. 4. But in so saying they know not that they are investing God with weakness. For if He is not Himself the cause of the ma- terial, but makes things only of previously ex- isting material, He proves to be weak, because unable to produce anything He makes without the material; just as it is without doubt a weak- ness of the carpenter not to be able to make anything required without his timber. For, ex hypothest, had not the material existed, God would not have made anything. And how could He in that case be called Maker and Ar- tificer, if He owes His ability to make to some other source—namely, to the material? So that if this be so, God will be on their theory a Me- chanic only, and not a Creator out of nothing ¢; if, that is, He works at existing material, but is not Himself the cause of the material. For He could not in any sense be called Creator unless He is Creator of the material of which the things created have in their turn been made. 5. But the sectaries imagine to themselves a different artificer of all things, other than the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, in deep blindness even as to the words they use. 6. For whereas the Lord says to the Jews5: ‘Have ye not read that from the beginning He which created them made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they twain shall become one flesh?” and then, 3 Or, ‘‘ been made in one way only.” In the next clause I formerly translated the difficult words ws émt owpearos évos “as in the case of the universe;’ but although the rendering has commended itself to others I now reluctantly admit that it puts too much into the Greek (in spite of § 41. 5).
4 eis TO civan. 5 Matt. xix. 4, &c.
of referring to the Creator, says, ‘“ What, there- fore, GOD hath joined together let not man put asunder:” how come these men to assert that the creation is independent of the Father? Or if, in the words of John, who says, making no exception, “All things ° were made by Him, and “without Him was not anything made,” how could the artificer be another, distinct from the Father of Christ?
§ 3. Zhe true doctrine. Creation out of nothing, of God's lavish bounty of being. Man created above the rest, but incapable of independent berseverance. Fence the exceptional and supra- natural gift of being in Gods Image, with the promise of bliss conditionally upon his perse- verance in grace.
Thus do they vainly speculate. But the godly teaching and the faith according to Christ brands their foolish language as godlessness. For it knows that it was not spontaneously, because forethought is not absent; nor of ex- isting matter, because God is not weak; but that out of nothing, and without its having any pre- vious existence, God made the universe to exist through His word, as He says firstly through Moses: “In7 the beginning God created the heaven and the earth;” secondly, in the most edifying book of the Shepherd, “ First ® of all believe that God is one, which created and framed all things, and made them to exist out of nothing.” 2. To which also Paul refers when he says, “By? faith we understand that the worlds have been framed by the Word of God, so that what is seen hath not been made out of things which do appear.” 3. For God is good, or rather is essentially the source of goodness: nor‘ could one that is good be niggardly of anything: whence, grudging ex- istence to none, He has made all things out of nothing by His own Word, Jesus Christ our Lord. And among these, having taken especial pity, above all things on earth, upon the race of men, and having perceived its inability, by virtue of the condition of its origin, to continue in one stay, He gave them a further gift, and He did not barely create man, as He did all the irrational creatures on the earth, but made them after His own image, giving them a portion even of the power of His own Word; so that having as it were a kind of reflexion of the Word, and being made rational, they might be able to abide ever in blessedness, living the true life which belongs to the saints in paradise. 4. But knowing once more how the will of man could 9 Heb. xi. 3 38 sway to either side, in anticipation He secured the grace given them by a law and by the spot where He placed them. For He brought them into His own garden, and gave them a law: so that, if they kept the grace and remained good, they might still keep the life in paradise without sorrow or pain or care, besides having the promise of incorruption in heaven; but that if they transgressed and turned back, and became evil, they might know that they were incurring that corruption in death which was theirs by nature: no longer to live in paradise, but cast out of it from that time forth to die and to abide in death and in corruption. 5. Now this is that of which Holy Writ also gives warning, saying in the Person of God: “Of every tree? that is in the garden, eating thou shalt eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, ye shall not eat of it, but on the day that ye eat, dying ye shall die.” But by “dying ye shall die,” what else could be meant than not dying merely, but also abiding ever in the corruption of death?
SS 4, 5. Our creation and Goa’s Incarnation most intimately connected. As by the Word man was called from non-existence into being, and Jurther received the grace of a divine life, so by the one fault which forfeited that life they again incurred corruption and untold sin and misery filled the world.
_ You are wondering, perhaps, for what pos- sible reason, having proposed to speak of the Incarnation of the Word, we are at present treating of the origin of mankind. But this, too, properly belongs to the aim of our treatise. 2. For in speaking of the appearance of the Saviour amongst us, we must needs speak also of the origin of men, that you may know that the reason of His coming down was because of us, and that our transgression 3 called forth the loving-kindness of the Word, that the Lord should both make haste to help us and appear among men. 3. For of His becoming In- carnate we were the object, and for our sal- vation He dealt so lovingly as to appear and be born even in a human body. 4. Thus, then, God has made man, and willed that he should abide in incorruption; but men, having despised and rejected the contempla- tion of God, and devised and contrived evil for themselves (as was said¢ in the former treatise), received the condemnation of death with which they had been threatened; and from thenceforth no longer remained as they were made, but5 were being corrupted ac- ? Gen. ii. 16, 57. 3 Cf. Orat. ii. 54, note As DE INCARNATIONE VERBI DEL.
cording to their devices; and death had the mastery over them as king® For transgres- sion of the commandment was turning them back to their natural state, so that just as they have had their being out of nothing, so also, as might be expected, they might look for corruption into nothing in the course of time. 5. For if, out of a former normal state of non- existence, they were called into being by the Presence and loving-kindness of the Word, it followed naturally that when men were be- reft of the knowledge of God and were turned back to what was not (for what is evil is not, but what is good is), they should, since they derive their being from God who IS, be ever- lastingly bereft even of being; in other words, that they should be disintegrated and abide in death and corruption. 6. For man is by nature mortal, inasmuch as he is made out of what is not; but by reason of his likeness to Him that is (and if he still preserved this likeness by keeping Him in his knowledge) he would stay his natural corruption, and remain incorrupt; as Wisdom? says: “The taking heed to His laws is the assurance of immortality;” but being incorrupt, he would live henceforth as God, to which I suppose the divine Scripture refers, when it says: “I have® said ye are gods, and ye are all sons of the most Highest; but ye die like men, and fall as one of the princes.”
5. For God has not only made us out of nothing; but He gave us freely, by the Grace of the Word, a life in correspondence with God. But men, having rejected things eternal, and, by counsel of the devil, turned to the things of corruption, became the cause? of their own corruption in death, being, as I said before, by nature corruptible, but destined, by the grace following from partaking of the Word, to have escaped their natural state, had they remained good. 2. For because of the Word dwelling with them, even their natural cor- ruption did not come near them, as Wisdom also says': “God made man for incorrup- tion, and as an image of His own eternity; but by envy of the devil death came into the world.” But when this was come to pass, men began to die, while corruption thence- forward prevailed against them, gaining even more than its natural power over the whole race, inasmuch as it had, owing to the trans- gression of the commandment, the threat of the Deity as a further advantage against them. 3. For even in their misdeeds men had not stopped short at any set limits; but gradually I 8 Ps. Ixxxii. 6, sg. 9 Cf. Concil, Araus, II. Can. 23.
‘Suam voluntatem homines faciunt, non Dei, quando id agunt quod Deo displicet.’
INCARNATION OF THE WORD.
39 pressing forward, have passed on beyond all measure: having to begin with been inventors of wickedness and called down upon them- selves death and corruption; while later on, having turned aside to wrong and exceeding all lawlessness, and stopping at no one evil but devising all manner of new evils in suc- cession, they have become insatiable in: sin- ning. 4. For there were adulteries everywhere and thefts, and the whole earth was full of murders and plunderings. And as to corruption and wrong, no heed was paid to law, but all crimes were being practised everywhere, both individually and jointly. Cities were at war with cities, and nations were rising up against nations; and the whole earth was rent with civil commotions and battles; each man vying with his fellows in lawless deeds. 8. Nor were even crimes against nature far from them, but, as the Apostle and witness of Christ says: “For their? women changed the natural use into that which is against nature: and like- wise also the men, leaving the natural use of the women, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working unseemliness, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.”
§ 6. Zhe human race then was wasting, God’s image was being effaced, and His work ruined. fiither, then, God must forego His spoken word by which man had incurred ruin; or that which had shared in the being of the Word must sink back again into destruction, in which case God's design would be defeated. What then? was God’s goodness to suffer this? But tf so, why had man been made? It would have been weakness, not goodness on Gods part.
For this cause, then, death having gained upon men, and corruption abiding upon them, the race of man was perishing; the rational man made in God’s image was disappearing, and the handiwork of God was in process of dissolution. 2. For death, as I said above, gained from that time forth a legal 3 hold over us, and it was impossible to evade the law, since it had been laid down by God because 4 of the transgression, and the result was in truth at once monstrous and unseemly, 3. For it were monstrous, firstly, that God, having spoken, should prove false—that, when once He had ordained that man, if he transgressed the commandment, should die the death, after the transgression man should not die, but God’s word should be broken. For God would 4 Gal. iii. 19 (verbally only).
not be true, if, when He had said we should die, man died not. 4. Again, it were unseemly that creatures once made rational, and having partaken of the Word, should go to ruin, and turn again toward non-existence by the way of corruption 5, 5. For it were not worthy of God’s goodness that the things He had made should waste away, because of the deceit practised on men by the devil. 6. Especially it was unseemly to the last degree that God’s handicraft among men should be done away, either because of their own carelessness, or because of the deceitfulness of evil spirits. 7. So, as the rational creatures were wasting and such works in course of ruin, what was God in His goodness to do? Suffer corruption to prevail against them and death to hold them fast? And where were the profit of their having been made, to begin with? For better were they not made, than once made, left to neglect and ruin. 8. For neglect reveals weakness, and not goodness on God’s part—if, that is, He allows His own work to be ruined when once He had made it—more so than if He had never made man at all. g. For if He had not made them, none could impute weakness; but once He had made them, and created them out of nothing, it were most monstrous for the work to be ruined, and that before the eyes of the Maker. 1o. It was, then, out of the question to leave men to the current of corruption; because this would be unseemly, and unworthy of God’s goodness.
§ 7. On the other hand there was the consistency of God’s nature, not to be sacrificed for our profit. Were men, then, to be called upon to repent? But repentance cannot avert the execution of a law,; still less can wt remedy a fallen nature. We have incurred corruption and need to be re- stored to the Grace of Gou’s Image. None could renew but He Who had created. He alone could (1) recreate all, (2) suffer for all, (3) represent all to the Father.
But just as this consequence must needs hold, so, too, on the other side the just claims ¢ of God lie against it: that God should appear true to the law He had laid down concerning death. For it were monstrous for God, the Father of truth, to appear a liar for our profit and preservation. 2. So here, once more, what possible course was God to take? To demand repentance of men for their transgression? For this one might pronounce worthy of God; as 5 Cf. Anselm cur Deus Homo, II. 4, ‘Valde alienum est ab eo, ut ullam rationalem naturam penitus perire sinat.’ ‘ 6 Literally ‘‘ what is reasonable with respect to God,” i.e. what is involved in His attributes and in His relation to us, cf. Rom. iii. 26, cf. Anselm, 74. I. 12, who slightly narrows down the idea of Athan, ‘Si peccatum sic dimittitur impunitum, similiter erit apud Deum peccanti et non peccanti, quod Deo mom convenit...Inconvenientia autem iniustitia est.’
40 40 though, just as from transgression men have become set towards corruption, so from repent- ance they may once more be set in the way of incorruption. 3. But repentance would, firstly, fail to guard the just claim? of God. For He would still be none the more true, if men did not remain in the grasp of death; nor, secondly, does repentance call men back from what is their nature — it merely stays them from acts of sin. 4. Now, if there were merely a mis- demeanour in question, and not a consequent corruption, repentance were well enough. But if, when transgression had once gained a start, men became involved in that corruption which was their nature, and were deprived of the grace which they had, being in the image of God, what further step was needed? or what was required for such grace and such recall, but the Word of God, which had also at the beginning made everything out of nought? 5. For His it was once more both to bring the corruptible to incorruption, and to main- tain intact the just claim 7 of the Father upon all. For being Word of the Father, and above all, He alone of natural fitness was both able to recreate everything, and worthy to suffer on behalf of all and to be ambassador for all with the Father.
$8. Zhe Word, then, visited that earth in which fle was yet always present; and saw all these evils. He takes a body of our Nature, and that of a spotless Virgin, in whose womb He ‘makes tt His own, wherein to reveal Himself, conquer death, and restore life.
For this purpose, then, the incorporeal and incorruptible and immaterial Word of God comes to our realm, howbeit he was not far from us® before. For no part of Creation is left void of Him: He has filled all things every- where, remaining present with His own Father. But He comes in condescension to shew loving- kindness upon us, and to visit us. 2. And seeing the race of rational creatures in the way to perish, and death reigning over them by corruption; seeing, too, that the threat against transgression gave a firm hold to the corruption which was upon us, and that it was monstrous that before the law was fulfilled it should fall through: seeing, once more, the unseemliness of what was come to pass: that the things whereof He Himself was Artificer were pass- ing away: seeing, further, the exceeding wickedness of men, and how by little and little they had increased it to an intolerable pitch against themselves: and seeing, lastly, how all men were under penalty of death: He 7 See previous note. 8 Acts xvii. 27. 9 Cf. vi. 3.
DE INCARNATIONE VERBI Dial: took pity on our race, and had mercy on our infirmity, and condescended to our corruption, and, unable to bear that death should have the mastery—lest the creature should perish, and His Father’s handiwork in men be spent for nought— He takes unto Himself a body, and that of no different sort from ours. 3. For He did not simply will to become embodied, or will merely to appear*. For if He willed merely to appear, He was able to effect His divine appear- ance by some other and higher means as well. But He takes a body of our kind, and not merely so, but from a spotless and stainless virgin, knowing not a man, a body clean and in very truth pure from intercourse of men. For being Himself mighty, and Artificer of everything, He prepares the body in the Virgin as a temple unto Himself, and makes it His very Own? as an instrument, in it manifested, and in it dwelling. 4. And thus taking from our bodies one of like nature, because all were under penalty of the corruption of death He gave it over to death in the stead of all, and offered it to the Father—doing this, moreover, of His loving-kindness, to the end that, firstly, all being held to have died in Him, the law involving the ruin of men might be undone (inasmuch as its power was fully spent in the Lord’s body, and had no longer holding-ground against men, his peers), and that, secondly, whereas men had turned toward corruption, He might turn them again toward incorruption, and quicken them from death by the appropriation? of His body and by the grace of the Resurrection, banishing death from them like straw from the fire 3.