Roger Pearse

Address of the blessed Cyril, Archbishop of Alexandria, to the very pious emperor Theodosius, devoted to Christ.

1. The exceptional success of your holy principate, which deserves fame but discourages praise, your incomparable provision for piety, are the heritage from On High which you echo and which you have preserved, unconquered, from the traits of envy, thanks to a skill in public affairs which you got from your father and also your grandfather, as can clearly been seen in this field. Also I propose to apply to your own person the words of our Saviour, who said: "A city on a hill cannot be hidden"; isn't what is on the heights not always, on the same basis, the same thing as that which is seen?

However what could equal Your Serenity? Nothing in the world, since the glory of your sceptre has reached the supreme limits by illuminating the whole universe with the glow of your perfect administration, while your leniency and your piety towards Christ delight Heaven — I mean the rational powers which reign in its heights. So great indeed is the admiration that you receive in these two connections that, having here and there equal and rival virtues, you have placed yourself beyond praise in all its forms. The votive offerings that others devote to you, Emperor Theodosius devoted to Christ, are the trophies of victories, crowns, thanksgivings and all other ways of honouring, not without reason, the imperial power.

2. As for us, that destiny has given to sacred service, we had the duty to offer you a work composed with the greatest care to the glory of God: your inclinations, your practice and the authentic wishes of your heart have indeed always carried you to applaud that glory, to hold execrable those who, like drunken men, insult it in one way or another, to put them in the row of your worst enemies, to gratify on the other hand with every kind of favour those who choose to glorify God in thought and word. I would willingly consider these excellent provisions as a proof of holiness, in perfect suitability to the glorious heights which you occupy. In a psalm to Christ the Saviour of the world, David, the inspired prophet exclaimed: "Didn't I hate those who hate you, Lord, and was I not consumed toward your enemies? I made myself hate them with a perfect hatred, they became my own enemies!" These words are fully justified: indeed one can give as a shining proof of his attachment to your person the combat which he ardently carries out against those who chose, I do not know through what blindness, not to love you; in the same way, one could express all the authenticity of his love for Christ by impetuously attacking those who have discredited Christianity, with on the lips, almost like a cry, these words of the Scripture inspired by God: "I am filled with a jealous zeal for the Lord!"

It is necessary for me to say now what kind of work I am offering you here.

3. Forgive me for having resolved to speak not only against a king, but also for the glory of Christ, the great King, who reigns with his Father over the world; it is with him alone that it is true to say: "Through me kings reign", because he is the "Lord of glory" in heaven and on earth. It necessarily follows that the champions of the divine teachings - us, in fact - given this office by Christ, must oppose to those who intend to defile his glory the arguments able to plead his cause, to appear sound to readers, to be a more useful aid for those whose heart is easily led astray and is inclined to yield to difficulties, and for those on the other hand who are well established in the faith to be a kind of stick able to support them in the strengthening of this faith and to maintain undimmed the tradition of orthodoxy.

However who is it that has entered into war against the glory of Christ? They are legion, those who at various periods have let themselves go at this foolishnes, driven by the perversity of the devil; but none as went far as Julian, who damaged the prestige of the Empire by refusing to recognize Christ, dispenser of royalty and power. Before his accession to the throne, he was counted among the believers: he had even been admitted to Holy Baptism and had studied the Holy Scriptures.

4. But some sinister characters, followers of superstition, entered I do not know how into connections with him and sowed in him the maxims of apostasy; then, allied with Satan in this design, they led him towards the practices of the Greeks and transformed into a servant of impure demons one who had been raised in holy churches and monasteries: "bad company corrupts good upbringing", as the very wise Paul says. However, I affirm that those who wish to preserve a solid thought, and who keep in their spirit, like an invaluable pearl, the tradition of the true faith, do not have to offer to the peddlers of superstition any occasion to insinuate themselves, in any case to speak to them freely. Is it not written: "You will be holy with the holy, irreproachable with the irreproachable, chosen with the chosen, and you will outwit the cheat"? The eloquence with which he was gifted the all-powerful Julian used against our common Saviour Christ; he composed three books against the holy gospels and against the very pure Christian religion, he used them to shake many spirits and to cause them uncommon wrongs. Indeed, the light-minded and easily seduced fall easily into his sights, and constitute a welcome amusement for the demonic powers; but not spirits strengthened in the faith which do not let themselves be disturbed sometimes: they believe that Julian knows the holy and divine Scriptures, since he accumulates in his own works — without otherwise knowing well what it says!... — a number of testimonies that he borrows from them.

5. Very many followers of superstition, when they meet Christians, overpower them with any kind of sarcastic remarks, and rely on the works of Julian to attack us, which they proclaim to be of an incomparable effectiveness, adding that there never was a learned man on our side able to refute them, or even show them at fault; also, at the instigation of more than one person, and full of confidence once again in the word of God: "Get under way, and I will open your mouth!", I put myself to the duty of rebutting this Greek eyebrow raised against the glory of Christ, to help to the extent of my abilities those which have been deceived, in order to convict of error and of ignorance of the Scriptures the man who has accused our common Saviour Christ.

I dedicate my work on this subject to Your Greatness devoted to Christ and very august: may God always keep him, guarantee success against his enemies in an inimitable felicity, place the whole universe at his feet, grant to him to transmit his august power to the sons of his sons, with the approval of Christ, by whom and with whom glory to God the Father and to the Holy Ghost, for all the centuries! Amen.

(This took about an hour, by the way, to do).

spin

I couldn't translate that much of anything in an hour. Hell, I couldn't write that much in an hour! That's quite impressive. What are you intending to do, continue with more? Where did you get the original?

:notworthy: Kudos :notworthy:


spin

Incidentally this was my 6699th post. 66 and 99 were what I was taught -- was it primary school? -- to get quotation marks correct.

Roger Pearse

You're very kind, but you can translate that fast. These machine translators are extremely effective.

The new edition of the text isn't out. But in 1985 the French Sources Chretiennes series started work on a new edition of Contra Julianum. They only issued one volume, containing an introduction, text and translation for the introductory address, and books 1 and 2. (When the new edition comes out they intend to redo that volume, and follow up with the other books). This is still available, and I got a copy from www.amazon.fr. It arrived this afternoon. I saw how short the address was, scanned it in and translated it.

Book 1 appears to contain nothing by Julian and instead outlines the general anti-pagan apologetic of the Alexandrian school. Book 2 begins with a justification of this approach -- it sounds as if his audience objected! -- and promises to keep closer to what Julian wrote.

I won't do a huge amount, but the start of book 2 looks interesting and I've done a few chapters of that. (I've just been interrupted by dinner).

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Toto

Many thanks for this!

HeretiKc

That's interesting, no?

Roger Pearse

Book II

1. We thought that it was by no means unjustified, that it was even useful and necessary to say before all what is the chronological sequence of the characters, and also what idea each has of God: therefore we have carried out with much precision the exposition of these details.

We could be reproached for this by sayings: "Why then, having undertaken to defend Christian doctrines and taking in mind to oppose a victorious argumentation to the blasphemies of Julian, did you not decide to engage from the start in that way? Why on the contrary have you diverted the energy which began your exposition into a different goal, to launch into genealogies and to undertake a study of Hebraic and Greek doctrines?"

So let us remove the objections that have been made to us about this choice, by affirming that we intentionally directed our matter towards this digression. Indeed, (Julian), following the example of the Babylonian Rhapsaces, doesn't hesitate to utter in unrestrained language his mocking remarks against the glory of God, and after tossing impious vociferations against our holy religion he quotes the wise ones of Greece unceasingly, crowns their condemnable opinions with all possible praise, desperate to attack the crowned teachings of the Church, to smile at the books of Moses and to put in the dock all these holy people; therefore we were fully justified in accumulating, before passing to the refutation, material which enables us to show in a clear way that the works of the greatest of all, Moses, were prior to those of the wise Greeks, and, moreover, that the Christian faith as it has been transmitted, appears incomparably superior to their dogmatic positions. It was thus, and not differently, that next books could avoid too long digressions and avoid appearing to deviate sometimes very far from the the subject. But enough now on this point.

2. It is now necessary to come to (Julian's) own book. We will reproduce his text word for word, and will oppose our own arguments to his lies in the appropriate order, because we realize that it is necessary to firmly neutralize them. But, as I said, from his open mouth without reserve he spreads every kind of calumny against our common Saviour Christ, and pours against him ill-sounding remarks: I will abstain from responding with similar details, and, advising the wise party to ignore that in his words which risks dirtying the spirit by simple contact, I will endeavour to combat this (method of) 'combat', by denouncing on all occasions his habit of scoffing which speaks wrongly and irrelevantly without ever being able to arrive at saying a true thing.

It also should be known that in his first book he handles a great mass of ideas and does not cease turning and turning over the same arguments in every direction; some developments which are found at the beginning of his work, he also advances in the body of the book and at the end: he thus reveals a kind of disorder in the articulation of his discussion, and, fatally, those who want to argue against what he says seem constantly to be repeating themselves instead of finishing them once for all. We will thus divide his text according to an appropriate classification, we will gather his ideas by categories and will face each of them not on several occasions, but only once, the with appropriate explanations and following the rules of the art (of speaking). Thus, at the beginning of his book against us, he says:

JULIAN

It is, I think, expedient to set forth to all mankind the reasons by which I was convinced that the fabrication of the Galilaeans is a fiction of men composed by wickedness. Though it has in it nothing divine, by making full use of that part of the soul which loves fable and is childish and foolish, it has induced men to believe that the monstrous tale is truth.

CYRIL

3. By 'Galilaeans', he means the Holy Apostles, I think, and by a 'fantastic account' the writings of Moses, the predictions of the holy saints and their declarations inspired by God. However, without his knowledge --- let us say rather: not without intervention of the divinity --- he has made this idea the basis of his own superstition!

In fact there are two Galilees, one in Judaea, the other on the borders of the Phoenician country; and it is written indeed in the Gospels about our common Saviour Christ that it is while walking on the edge of the Sea of Galilee, of Lake Tiberias, that he recruited his disciples. However God said by means of one of the holy prophets: "What are you to me, Tyre and Sidon, and you Galilee, entirely populated with foreigners?" In the same way the divine Isaiah exclaims: "Country of Zabulon, land of Nephtalim, and all you others who live by the edge of the sea, Galilee of the Gentiles! The people sitting in shadow saw a great light..."

So in Judaea, one cannot just imagine the presence of Galilaeans, since there are also all the Gentiles there: 'Galilee of the Gentiles', says Isaiah. It cannot well or clearly be seen which adversaries the book of Julian aims at in all suitability and veracity: is it us, or himself in company with the believers in the stupid superstition that he loves? Because this is also Galilaean! Well indeed, it can't be doubted for one moment that the direction of the expressions employed by Julian agrees with the nonsense of the Greeks.

4. Where indeed to find all such an apparatus of fables, those vain words, this tasteless and irresponsible jumble of fads of every kind, if not among them and them only, who, twisting their subtle inventions, try to give to falsehood the colours of truth? So strong, so widespread among them is the turpitude that the elite of their spirits, the men cracked to philosophize extremely appropriately on the world which surrounded them, have raised loud cries against the undivine transports of their poets, and affirmed openly that they should abandon their charlatanism. In fact, Plato does not approve those poems, i.e. the homeric poems, which display the gods and goddesses convicted of libidinous passions, abused by quite human cupidities, and in addition prone to tears, deploring the death of those of their blood and breaking out like pansies in 'Woe is me!' because they want to save someone from death and are unable to do so, humbling themselves on the contrary before the fates, and yielding to Destiny, apparently more powerful than the Master of the gods, he that they call 'supreme Zeus'!

But I will not delay in saying all that I could still say on this subject; not wanting to appear to allow myself to be diverted from what is suitable, I will return to the point which my subject designates.

5. If there is a plot, it is a plot of the Greeks: it is they who undertook to use the fantastic to guarantee the truth, and not in all simplicity of spirit, but indeed with impious intentions and the satisfaction of wrongdoing! It is they who gathered against the inexpressible glory of all-powerful God this hateful 'fiction', which set up this 'deception', like some trap aimed at simple souls.

They have in effect mislaid the whole earth by pretending that the sky and the elements in general were God. As the very wise Paul writes: "While calling themselves wise, they fell into madness, and altered the glory of imperishable God by giving him the appearance of perishable man, birds, quadrupeds, and animals."

However, to run with his ideas, we will not throw against others the criticisms which he formulated and will indeed let them attack the Holy Apostles, even the very wise Moses himself and the holy prophets; but when he comes to the bar, will he clearly show what is this 'fiction implemented by malice', of what nature is this 'fantastic account' about which he speaks, in what consists the 'fondness for a fable, the puerile side' of the Christian religion! Did Moses write for us tales, when he professed one God by nature and in truth, unbegotten, eternal, imperishable, without quantity, invisible, immutable, imperceptible, God who is life and who gives life, who is science and power, creator, King and Lord of the universe? Did he deviate from the truth, the word of the holy prophets, who stick step by step to the doctrines of Moses? Will we find a teaching different in the holy Apostles? Certainly not!

6. And then, how can he affirm that the beliefs of Galilaeans do not have in them anything divine, that they are in addition hazardous fables, monstrous fictions? Who would refuse to admit that there can nothing better for men than to know clearly and without error the Craftsman and Lord of the world, one in nature and in truth? Our adversaries themselves, I know, would affirm that the most beautiful remarkable part of philosophy is contemplative philosophy: thanks to it, the spirits which their wisdom considers the best even to see go to great pains, and as much as is possible for men to do, to grasp the divine nature. Since he says that he himself is persuaded of this, would he teach us from where and from whom he obtains this certainty? Because finally it is not necessary that he flatters himself to be the only one with knowledge. If he was convinced of it himself, if that is enough for him to show without possible dispute — as at least he thinks and affirms --- that Christianity is not worth anything, I will not hesitate to say that this is pure drivel in him, and that he just amuses himself to attack us alone! We will not submit ourselves to such a hostile judge! If on the other hand he considers that the declarations of the critics against anyone must be founded in truth and without lies, then, that he does not say that this is just his conviction; he argues with facts!

However it is indeed he himself, and not us, who he must hand over to justice for the invention of fables, and he is extremely likely to be convicted! What he said will persuade some of us: let us let him speak:

JULIAN

7. Now since I intend to treat of all their first dogmas, as they call them, I wish to say in the first place that if my readers desire to try to refute me they must proceed as if they were in a court of law and not drag in irrelevant matter, or, as the saying is, bring counter-charges until they have defended their own views. For thus it will be better and clearer if, when they wish to censure any views of mine, they undertake that as a separate task, but when they are defending themselves against my censure, they bring no counter-charges.

CYRIL

So it is necessary for those who you put on trial to be dumb? You require that the defendant be condemned without being able to break silence, and, without saying a word about your arguments, agrees to confirm the charge against himself! However, to refuse us the right to say anything of your theses is the act of a man who fears the controversy and is not unaware of the unpleasant weakness of his position. If our man, in examining the Christian religion, does not approve it on all points and decrees the crown of the supreme honours to the Greek superstition, I admit that he treats both equally; but if he takes pleasure in the speeches which he allows against us and gives the palm to his erroneous designs while opposing to us, as higher than ours, the Greek religion, how can he ask us to keep silence on and not to make any allusion to this religion, when, in our desire to defend the cause of our own beliefs, it is of that subject precisely that we speak?

8. If, renouncing the right to attack what you write, I had adopted the intention to mention only Greek realities, I could affirm: "His book on this subject is acceptable, and remains within the limits of probability"; but when would we defend ourselves, when we make a point of answering each one of its declarations, how does he still have the right to reproach us for our efforts to plead the cause of our religion while exposing the infamous impiety of the Greeks? Colours can be seen more clearly when there is contrast. "The light is seen in darkness", it is written, and in the same way, I believe, the beauty attached to the virtues appears to simple souls only through the ugliness of their opposites. What inclines to me to give to the Good the palm of victory is the hideousness of the Evil: and for this reason (Julian) has indeed reason to fear the arguments of his own camp, and refuses shamefully the right to produce it on the day, going so far as to impose silence on those which he puts on trial in this lawsuit! Here now is how he opposes other objections to us:

(That's as much as I'm going to do, I think).

Roger Pearse

In fact it is a commonplace of patristic literature that the pre-incarnate Son appears at various points in the OT. In this case the reference is to a saying of Jesus himself, about David calling the son of man Lord.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

HeretiKc

Forgive my complete ignorance on the subject, but who are some of the other church fathers who did this?

Roger Pearse

Actually off-hand I don't remember! Probably Tertullian does (how else would I know) and Eusebius of Caesarea. I see it all the time, and never took note -- sorry!

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Roger Pearse

Glad to do what little I can to help.

What I never understand is why, after 5 centuries of incessant education in Greek and Latin, does anything in either language remain untranslated? If one knows a language, use it! Even if it's not perfect, it's better than nothing. But obviously I fail to understand something basic about the way the world works.

All the best,

Roger Pearse