VALENTINIAN’S VAGARIES ABOUT THE ABOLITION OF
DEATH REFUTED.
Valentinian, in a homily, writes in these words: “Ye are originally
immortal, and children of eternal life, and ye would have death
distributed to you, that ye may spend and lavish it, and that death
may die in you and by you; for when ye dissolve the world, and are
not yourselves dissolved, ye have dominion over creation and all
corruption.” For he also, similarly with Basilides, supposes a class
saved by nature, and that this different race has come hither to us
from above for the abolition of death, and that the origin of death is
the work of the Creator of the world. Wherefore also he so expounds
that scripture, “No man shall see the face of God, and live,” as if He
were the cause of death. Respecting this God, he makes those allusions
when writing in these expressions: “As much as the image is inferior
to the living face, so much is the world inferior to the living Æon.
What is, then, the cause of the image? The majesty of the face, which
exhibits the figure to the painter, to be honoured by his name; for
the form is not found exactly to the life, but the name supplies what
is wanting in the effigy. The invisibility of God co-operates also in
order to the faith of that which has been fashioned.” For the Creator,
called God and Father, he designated as “Painter,” and “Wisdom,” whose
image that which is formed is, to the glory of the invisible One;
since the things which proceed from a pair are complements, and those
which proceed from one are images. But since what is seen is no part
of Him, the soul comes from what is intermediate, which is different;
and this is the inspiration of the different spirit, and generally
what is breathed into the soul, which is the image of the spirit. And
in general, what is said of the Creator, who was made according to
the image, they say was foretold by a sensible image in the book of
Genesis respecting the origin of man; and the likeness they transfer
to themselves, teaching that the addition of the different spirit was
made, unknown to the Creator. When, then, we treat of the unity of
the God who is proclaimed in the law, the prophets, and the gospel,
we shall also discuss this; for the topic is supreme. But we must
advance to that which is urgent. If for the purpose of doing away with
death the peculiar race has come, it is not Christ who has abolished
death, unless He also is said to be of the same essence with them. And
if He abolished it to this end, that it might not touch the peculiar
race, it is not these, the rivals of the Creator, who breathe into the
image of their intermediate spirit the life from above--in accordance
with the principle of the dogma--that abolish death. But should they
say that this takes place by His mother, or should they say that
they, along with Christ, war against death, let them own the secret
dogma that they have the hardihood to assail the divine power of the
Creator, by setting to rights His creation, as if they were superior,
endeavouring to save the vital image which He was not able to rescue
from corruption. Then the Lord would be superior to God the Creator;
for the son would never contend with the father, especially among the
gods. But the point that the Creator of all things, the omnipotent
Lord, is the Father of the Son, we have deferred till the discussion
of these points, in which we have undertaken to dispute against the
heresies, showing that He alone is the God proclaimed by Him.
But the apostle, writing to us with reference to the endurance of
afflictions, says, “And this is of God, that it is given to you on
behalf of Christ, not only to believe on Him, but also to suffer for
His sake; having the same conflict which ye saw in me, and now hear
to be in me. If there is therefore any consolation in Christ, if
any comfort of love, if any communion of spirit, if any bowels and
mercies, fulfil ye my joy, that ye may be of the same mind, having the
same love, unanimous, thinking one thing. And if he is offered on the
sacrifice and service of faith, joying and rejoicing”[573] with the
Philippians, to whom the apostle speaks, calling them “fellow-partakers
of joy,”[574] how does he say that they are of one soul, and having a
soul? Likewise also, writing respecting Timothy and himself, he says,
“For I have no one like-souled, who will nobly care for your state. For
all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ’s.”[575]
Let not the above-mentioned people, then, call us, by way of reproach,
“natural men” (ψυχικοὶ), nor the Phrygians either; for these now call
those who do not apply themselves to the new prophecy “natural men”
(ψυχικοὶ), with whom we shall discuss in our remarks on “Prophecy.”
The perfect man ought therefore to practise love, and thence to haste
to the divine friendship, fulfilling the commandments from love. And
loving one’s enemies does not mean loving wickedness, or impiety, or
adultery, or theft; but the thief, the impious, the adulterer, not as
far as he sins, and in respect of the actions by which he stains the
name of man, but as he is a man, and the work of God. Assuredly sin
is an activity, not an existence: and therefore it is not a work of
God. Now sinners are called enemies of God--enemies, that is, of the
commands which they do not obey, as those who obey become friends, the
one named so from their fellowship, the others from their estrangement,
which is the result of free choice; for there is neither enmity nor sin
without the enemy and the sinner. And the command “to covet nothing,”
not as if the things to be desired did not belong to us, does not teach
us not to entertain desire, as those suppose who teach that the Creator
is different from the first God, not as if creation was loathsome and
bad (for such opinions are impious). But we say that the things of the
world are _not our own_, not as if they were monstrous, not as if
they did not belong to God, the Lord of the universe, but because we
do not continue among them for ever; being, in respect of possession,
not ours, and passing from one to another in succession; but belonging
to us, for whom they were made in respect of use, so long as it is
necessary to continue with them. In accordance, therefore, with natural
appetite, things disallowed are to be used rightly, avoiding all excess
and inordinate affection.