What then, I asked, are the fire and the gulf and the other features in the picture? Are they not that which they are said to be?
I think, she replied, that the Gospel signifies by means of each of them certain doctrines with regard to our question of the soul. For when the patriarch first says to the Rich Man, “Thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things,” and in the same way speaks of the Poor Man, that he, namely, has done his duty in bearing his share of life’s evil things, and then, after that, adds with regard to the gulf that it is a barrier between them, he evidently by such expressions intimates a very important truth; and, to my thinking, it is as follows. Once man’s life had but one character; and by that I mean that it was to be found only in the cat- 1823 mpd¢ TO dkatTEpyaotov Tis THV oto1xetwv Ans. There is the same sort of distinction above, 215 A, i.e. between the kindred dust first, and then the universe (tO m&v) into which the atoms may stream back. 1824 axpovwe.
On the Soul and the Resurrection.
egory of the good and had no contact with evil. The first of God’s commandments attests the truth of this; that, namely, which gave to man unstinted enjoyment of all the blessings of Paradise, forbidding only that which was a mixture of good and evil and so composed of contraries, but making death the penalty for transgressing in that particular. But man, acting freely by a voluntary impulse, deserted the lot that was unmixed with evil, and drew upon himself that which was a mixture of contraries. Yet Divine Providence did not leave that recklessness of ours without a corrective. Death indeed, as the fixed penalty for breaking the law, necessarily fell upon its transgressors; but God divided the life of man into two parts, namely, this present life, and that “out of the body” hereafter; and He placed on the first a limit of the briefest possible time, while He prolonged the other into eternity; and in His love for man He gave him his choice, to have the one or the other of those things, good or evil, I mean, in which of the two parts he liked: either in this short and transitory life, or in those endless ages, whose limit is infinity. Now these expressions “good” and “evil” are equivocal; they are used in two senses, one relating to mind and the other to sense; some classify as good whatever is pleasant to feeling: others are confident that only that which is perceptible by intelligence is good and deserves that name. Those, then, whose reasoning powers have never been exercised and who have never had a glimpse of the better way soon use up on gluttony in this fleshly life the dividend of good which their constitution can claim, and they reserve none of it for the after life; but those who by a discreet and sober- minded calculation economize the powers of living are afflicted by things painful to sense here, but they reserve their good for the succeeding life, and so their happier lot is lengthened out to last as long as that eternal life. This, in my opinion, is the “gulf”; which is not made by the parting of the earth, but by those decisions in this life which result in a separation into opposite characters. The man who has once chosen pleasure in this life, and has not cured his inconsiderateness by repentance, places the land of the good beyond his own reach; for he has dug against himself the yawning impassable abyss of a necessity that nothing can break through. This is the reason, I think, that the name of Abraham’s bosom is given to that good situation of the soul in which Scripture makes the athlete of endurance repose. For it is related of this patriarch first, of all up to that time born, that he exchanged the enjoyment of the present for the hope of the future; he was stripped of all the surround- ings in which his life at first was passed, and resided amongst foreigners, and thus purchased by present annoyance future blessedness. As then figuratively'®”° we calla particular circuit of the ocean a “bosom,” so does Scripture seem to me to express the idea of those measureless blessings above by the word “bosom,” meaning a place into which all virtuous voyagers of this life are, when they have put in from hence, brought to anchor in the waveless harbour 1825 &k KaTaXprOEWS TIVvoOG: not as usually “by a misuse of words.”
On the Soul and the Resurrection.
of that gulf of blessings!®*°. Meanwhile the denial of these blessings which they witness be- comes in the others a flame, which burns the soul and causes the craving for the refreshment of one drop out of that ocean of blessings wherein the saints are affluent; which nevertheless they do not get. If, too, you consider the “tongue,” and the “eye,” and the “finger,” and the other names of bodily organs, which occur in the conversation between those disembodied souls, you will be persuaded that this conjecture of ours about them chimes in with the opinion we have already stated about the soul. Look closely into the meaning of those words. For as the concourse of atoms forms the substance of the entire body, so it is reasonable to think that the same cause operates to complete the substance of each member of the body. If, then, the soul is present with the atoms of the body when they are again mingled with the universe, it will not only be cognizant of the entire mass which once came together to form the whole body, and will be present with it, but, besides that, will not fail to know the particular materials of each one of the members, so as to remember by what divisions amongst the atoms our limbs were completely formed. There is, then, nothing improbable in supposing that what is present in the complete mass is present also in each division of the mass. If one, then, thinks of those atoms in which each detail of the body potentially inheres, and surmises that Scripture means a “finger” and a “tongue” and an “eye” and the rest as existing, after dissolution, only in the sphere of the soul, one will not miss the probable truth. Moreover, if each detail carries the mind away from a material acceptation of the story, surely the “hell” which we have just been speaking of cannot reasonably be thought a place so named; rather we are there told by Scripture about a certain unseen and immater- ial situation in which the soul resides. In this story of the Rich and the Poor Man we are taught another doctrine also, which is intimately connected with our former discoveries. The story makes the sensual pleasure-loving man, when he sees that his own case is one that admits of no escape, evince forethought for his relations on earth; and when Abraham tells him that the life of those still in the flesh is not unprovided with a guidance, for they may find it at hand, if they will, in the Law and the Prophets, he still continues entreating that Just!®7 Patriarch, and asks that a sudden and convincing message, brought by some one risen from the dead, may be sent to them. What then, I asked, is the doctrine here?
Why, seeing that Lazarus’ soul is occupied!®?8 with his present blessings and turns round to look at nothing that he has left, while the rich man is still attached, with a cement 1826 There is an anacoluthon here, for t@ dyé9w KdArw follows @ above; designed no doubt to bring the things compared more closely together. Oehler, however, would join yaw with the relative, and translates as if t@ = Kat.
1827 tov dikatov. Most of Krabinger’s Codd. read tov nAovonov.
1828 is occupied with his present blessings (AoxoXoc toic napovdotv); surely not, with Oehler, “is not occupied with the present world”!
On the Soul and the Resurrection.
as it were, even after death, to the life of feeling, which he does not divest himself of even when he has ceased to live, still keeping as he does flesh and blood in his thoughts (for in his entreaty that his kindred may be exempted from his sufferings he plainly shows that he is not freed yet from fleshly feeling),—in such details of the story (she continued) I think our Lord teaches us this; that those still living in the flesh must as much as ever they can separate and free themselves in a way from its attachments by virtuous conduct, in order that after death they may not need a second death to cleanse them from the remnants that are owing to this cement °*” of the flesh, and, when once the bonds are loosed from around the soul, her soaring'®°° up to the Good may be swift and unimpeded, with no anguish of the body to distract her. For if any one becomes wholly and thoroughly carnal in thought, such an one, with every motion and energy of the soul absorbed in fleshly desires, is not parted from such attachments, even in the disembodied state; just as those who have lingered long in noisome places do not part with the unpleasantness contracted by that lengthened stay, even when they pass into a sweet atmosphere. So!831 it is that, when the change is made into the impalpable Unseen, not even then will it be possible for the lovers of the flesh to avoid dragging away with them under any circumstances some fleshly foulness; and thereby their torment will be intensified, their soul having been materialized by such surroundings. I think too that this view of the matter harmonizes to a certain extent with the assertion made by some persons that around their graves shadowy phantoms of the departed are often seen!8°?. Tf this is really so, an inordinate attachment of that particular soul to the life in the 1829 _KdAAng. The metaphor is Platonic. “The soul...absolutely bound and glued to the body” (Pheedo, p. 82 1830 her soaring. Plato first spoke (Phedrus, p. 248 C) of “that growth of wing, by which the soul is lifted.” Once these natural wings can get expanded, her flight upwards is a matter of course. This image is reproduced by Plotinus p. 769 A (end of Enneads); Libanius, Pro Socrate, p. 258; Synesius, De Providentid, p. 90 D, and Hymn i. Ill, where he speaks of the ¢Apa Kod@ov of the soul, and Hymn iii. 42. But there is mixed here with the idea of a flight upwards (i.e. dvadpopr), that of the running-ground as well (cf. Greg. De scopo Christian. III. p. 299, toic tig apEtts Spdpois), which, as sanctioned in the New Testament, Chrysostom so often uses.
1831 oUtw¢ answers to Kabdmep, not to we above.
« 1832 shadowy phantoms of the departed are often seen. Cf. Origen c. Cels. ii. 60 (in answer to Celsus’ “Epicurean” opinion that ghosts are pure illusion): “He who does believe this (i.e. in ghosts) necessarily believes in the im- mortality, or at all events the long continuance of the soul: as Plato does in his treatise on the soul (i.e. the Phedo) when he says that the shadowy apparitions of the dead hover round their tombs. These apparitions, then, have some substance: it is the so-called ‘radiant’ frame in which the soul exists. But Celsus, not liking this, would have us believe that people have waking dreams and ‘imagine as true, in accordance with their wishes, a wild piece of unreality.’ In sleep we may well believe that this is the case: not so in waking hours, unless some one is quite out of his senses, or is melancholy mad.” But Origen here quotes Plato in connection with the reality of the Re- On the Soul and the Resurrection.
flesh is proved to have existed, causing it to be unwilling, even when expelled from the flesh, to fly clean away and to admit the complete change of its form into the impalpable; it remains near the frame even after the dissolution of the frame, and though now outside it, hovers regretfully over the place where its material is and continues to haunt it.
Then, after a moment’s reflection on the meaning of these latter words, I said: I think that a contradiction now arises between what you have said and the result of our former examination of the passions. For if, on the one hand, the activity of such movements within us is to be held as arising from our kinship with the brutes, such movements I mean as were enumerated in our previous discussion!
, anger, for instance, and fear, desire of pleasure, and so on, and, on the other hand, it was affirmed that virtue consists in the good employ- ment of these movements, and vice in their bad employment, and in addition to this we discussed the actual contribution of each of the other passions to a virtuous life, and found that through desire above all we are brought nearer God, drawn up, by its chain as it were, from earth towards Him,—I think (I said) that that part of the discussion is in a way opposed to that which we are now aiming at.
How so? she asked.
Why, when every unreasoning instinct is quenched within us after our purgation, this principle of desire will not exist any more than the other principles; and this being removed, it looks as if the striving after the better way would also cease, no other emotion remaining in the soul that can stir us up to the appetence of Good.
To that objection, she replied, we answer this. The speculative and critical faculty is the property of the soul’s godlike part; for it is by these that we grasp the Deity also. If, then whether by forethought here, or by purgation hereafter, our soul becomes free from any emotional connection with the brute creation, there will be nothing to impede its contem- plation of the Beautiful; for this last is essentially capable of attracting in a certain way every being that looks towards it. If, then, the soul is purified of every vice, it will most certainly be in the sphere of Beauty. The Deity is in very substance Beautiful; and to the Deity the soul will in its state of purity have affinity, and will embrace It as like itself. Whenever this happens, then, there will be no longer need of the impulse of Desire to lead the way to the Beautiful. Whoever passes his time in darkness, he it is who will be under the influence of a desire for the light; but whenever he comes into the light, then enjoyment takes the place of desire, and the power to enjoy renders desire useless and out of date. It will therefore be no detriment to our participation in the Good, that the soul should be free from such emo- tions, and turning back upon herself should know herself accurately what her actual nature surrection body of Christ: Gregory refers to ghosts only, with regard to the piAoowpato1, whose whole condition after death he represents very much in Plato’s words. See Phedo, p. 81 B. 1833 mpoAabwv; on the authority of five Codd., for mpochabwv On the Soul and the Resurrection.
is, and should behold the Original Beauty reflected in the mirror and in the figure of her own beauty. For truly herein consists the real assimilation to the Divine; viz. in making our own life in some degree a copy of the Supreme Being. For a Nature like that, which transcends all thought and is far removed from all that we observe within ourselves, proceeds in its existence in a very different manner to what we do in this present life. Man, possessing a constitution whose law it is to be moving, is carried in that particular direction whither the impulse of his will directs: and so his soul is not affected in the same way towards what lies before it!*4 , aS one may say, as to what it has left behind; for hope leads the forward movement, but it is memory that succeeds that movement when it has advanced to the at- tainment of the hope; and ifit is to something intrinsically good that hope thus leads on the soul, the print that this exercise of the will leaves upon the memory is a bright one; but if hope has seduced the soul with some phantom only of the Good, and the excellent Way has been missed, then the memory that succeeds what has happened becomes shame, and an intestine war is thus waged in the soul between memory and hope, because the last has been such a bad leader of the will. Such in fact is the state of mind that shame gives expression to; the soul is stung as it were at the result; its remorse for its ill-considered attempt is a whip that makes it feel to the quick, and it would bring in oblivion to its aid against its tormentor. Now in our case nature, owing to its being indigent of the Good, is aiming always at this which is still wanting to it, and this aiming ata still missing thing is this very habit of Desire, which our constitution displays equally, whether it is baulked of the real Good, or wins that which it is good to win. But a nature that surpasses every idea that we can form of the Good and transcends all other power, being in no want of anything that can be regarded as good, is itself the plenitude of every good; it does not move in the sphere of the good by way of participation in it only, but it is itself the substance of the Good (whatever we imagine the Good to be); it neither gives scope for any rising hope (for hope manifests activity in the direction of something absent; but “what a man has, why doth he yet hope for?” as the Apostle asks), nor is it in want of the activity of the memory for the knowledge of things; that which is actually seen has no need of being remembered. Since, then, this Divine nature is beyond any particular good!* q , and to the good the good is an object of love, it follows that when It looks within Itself!®°°, It wishes for what It contains and contains that which It wishes, and admits nothing external. Indeed there is nothing external to It, with the sole exception of evil, which, strange as it may seem to say, possesses an existence in not existing 1834 Kata to Eumpoobev avtijc. 1835 any particular good, not as Oehler, “jenseits alles Guten.” The Divine Being is the complement, not the negation, of each single good. 1836 ev Eat? PAEMovoa. But Augentius and Sifanus seem to have read Eauttyv: and this is supported by three Codd.
On the Soul and the Resurrection.
at all. For there is no other origin of evil except the negation of the existent, and the truly- existent forms the substance of the Good. That therefore which is not to be found in the existent must be in the non-existent. Whenever the soul, then, having divested itself of the multifarious emotions incident to its nature, gets its Divine form and, mounting above Desire, enters within that towards which it was once incited by that Desire, it offers no harbour within itself either for hope or for memory. It holds the object of the one; the other is extruded from the consciousness by the occupation in enjoying all that is good: and thus the soul copies the life that is above, and is conformed to the peculiar features of the Divine nature; none of its habits are left to it except that of love, which clings by natural affinity to the Beautiful. For this is what love is; the inherent affection towards a chosen object. When, then, the soul, having become simple and single in form and so perfectly godlike, finds that perfectly simple and immaterial good which is really worth enthusiasm and love taches itself to it and blends with it by means of the movement and activity of love, fashioning itself according to that which it is continually finding and grasping. Becoming by this assim- ilation to the Good all that the nature of that which it participates is, the soul will con- sequently, owing to there being no lack of any good in that thing itself which it participates, be itself also in no lack of anything, and so will expel from within the activity and the habit of Desire; for this arises only when the thing missed is not found. For this teaching we have the authority of God’s own Apostle, who announces a subduing!*°8 and a ceasing of all other activities, even for the good, which are within us, and finds no limit for love alone. Prophecies, he says, shall fail; forms of knowledge shall cease; but “charity never faileth;” which is equivalent to its being always as it is: and though!®? * he says that faith and hope have endured so far by the side of love, yet again he prolongs its date beyond theirs, and with good reason too; for hope is in operation only so long as the enjoyment of the things hoped for is not to be had; and faith in the same way is a support!840 in the uncertainty about the things hoped for; for so he defines it—“the substance’””” of things hoped for”; but when the thing hoped for actually comes, then all other faculties are reduced to quiescence!®, and love alone remains active, finding nothing to succeed itself. Love, therefore, 1837 TO Hovov TH Svtt dyanntov Kal Epcoutov.
1838 KataotoAny. Cf. 1 Cor. xiii. 8-13.
1839 Schmidt well remarks that there lies in A¢ywv here not a causal but only a concessive force: and he puts a stop before eixdtwo. Oehler has not seen that cydmn is governed by the preposition ovv in the verb “by the side of love,” and quite mistranslates the passage.
1840 épetoua.
1841 Undotaotc Heb. xi. 1.
1842 reduced to quiescence, &tpeuovvtwv. This is the reading adopted by Krabinger, from four Codd., instead of the vox nihili of the editions, evtnpepdvtwv. The contrast must be between “remaining in activity (€vepyeia),” On the Soul and the Resurrection.
is the foremost of all excellent achievements and the first of the commandments of the law. If ever, then, the soul reach this goal, it will be in no need of anything else; it will embrace that plenitude of things which are, whereby alone’®* it seems in any way to preserve within itself the stamp of God’s actual blessedness. For the life of the Supreme Being is love, seeing that the Beautiful is necessarily lovable to those who recognize it, and the Deity does recognize it, and so this recognition becomes love, that which He recognizes being essentially beautiful.
1844. and no satiety interrupting this This True Beauty the insolence of satiety cannot touc continuous capacity to love the Beautiful, God’s life will have its activity in love; which life is thus in itself beautiful, and is essentially of a loving disposition towards the Beautiful, and receives no check to this activity of love. In fact, in the Beautiful no limit is to be found so that love should have to cease with any limit of the Beautiful. This last can be ended only by its opposite; but when you have a good, as here, which is in its essence incapable of a change for the worse, then that good will go on unchecked into infinity. Moreover, as every being is capable of attracting its like, and humanity is, in a way, like God, as bearing within itself some resemblances to its Prototype, the soul is by a strict necessity attracted to the kindred Deity. In fact what belongs to God must by all means and at any cost be preserved for Him. If, then, on the one hand, the soul is unencumbered with superfluities and no trouble connected with the body presses it down, its advance towards Him Who draws it 1849 on the other hand, that it has been so as to be held down to a habit connected with to Himself is sweet and congenial. But suppose transfixed with the nails of propension!®**° material things,—a case like that of those in the ruins caused by earthquakes, whose bodies are crushed by the mounds of rubbish; and let us imagine by way of illustration that these and “becoming idle,” and he quotes a passage from Plotinus to show that dtpepeiv has exactly this latter sense. Cf. 1 Cor. xiii. 8, 10, katapynOrjoovtat, KatapynOroetat 1843. whereby alone, xa’ 6 Soxei Udvov Mw¢ avTiIG, kK. Tt. A, the reading of Sifanus.
1844 the insolence of satiety cannot touch. Krabinger quotes from two of his Codd. a scholium to this effect: “Then this proves to be nonsense what Origen has imagined about the satiety of minds, and their consequent fall and recall, on which he bases his notorious teaching about the pre-existence and restoration of souls that are always revolving in endless motion, determined as he is, like a retailer of evil, to mingle the Grecian myths with the Church’s truth.” Gregory, more sober in his idealism, certainly does not follow on this point his great Master. The phrase vBptotrs Kdpos is used by Gregory Naz. also in his Poems (p. 32 A), and may have been suggested to both by some poet, now lost. “Familiarity breeds contempt” is the modern equivalent.
1845 But suppose, &c. Moller (Gregorii doctrina de hom. natur., p. 99) shows that the following view of Pur- gatory is not that taught by the Roman Church.
1846 by the nails of propension. This metaphor is frequently used by Gregory. Cf. De Virginit. c. 5: “How can the soul which is riveted (npoonAw8eion) to the pleasures of the flesh, and busied with merely human longings, turn a disengaged eye upon its kindred intellectual light?” So De Beatitud. Or. viii. (I. p. 833), &c.
On the Soul and the Resurrection.
are not only pressed down by the weight of the ruins, but have been pierced as well with some spikes and splinters discovered with them in the rubbish. What then, would naturally be the plight of those bodies, when they were being dragged by relatives from the ruins to receive the holy rites of burial, mangled and torn entirely, disfigured in the most direful manner conceivable, with the nails beneath the heap harrowing them by the very violence necessary to pull them out?—Such I think is the plight of the soul as well when the Divine force, for God’s very love of man, drags that which belongs to Him from the ruins of the irrational and material. Not in hatred or revenge for a wicked life, to my thinking, does God bring upon sinners those painful dispensations; He is only claiming and drawing to Himself whatever, to please Him, came into existence. But while He for a noble end is attracting the soul to Himself, the Fountain of all Blessedness, it is the occasion necessarily to the being so attracted ofa state of torture. Just as those who refine gold from the dross which it contains not only get this base alloy to melt in the fire, but are obliged to melt the pure gold along with the alloy, and then while this last is being consumed the gold remains, so, while evil is being consumed in the purgatorial!®*” fire, the soul that is welded to this evil must inevitably be in the fire too, until the spurious material alloy is consumed and annihilated by this fire.
If a clay of the more tenacious kind is deeply plastered round a rope, and then the end of the rope is put through a narrow hole, and then some one on the further side violently pulls it by that end, the result must be that, while the rope itself obeys the force exerted, the clay that has been plastered upon it is scraped off it with this violent pulling and is left outside the hole, and, moreover, is the cause why the rope does not run easily through the passage, but has to undergo a violent tension at the hands of the puller. In such a manner, I think, we may figure to ourselves the agonized struggle of that soul which has wrapped itself up in earthy material passions, when God is drawing it, His own one, to Himself, and the foreign matter, which has somehow grown into its substance, has to be scraped from it by main force, and so occasions it that keen intolerable anguish.
Then it seems, I said, that it is not punishment chiefly and principally that the Deity, as Judge, afflicts sinners with; but He operates, as your argument has shown, only to get the good separated from the evil and to attract it into the communion of blessedness.
That, said the Teacher, is my meaning; and also that the agony will be measured by the amount of evil there is in each individual. For it would not be reasonable to think that the man who has remained so long as we have supposed in evil known to be forbidden, and the 1847 purgatorial, xaBapot& 251°. Five of Krabinger’s Codd. and the versions of Augentius and Sifanus approve this reading. That of the Editions is dxoiprjtw. [This last epithet is applied to God’s justice (Suc) by Isidore of Pelusium, Ep. 90: and to the “worm,” and, on the other hand, the Devil, by Cyril Alexand. Act. Ephes., p. 252. Cf. S. Math. iii. 12; S. Mark ix. 48.] It is the same with aiwvi& 251° before mupi just below. The Editions have it; the Codd. and Latin versions have not: Krabinger therefore has not hesitated to expunge it.
On the Soul and the Resurrection.
man who has fallen only into moderate sins, should be tortured to the same amount in the judgment upon their vicious habit; but according to the quantity of material will be the longer or shorter time that that agonizing flame will be burning; that is, as long as there is fuel to feed it. In the case of the man who has acquired a heavy weight of material, the con- suming fire must necessarily be very searching; but where that which the fire has to feed upon848 has spread less far, there the penetrating fierceness of the punishment is mitigated, so far as the subject itself, in the amount of its evil, is diminished. In any and every case evil must be removed out of existence, so that, as we said above, the absolutely non-existent should cease to be at all. Since it is not in its nature that evil should exist outside the will, does it not follow that when it shall be that every will rests in God, evil will be reduced to complete annihilation, owing to no receptacle being left for it?
But, said I, what help can one find in this devout hope, when one considers the greatness of the evil in undergoing torture even for a single year; and if that intolerable anguish be prolonged for the interval of an age, what grain of comfort is left from any subsequent ex- pectation to him whose purgation is thus commensurate with an entire age?!84?
Why?®> © either we must plan to keep the soul absolutely untouched and free from any stain of evil; or, if our passionate nature makes that quite impossible, then we must plan that our failures in excellence consist only in mild and easily-curable derelictions. For the 1851 4 debtor of ten thousand talents and a Gospel in its teaching distinguishes between debtor of five hundred pence, and of fifty pence and ofa farthing’*°*, which is “the uttermost” of coins; it proclaims that God’s just judgment reaches to all, and enhances the payment necessary as the weight of the debt increases, and on the other hand does not overlook the very smallest debts. But the Gospel tells us that this payment of debts was not effected by the refunding of money, but that the indebted man was delivered to the tormentors until he should pay the whole debt; and that means nothing else than paying in the coin of torment the inevitable recompense, the recompense, I mean, that consists in taking the 1848 1 tod mUpdc Samtavr}. These words can have no other meaning to suit the sense. Krabinger’s reproduction of Sifanus’ Latin, “ignis ille consumens,” makes the sentence a tautology.
1849 mpdc GAov ai& 242'va. But cf. Plato, Timeeus, 37, 39 D.
1850 Macrina’s answer must begin here, though the Paris Editt. take no notice of a break. Krabinger on the authority of one of his Codd. has inserted protv 1 diddoKados after tpovontéov 1851 distinguishes between. The word here is oidev, which is used of “teaching,” “telling,” after the fashion of the later Greek writers, in making a quotation.
1852 ofa farthing. No mention is made of this in the Parable (S. Matt. xviii. 23; S. Luke vii. 41). The “uttermost farthing” of S. Matt. v. 26 does not apply here.
1853 81d tig Paokvov. Of course 514 cannot go with dpetAny, though Krabinger translates “per tormenta debita.” He has however, with Oehler, pointed the Greek right, so as to take 6~Anua as in opposition to dge1Anv On the Soul and the Resurrection.