Chapter 7
The mother Achamoth, when all
her seed are perfected, shall pass into the Pleroma, accompanied by those men
who are spiritual; the Demiurge, with animal men, shall pass into the
intermediate habitation; but all material men shall go into corruption. Their
blasphemous opinions against the true incarnation of Christ by the Virgin Mary.
Their views as to the prophecies. Stupid ignorance of the Demiurge.
1. When all the seed shall have come to
perfection, they state that then their mother Achamoth shall pass from the
intermediate place, and enter in within the Pleroma, and shall receive as her
spouse the Saviour, who sprang from all the Æons, that thus a conjunction may
be formed between the Saviour and Sophia, that is, Achamoth. These, then, are
the bridegroom and bride, while the nuptial chamber is the full extent of the
Pleroma. The spiritual seed, again, being divested of their animal souls, and
becoming intelligent spirits, shall in an irresistible and invisible manner
enter in within the Pleroma, and be bestowed as brides on those angels who wait
upon the Saviour. The Demiurge himself will pass into the place of his mother
Sophia; that is, the intermediate habitation. In this intermediate place, also,
shall the souls of the righteous repose; but nothing of an animal nature shall
find admittance to the Pleroma. When these things have taken place as
described, then shall that fire which lies hidden in the world blaze forth and
burn; and while destroying all matter, shall also be extinguished along with
it, and have no further existence. They affirm that the Demiurge was acquainted
with none of these things before the advent of the Saviour.
2. There are also some who maintain that he also
produced Christ as his own proper son, but of an animal nature, and that
mention was made of him by the prophets. This Christ passed through Mary just
as water flows through a tube; and there descended upon him in the form of a
dove at the time of his baptism, that Saviour who belonged to the Pleroma, and
was formed by the combined efforts of all its inhabitants. In him there existed
also that spiritual seed which proceeded from Achamoth. They hold, accordingly,
that our Lord, while preserving the type of the first-begotten and primary
tetrad, was compounded of these four substances, — of that which is spiritual,
in so far as He was from Achamoth; of that which is animal, as being from the
Demiurge by a special dispensation, inasmuch as He was formed [corporeally]
with unspeakable skill; and of the Saviour, as respects that dove which
descended upon Him. He also continued free from all suffering, since indeed it
was not possible that He should suffer who was at once incomprehensible and
invisible. And for this reason the Spirit of Christ, who had been placed within
Him, was taken away when He was brought before Pilate. They maintain, further,
that not even the seed which He had received from the mother [Achamoth] was
subject to suffering; for it, too, was impassible, as being spiritual, and
invisible even to the Demiurge himself. It follows, then, according to them,
that the animal Christ, and that which had been formed mysteriously by a
special dispensation, underwent suffering, that the mother might exhibit
through him a type of the Christ above, namely, of him who extended himself
through Stauros, and imparted to Achamoth shape, so far as substance was
concerned. For they declare that all these transactions were counterparts of
what took place above.
3. They maintain, moreover, that those souls which
possess the seed of Achamoth are superior to the rest, and are more dearly
loved by the Demiurge than others, while he knows not the true cause thereof,
but imagines that they are what they are through his favour towards them.
Wherefore, also, they say he distributed them to prophets, priests, and kings;
and they declare that many things were spoken by this seed through the
prophets, inasmuch as it was endowed with a transcendently lofty nature. The
mother also, they say, spoke much about things above, and that both through him
and through the souls which were formed by him. Then, again, they divide the
prophecies [into different classes], maintaining that one portion was uttered
by the mother, a second by her seed, and a third by the Demiurge. In like
manner, they hold that Jesus uttered some things under the influence of the
Saviour, others under that of the mother, and others still under that of the Demiurge,
as we shall show further on in our work.
4. The Demiurge, while ignorant of those things
which were higher than himself, was indeed excited by the announcements made
[through the prophets], but treated them with contempt, attributing them
sometimes to one cause and sometimes to another; either to the prophetic spirit
(which itself possesses the power of self-excitement), or to [mere unassisted]
man, or that it was simply a crafty device of the lower [and baser order of
men]. He remained thus ignorant until the appearing of the Lord. But they
relate that when the Saviour came, the Demiurge learned all things from Him,
and gladly with all, his power joined himself to Him. They maintain that he is
the centurion mentioned in the Gospel, who addressed the Saviour in these
words: "For I also am one having soldiers and servants under my authority;
and whatsoever I command they do." Matthew 8:9; Luke 7:8 They further hold
that he will continue administering the affairs of the world as long as that is
fitting and needful, and specially that he may exercise a care over the Church;
while at the same time he is influenced by the knowledge of the reward prepared
for him, namely, that he may attain to the habitation of his mother.
5. They conceive, then, of three kinds of men,
spiritual, material, and animal, represented by Cain, Abel, and Seth. These
three natures are no longer found in one person, but constitute various kinds
[of men]. The material goes, as a matter of course, into corruption. The
animal, if it make choice of the better part, finds repose in the intermediate
place; but if the worse, it too shall pass into destruction. But they assert
that the spiritual principles which have been sown by Achamoth, being
disciplined and nourished here from that time until now in righteous souls
(because when given forth by her they were yet but weak), at last attaining to
perfection, shall be given as brides to the angels of the Saviour, while their
animal souls of necessity rest for ever with the Demiurge in the intermediate
place. And again subdividing the animal souls themselves, they say that some
are by nature good, and others by nature evil. The good are those who become
capable of receiving the [spiritual] seed; the evil by nature are those who are
never able to receive that seed.
Chapter 8
How the Valentinians pervert the
Scriptures to support their own pious opinions.
1. Such, then, is their system, which neither the
prophets announced, nor the Lord taught, nor the apostles delivered, but of
which they boast that beyond all others they have a perfect knowledge. They
gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures; and, to use a common
proverb, they strive to weave ropes of sand, while they endeavour to adapt with
an air of probability to their own peculiar assertions the parables of the
Lord, the sayings of the prophets, and the words of the apostles, in order that
their scheme may not seem altogether without support. In doing so, however, they
disregard the order and the connection of the Scriptures, and so far as in them
lies, dismember and destroy the truth. By transferring passages, and dressing
them up anew, and making one thing out of another, they succeed in deluding
many through their wicked art in adapting the oracles of the Lord to their
opinions. Their manner of acting is just as if one, when a beautiful image of a
king has been constructed by some skilful artist out of precious jewels, should
then take this likeness of the man all to pieces, should rearrange the gems,
and so fit them together as to make them into the form of a dog or of a fox,
and even that but poorly executed; and should then maintain and declare that
this was the beautiful image of the king which the skilful artist constructed,
pointing to the jewels which had been admirably fitted together by the first
artist to form the image of the king, but have been with bad effect transferred
by the latter one to the shape of a dog, and by thus exhibiting the jewels,
should deceive the ignorant who had no conception what a king's form was like,
and persuade them that that miserable likeness of the fox was, in fact, the
beautiful image of the king. In like manner do these persons patch together old
wives' fables, and then endeavour, by violently drawing away from their proper
connection, words, expressions, and parables whenever found, to adapt the
oracles of God to their baseless fictions. We have already stated how far they
proceed in this way with respect to the interior of the Pleroma.
2. Then, again, as to those things outside of
their Pleroma, the following are some specimens of what they attempt to
accommodate out of the Scriptures to their opinions. They affirm that the Lord
came in the last times of the world to endure suffering, for this end, that He
might indicate the passion which occurred to the last of the Æons, and might by
His own end announce the cessation of that disturbance which had risen among
the Æons. They maintain, further, that that girl of twelve years old, the
daughter of the ruler of the synagogue, Luke 8:41 to whom the Lord approached
and raised her from the dead, was a type of Achamoth, to whom their Christ, by
extending himself, imparted shape, and whom he led anew to the perception of
that light which had forsaken her. And that the Saviour appeared to her when
she lay outside of the Pleroma as a kind of abortion, they affirm Paul to have
declared in his Epistle to the Corinthians [in these words], "And last of
all, He appeared to me also, as to one born out of due time." 1
Corinthians 15:8 Again, the coming of the Saviour with His attendants to
Achamoth is declared in like manner by him in the same Epistle, when he says,
"A woman ought to have a veil upon her head, because of the angels."
Now, that Achamoth, when the Saviour came to her, drew a veil over herself
through modesty, Moses rendered manifest when he put a veil upon his face.
Then, also, they say that the passions which she endured were indicated by the
Lord upon the cross. Thus, when He said, "My God, my God, why have You
forsaken Me?" Matthew 27:46 He simply showed that Sophia was deserted by
the light, and was restrained by Horos from making any advance forward. Her
anguish, again, was indicated when He said, "My soul is exceeding
sorrowful, even unto death;" Matthew 26:38 her fear by the words,
"Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from Me;" Matthew 26:39
and her perplexity, too, when He said, "And what I shall say, I know
not."
3. And they teach that He pointed out the three
kinds of men as follows: the material, when He said to him that asked Him,
"Shall I follow You?" Luke 9:57-58 "The Son of man has not where
to lay His head;"— the animal, when He said to him that declared, "I
will follow You, but suffer me first to bid them farewell that are in my
house," "No man, putting his hand to the plough, and looking back, is
fit for the kingdom of heaven" Luke 9:61-62 (for this man they declare to
be of the intermediate class, even as they do that other who, though he
professed to have wrought a large amount of righteousness, yet refused to
follow Him, and was so overcome by [the love of] riches, as never to reach
perfection) — this one it pleases them to place in the animal class — the
spiritual, again, when He said, "Let the dead bury their dead, but go and
preach the kingdom of God," Luke 9:60 and when He said to Zaccheus the
publican, "Make haste, and come down, for today I must abide in your
house" Luke 19:5 — for these they declared to have belonged to the
spiritual class. Also the parable of the leaven which the woman is described as
having hid in three measures of meal, they declare to make manifest the three
classes. For, according to their teaching, the woman represented Sophia; the
three measures of meal, the three kinds of men — spiritual, animal, and
material; while the leaven denoted the Saviour Himself. Paul, too, very plainly
set forth the material, animal, and spiritual, saying in one place, "As is
the earthy, such are they also that are earthy;" 1 Corinthians 15:48 and
in another place, "But the animal man receives not the things of the
Spirit;" 1 Corinthians 2:14 and again: "He that is spiritual judges
all things." 1 Corinthians 2:15 And this, "The animal man receives
not the things of the Spirit," they affirm to have been spoken concerning
the Demiurge, who, as being animal, knew neither his mother who was spiritual,
nor her seed, nor the Æons in the Pleroma. And that the Saviour received
first-fruits of those whom He was to save, Paul declared when he said,
"And if the first-fruits be holy, the lump is also holy," Romans
11:16 teaching that the expression "first-fruits" denoted that which
is spiritual, but that "the lump" meant us, that is, the animal
Church, the lump of which they say He assumed, and blended it with Himself,
inasmuch as He is "the leaven."
4. Moreover, that Achamoth wandered beyond the
Pleroma, and received form from Christ, and was sought after by the Saviour,
they declare that He indicated when He said, that He had come after that sheep
which had gone astray. Luke 15:4, 8 For they explain the wandering sheep to
mean their mother, by whom they represent the Church as having been sown. The
wandering itself denotes her stay outside of the Pleroma in a state of varied
passion, from which they maintain that matter derived its origin. The woman,
again, who sweeps the house and finds the piece of money, they declare to
denote the Sophia above, who, having lost her enthymesis, afterwards recovered
it, on all things being purified by the advent of the Saviour. Wherefore this
substance also, according to them, was reinstated in Pleroma. They say, too,
that Simeon, "who took Christ into his arms, and gave thanks to God, and
said, Lord, now let Your servant depart in peace, according to Your word,"
Luke 2:28 was a type of the Demiurge, who, on the arrival of the Saviour,
learned his own change of place, and gave thanks to Bythus. They also assert
that by Anna, who is spoken of in the gospel Luke 2:36 as a prophetess, and
who, after living seven years with her husband, passed all the rest of her life
in widowhood until she saw the Saviour, and recognised Him, and spoke of Him to
all, was most plainly indicated Achamoth, who, having for a little while looked
upon the Saviour with His associates, and dwelling all the rest of the time in
the intermediate place, waited for Him till He should come again, and restore
her to her proper consort. Her name, too, was indicated by the Saviour, when He
said, "Yet wisdom is justified by her children." Luke 7:35 This, too,
was done by Paul in these words, "But we speak wisdom among them that are
perfect." 1 Corinthians 2:6 They declare also that Paul has referred to
the conjunctions within the Pleroma, showing them forth by means of one; for,
when writing of the conjugal union in this life, he expressed himself thus:
"This is a great mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the
Church." Ephesians 5:32
5. Further, they teach that John, the disciple of
the Lord, indicated the first Ogdoad, expressing themselves in these words:
John, the disciple of the Lord, wishing to set forth the origin of all things,
so as to explain how the Father produced the whole, lays down a certain
principle — that, namely, which was first-begotten by God, which Being he has termed
both the only-begotten Son and God, in whom the Father, after a seminal manner,
brought forth all things. By him the Word was produced, and in him the whole
substance of the Æons, to which the Word himself afterwards imparted form.
Since, therefore, he treats of the first origin of things, he rightly proceeds
in his teaching from the beginning, that is, from God and the Word. And he
expresses himself thus: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was
with God, and the Word was God; the same was in the beginning with God."
John 1:1-2 Having first of all distinguished these three — God, the Beginning,
and the Word — he again unites them, that he may exhibit the production of each
of them, that is, of the Son and of the Word, and may at the same time show
their union with one another, and with the Father. For "the
beginning" is in the Father, and of the Father, while "the Word"
is in the beginning, and of the beginning. Very properly, then, did he say,
"In the beginning was the Word," for He was in the Son; "and the
Word was with God," for He was the beginning; "and the Word was
God," of course, for that which is begotten of God is God. "The same
was in the beginning with God" — this clause discloses the order of
production. "All things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing
made;" John 1:3 for the Word was the author of form and beginning to all
the Æons that came into existence after Him. But "what was made in
Him," says John, "is life." Here again he indicated conjunction;
for all things, he said, were made by Him, but in Him was life. This, then,
which is in Him, is more closely connected with Him than those things which
were simply made by Him, for it exists along with Him, and is developed by Him.
When, again, he adds, "And the life was the light of men," while thus
mentioning Anthropos, he indicated also Ecclesia by that one expression, in
order that, by using only one name, he might disclose their fellowship with one
another, in virtue of their conjunction. For Anthropos and Ecclesia spring from
Logos and Zoe. Moreover, he styled life (Zoe) the light of men, because they
are enlightened by her, that is, formed and made manifest. This also Paul
declares in these words: "For whatsoever does make manifest is
light." Ephesians 5:13 Since, therefore, Zoe manifested and begot both
Anthropos and Ecclesia, she is termed their light. Thus, then, did John by
these words reveal both other things and the second Tetrad, Logos and Zoe,
Anthropos and Ecclesia. And still further, he also indicated the first Tetrad.
For, in discoursing of the Saviour and declaring that all things beyond the
Pleroma received form from Him, he says that He is the fruit of the entire
Pleroma. For he styles Him a "light which shines in darkness, and which
was not comprehended" John 1:5 by it, inasmuch as, when He imparted form
to all those things which had their origin from passion, He was not known by
it. He also styles Him Son, and Aletheia, and Zoe, and the "Word made
flesh, whose glory," he says, "we beheld; and His glory was as that
of the Only-begotten (given to Him by the Father), full of grace and
truth." John 1:14 (But what John really does say is this: "And the
Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us; and we beheld His glory, the glory as
of the only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." ) Thus,
then, does he [according to them] distinctly set forth the first Tetrad, when
he speaks of the Father, and Charis, and Monogenes, and Aletheia. In this way,
too, does John tell of the first Ogdoad, and that which is the mother of all
the Æons. For he mentions the Father, and Charis, and Monogenes, and Aletheia,
and Logos, and Zoe, and Anthropos, and Ecclesia. Such are the views of
Ptolemæus.
begotten and primary tetrad, was compounded of
these four substances, — of that which is spiritual, in so far as He was from
Achamoth; of that which is animal, as being from the Demiurge by a special
dispensation, inasmuch as He was formed [corporeally] with unspeakable skill;
and of the Saviour, as respects that dove which descended upon Him. He also
continued free from all suffering, since indeed it was not possible that He
should suffer who was at once incomprehensible and invisible. And for this
reason the Spirit of Christ, who had been placed within Him, was taken away when
He was brought before Pilate. They maintain, further, that not even the seed
which He had received from the mother [Achamoth] was subject to suffering; for
it, too, was impassible, as being spiritual, and invisible even to the Demiurge
himself. It follows, then, according to them, that the animal Christ, and that
which had been formed mysteriously by a special dispensation, underwent
suffering, that the mother might exhibit through him a type of the Christ
above, namely, of him who extended himself through Stauros, and imparted to
Achamoth shape, so far as substance was concerned. For they declare that all
these transactions were counterparts of what took place above.
Chapter 9
Refutation of the impious
interpretations of these heretics.
1. You see, my friend, the method which these men
employ to deceive themselves, while they abuse the Scriptures by endeavouring
to support their own system out of them. For this reason, I have brought
forward their modes of expressing themselves, that thus you might understand
the deceitfulness of their procedure, and the wickedness of their error. For,
in the first place, if it had been John's intention to set forth that Ogdoad
above, he would surely have preserved the order of its production, and would doubtless
have placed the primary Tetrad first as being, according to them, most
venerable and would then have annexed the second, that, by the sequence of the
names, the order of the Ogdoad might be exhibited, and not after so long an
interval, as if forgetful for the moment and then again calling the matter to
mind, he, last of all, made mention of the primary Tetrad. In the next place,
if he had meant to indicate their conjunctions, he certainly would not have
omitted the name of Ecclesia; while, with respect to the other conjunctions, he
either would have been satisfied with the mention of the male [Æons] (since the
others [like Ecclesia] might be understood), so as to preserve a uniformity
throughout; or if he enumerated the conjunctions of the rest, he would also
have announced the spouse of Anthropos, and would not have left us to find out
her name by divination.
2. The fallacy, then, of this exposition is
manifest. For when John, proclaiming one God, the Almighty, and one Jesus
Christ, the Only-begotten, by whom all things were made, declares that this was
the Son of God, this the Only-begotten, this the Former of all things, this the
true Light who enlightens every man, this the Creator of the world, this He that
came to His own, this He that became flesh and dwelt among us — these men, by a
plausible kind of exposition, perverting these statements, maintain that there
was another Monogenes, according to production, whom they also style Arche.
They also maintain that there was another Saviour, and another Logos, the son
of Monogenes, and another Christ produced for the re-establishment of the
Pleroma. Thus it is that, wresting from the truth every one of the expressions
which have been cited, and taking a bad advantage of the names, they have
transferred them to their own system; so that, according to them, in all these
terms John makes no mention of the Lord Jesus Christ. For if he has named the
Father, and Charis, and Monogenes, and Aletheia, and Logos, and Zoe, and
Anthropos, and Ecclesia, according to their hypothesis, he has, by thus
speaking, referred to the primary Ogdoad, in which there was as yet no Jesus,
and no Christ, the teacher of John. But that the apostle did not speak
concerning their conjunctions, but concerning our Lord Jesus Christ, whom he
also acknowledges as the Word of God, he himself has made evident. For, summing
up his statements respecting the Word previously mentioned by him, he further
declares, "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." But,
according to their hypothesis, the Word did not become flesh at all, inasmuch
as He never went outside of the Pleroma, but that Saviour [became flesh] who
was formed by a special dispensation [out of all the Æons], and was of later
date than the Word.
3. Learn then, you foolish men, that Jesus who
suffered for us, and who dwelt among us, is Himself the Word of God. For if any
other of the Æons had become flesh for our salvation, it would have been
probable that the apostle spoke of another. But if the Word of the Father who
descended is the same also that ascended, He, namely, the Only-begotten Son of
the only God, who, according to the good pleasure of the Father, became flesh
for the sake of men, the apostle certainly does not speak regarding any other,
or concerning any Ogdoad, but respecting our Lord Jesus Christ. For, according
to them, the Word did not originally become flesh. For they maintain that the
Saviour assumed an animal body, formed in accordance with a special
dispensation by an unspeakable providence, so as to become visible and
palpable. But flesh is that which was of old formed for Adam by God out of the
dust, and it is this that John has declared the Word of God became. Thus is
their primary and first-begotten Ogdoad brought to nought. For, since Logos,
and Monogenes, and Zoe, and Phōs, and Soter, and Christus, and the Son of God,
and He who became incarnate for us, have been proved to be one and the same,
the Ogdoad which they have built up at once falls to pieces. And when this is
destroyed, their whole system sinks into ruin — a system which they falsely
dream into existence, and thus inflict injury on the Scriptures, while they
build up their own hypothesis.
4. Then, again, collecting a set of expressions
and names scattered here and there [in Scripture], they twist them, as we have
already said, from a natural to a non-natural sense. In so doing, they act like
those who bring forward any kind of hypothesis they fancy, and then endeavour
to support them out of the poems of Homer, so that the ignorant imagine that
Homer actually composed the verses bearing upon that hypothesis, which has, in
fact, been but newly constructed; and many others are led so far by the
regularly-formed sequence of the verses, as to doubt whether Homer may not have
composed them. Of this kind is the following passage, where one, describing
Hercules as having been sent by Eurystheus to the dog in the infernal regions,
does so by means of these Homeric verses — for there can be no objection to our
citing these by way of illustration, since the same sort of attempt appears in
both:—
"Thus saying, there sent forth from his house
deeply groaning."— Od., x. 76.
"The hero Hercules conversant with mighty
deeds."— Od., xxi. 26.
"Eurystheus, the son of Sthenelus, descended
from Perseus." — Il., xix. 123.
"That he might bring from Erebus the dog of
gloomy Pluto." — Il., viii. 368.
"And he advanced like a mountain-bred lion
confident of strength."— Od., vi. 130.
"Rapidly through the city, while all his
friends followed." — Il., xxiv. 327.
"Both maidens, and youths, and much-enduring
old men." — Od., xi. 38.
"Mourning for him bitterly as one going
forward to death." — Il., xxiv. 328.
"But Mercury and the blue-eyed Minerva
conducted him."— Od., xi. 626.
"For she knew the mind of her brother, how it
laboured with grief."— Il., ii. 409.
Advertisement - Continue Reading Below
Now, what simple-minded man, I ask, would not be
led away by such verses as these to think that Homer actually framed them so
with reference to the subject indicated? But he who is acquainted with the
Homeric writings will recognise the verses indeed, but not the subject to which
they are applied, as knowing that some of them were spoken of Ulysses, others
of Hercules himself, others still of Priam, and others again of Menelaus and
Agamemnon. But if he takes them and restores each of them to its proper
position, he at once destroys the narrative in question. In like manner he also
who retains unchangeable in his heart the rule of the truth which he received
by means of baptism, will doubtless recognise the names, the expressions, and
the parables taken from the Scriptures, but will by no means acknowledge the
blasphemous use which these men make of them. For, though he will acknowledge
the gems, he will certainly not receive the fox instead of the likeness of the
king. But when he has restored every one of the expressions quoted to its
proper position, and has fitted it to the body of the truth, he will lay bare,
and prove to be without any foundation, the figment of these heretics.
5. But since what may prove a finishing-stroke to
this exhibition is wanting, so that any one, on following out their farce to
the end, may then at once append an argument which shall overthrow it, we have
judged it well to point out, first of all, in what respects the very fathers of
this fable differ among themselves, as if they were inspired by different
spirits of error. For this very fact forms an a priori proof that the truth
proclaimed by the Church is immoveable, and that the theories of these men are
but a tissue of falsehoods.
Chapter 10
Unity of the faith of the Church
throughout the whole world.
1. The Church, though dispersed throughout the
whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and
their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and
in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation;
and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations
of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the
resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the
beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His [future] manifestation from heaven in
the glory of the Father "to gather all things in one," Ephesians 1:10
and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ
Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the
invisible Father, "every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things
in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should
confess" Philippians 2:10-11 to Him, and that He should execute just
judgment towards all; that He may send "spiritual wickednesses,"
Ephesians 6:12 and the angels who transgressed and became apostates, together
with the ungodly, and unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into
everlasting fire; but may, in the exercise of His grace, confer immortality on
the righteous, and holy, and those who have kept His commandments, and have
persevered in His love, some from the beginning [of their Christian course],
and others from [the date of] their repentance, and may surround them with
everlasting glory.
2. As I have already observed, the Church, having
received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole
world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it. She also
believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul, and one
and the same heart, and she proclaims them, and teaches them, and hands them
down, with perfect harmony, as if she possessed only one mouth. For, although
the languages of the world are dissimilar, yet the import of the tradition is
one and the same. For the Churches which have been planted in Germany do not
believe or hand down anything different, nor do those in Spain, nor those in
Gaul, nor those in the East, nor those in Egypt, nor those in Libya, nor those
which have been established in the central regions of the world. But as the
sun, that creature of God, is one and the same throughout the whole world, so
also the preaching of the truth shines everywhere, and enlightens all men that
are willing to come to a knowledge of the truth. Nor will any one of the rulers
in the Churches, however highly gifted he may be in point of eloquence, teach
doctrines different from these (for no one is greater than the Master); nor, on
the other hand, will he who is deficient in power of expression inflict injury
on the tradition. For the faith being ever one and the same, neither does one who
is able at great length to discourse regarding it, make any addition to it, nor
does one, who can say but little diminish it.
3. It does not follow because men are endowed with
greater and less degrees of intelligence, that they should therefore change the
subject-matter [of the faith] itself, and should conceive of some other God
besides Him who is the Framer, Maker, and Preserver of this universe, (as if He
were not sufficient for them), or of another Christ, or another Only-begotten.
But the fact referred to simply implies this, that one may [more accurately
than another] bring out the meaning of those things which have been spoken in
parables, and accommodate them to the general scheme of the faith; and explain
[with special clearness] the operation and dispensation of God connected with
human salvation; and show that God manifested longsuffering in regard to the
apostasy of the angels who transgressed, as also with respect to the
disobedience of men; and set forth why it is that one and the same God has made
some things temporal and some eternal, some heavenly and others earthly; and
understand for what reason God, though invisible, manifested Himself to the
prophets not under one form, but differently to different individuals; and show
why it was that more covenants than one were given to mankind; and teach what
was the special character of each of these covenants; and search out for what
reason "God Romans 11:32 has concluded every man in unbelief, that He may
have mercy upon all;" and gratefully describe on what account the Word of
God became flesh and suffered; and relate why the advent of the Son of God took
place in these last times, that is, in the end, rather than in the beginning
[of the world]; and unfold what is contained in the Scriptures concerning the
end [itself], and things to come; and not be silent as to how it is that God
has made the Gentiles, whose salvation was despaired of, fellow-heirs, and of
the same body, and partakers with the saints; and discourse how it is that
"this mortal body shall put on immortality, and this corruptible shall put
on incorruption;" 1 Corinthians 15:54 and proclaim in what sense [God]
says, "That is a people who was not a people; and she is beloved who was
not beloved;" Hosea 2:23; Romans 9:25 and in what sense He says that
"more are the children of her that was desolate, than of her who possessed
a husband." Isaiah 54:1; Galatians 4:27 For in reference to these points,
and others of a like nature, the apostle exclaims: "Oh! The depth of the riches
both of the wisdom and knowledge of God; how unsearchable are His judgments,
and His ways past finding out!" Romans 11:33 But [the superior skill
spoken of] is not found in this, that any one should, beyond the Creator and
Framer [of the world], conceive of the Enthymesis of an erring Æon, their
mother and his, and should thus proceed to such a pitch of blasphemy; nor does
it consist in this, that he should again falsely imagine, as being above this
[fancied being], a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at
another time an innumerable tribe of Æons, as these teachers who are destitute
of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and
the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said.
Chapter 11
The opinions of Valentinus, with
those of his disciples and others.
1. Let us now look at the inconsistent opinions of
those heretics (for there are some two or three of them), how they do not agree
in treating the same points, but alike, in things and names, set forth opinions
mutually discordant. The first of them, Valentinus, who adapted the principles
of the heresy called "Gnostic" to the peculiar character of his own
school, taught as follows: He maintained that there is a certain Dyad (twofold
being), who is inexpressible by any name, of whom one part should be called
Arrhetus (unspeakable), and the other Sige (silence). But of this Dyad a second
was produced, one part of whom he names Pater, and the other Aletheia. From
this Tetrad, again, arose Logos and Zoe, Anthropos and Ecclesia. These
constitute the primary Ogdoad. He next states that from Logos and Zoe ten
powers were produced, as we have before mentioned. But from Anthropos and
Ecclesia proceeded twelve, one of which separating from the rest, and falling
from its original condition, produced the rest of the universe. He also
supposed two beings of the name of Horos, the one of whom has his place between
Bythus and the rest of the Pleroma, and divides the created Æons from the
uncreated Father, while the other separates their mother from the Pleroma. Christ
also was not produced from the Æons within the Pleroma, but was brought forth
by the mother who had been excluded from it, in virtue of her remembrance of
better things, but not without a kind of shadow. He, indeed, as being
masculine, having severed the shadow from himself, returned to the Pleroma; but
his mother being left with the shadow, and deprived of her spiritual substance,
brought forth another son, namely, the Demiurge, whom he also styles the
supreme ruler of all those things which are subject to him. He also asserts
that, along with the Demiurge, there was produced a left-hand power, in which
particular he agrees with those falsely called Gnostics, of whom to we have yet
to speak. Sometimes, again, he maintains that Jesus was produced from him who
was separated from their mother, and united to the rest, that is, from
Theletus, sometimes as springing from him who returned into the Pleroma, that
is, from Christ; and at other times still as derived from Anthropos and
Ecclesia. And he declares that the Holy Spirit was produced by Aletheia for the
inspection and fructification of the Æons, by entering invisibly into them, and
that, in this way, the Æons brought forth the plants of truth.
2. Secundus again affirms that the primary Ogdoad
consists of a right hand and a left hand Tetrad, and teaches that the one of
these is called light, and the other darkness. But he maintains that the power
which separated from the rest, and fell away, did not proceed directly from the
thirty Æons, but from their fruits.
3. There is another, who is a renowned teacher
among them, and who, struggling to reach something more sublime, and to attain
to a kind of higher knowledge, has explained the primary Tetrad as follows:
There is [he says] a certain Proarche who existed before all things, surpassing
all thought, speech, and nomenclature, whom I call Monotes (unity). Together
with this Monotes there exists a power, which again I term Henotes (oneness).
This Henotes and Monotes, being one, produced, yet not so as to bring forth
[apart from themselves, as an emanation] the beginning of all things, an
intelligent, unbegotten, and invisible being, which beginning language terms
"Monad." With this Monad there co-exists a power of the same essence,
which again I term Hen (One). These powers then — Monotes, and Henotes, and
Monas, and Hen — produced the remaining company of the Æons.
4. Iu, Iu! Pheu, Pheu!— for well may we utter
these tragic exclamations at such a pitch of audacity in the coining of names
as he has displayed without a blush, in devising a nomenclature for his system
of falsehood. For when he declares: There is a certain Proarche before all
things, surpassing all thought, whom I call Monotes; and again, with this
Monotes there co-exists a power which I also call Henotes — it is most manifest
that he confesses the things which have been said to be his own invention, and
that he himself has given names to his scheme of things, which had never been
previously suggested by any other. It is manifest also, that he himself is the
one who has had sufficient audacity to coin these names; so that, unless he had
appeared in the world, the truth would still have been destitute of a name.
But, in that case, nothing hinders any other, in dealing with the same subject,
to affix names after such a fashion as the following: There is a certain
Proarche, royal, surpassing all thought, a power existing before every other
substance, and extended into space in every direction. But along with it there
exists a power which I term a Gourd; and along with this Gourd there exists a
power which again I term Utter-Emptiness. This Gourd and Emptiness, since they
are one, produced (and yet did not simply produce, so as to be apart from
themselves) a fruit, everywhere visible, eatable, and delicious, which
fruit-language calls a Cucumber. Along with this Cucumber exists a power of the
same essence, which again I call a Melon. These powers, the Gourd,
Utter-Emptiness, the Cucumber, and the Melon, brought forth the remaining
multitude of the delirious melons of Valentinus. For if it is fitting that that
language which is used respecting the universe be transformed to the primary
Tetrad, and if any one may assign names at his pleasure, who shall prevent us
from adopting these names, as being much more credible [than the others], as
well as in general use, and understood by all?
5. Others still, however, have called their
primary and first-begotten Ogdoad by the following names: first, Proarche; then
Anennoetos; thirdly, Arrhetos; and fourthly, Aoratos. Then, from the first,
Proarche, there was produced, in the first and fifth place, Arche; from
Anennoetos, in the second and sixth place, Acataleptos; from Arrhetos, in the
third and seventh place, Anonomastos; and from Aoratos, in the fourth and
eighth place, Agennetos. This is the Pleroma of the first Ogdoad. They maintain
that these powers were anterior to Bythus and Sige, that they may appear more
perfect than the perfect, and more knowing than the very Gnostics! To these
persons one may justly exclaim: "O you trifling sophists!" since,
even respecting Bythus himself, there are among them many and discordant
opinions. For some declare him to be without a consort, and neither male nor
female, and, in fact, nothing at all; while others affirm him to be
masculo-feminine, assigning to him the nature of a hermaphrodite; others,
again, allot Sige to him as a spouse, that thus may be formed the first
conjunction.
Chapter 12)
The doctrines of the followers
of Ptolemy and Colorbasus.
1. But the followers of Ptolemy say that he
[Bythus] has two consorts, which they also name Diatheses (affections), viz.,
Ennœa and Thelesis. For, as they affirm, he first conceived the thought of
producing something, and then willed to that effect. Wherefore, again, these
two affections, or powers, Ennœa and Thelesis, having intercourse, as it were,
between themselves, the production of Monogenes and Aletheia took place
according to conjunction. These two came forth as types and images of the two
affections of the Father — visible representations of those that were invisible
— Nous (i.e., Monogenes) of Thelesis, and Aletheia of Ennœa, and accordingly
the image resulting from Thelesis was masculine, while that from Ennœa was
feminine. Thus Thelesis (will) became, as it were, a faculty of Ennœa
(thought). For Ennœa continually yearned after offspring; but she could not of
herself bring forth that which she desired. But when the power of Thelesis (the
faculty of will) came upon her, then she brought forth that on which she had
brooded.
2. These fancied beings (like the Jove of Homer,
who is represented as passing an anxious sleepless night in devising plans for
honouring Achilles and destroying numbers of the Greeks) will not appear to
you, my dear friend, to be possessed of greater knowledge than He who is the
God of the universe. He, as soon as He thinks, also performs what He has
willed; and as soon as He wills, also thinks that which He has willed; then
thinking when He wills, and then willing when He thinks, since He is all
thought, [all will, all mind, all light,] all eye, all ear, the one entire
fountain of all good things.
3. Those of them, however, who are deemed more
skilful than the persons who have just been mentioned, say that the first
Ogdoad was not produced gradually, so that one Æon was sent forth by another,
but that all the Æons were brought into existence at once by Propator and his
Ennœa. He (Colorbasus) affirms this as confidently as if he had assisted at
their birth. Accordingly, he and his followers maintain that Anthropos and
Ecclesia were not produced, as others hold, from Logos and Zoe; but, on the
contrary, Logos and Zoe from Anthropos and Ecclesia. But they express this in
another form, as follows: When the Propator conceived the thought of producing
something, he received the name of Father. But because what he did produce was
true, it was named Aletheia. Again, when he wished to reveal himself, this was
termed Anthropos. Finally, when he produced those whom he had previously
thought of, these were named Ecclesia. Anthropos, by speaking, formed Logos:
this is the first-born son. But Zoe followed upon Logos; and thus the first
Ogdoad was completed.
4. They have much contention also among themselves
respecting the Saviour. For some maintain that he was formed out of all;
wherefore also he was called Eudocetos, because the whole Pleroma was well
pleased through him to glorify the Father. But others assert that he was
produced from those ten Æons alone who sprung from Logos and Zoe, and that on
this account he was called Logos and Zoe, thus preserving the ancestral names.
Others, again, affirm that he had his being from those twelve Æons who were the
offspring of Anthropos and Ecclesia; and on this account he acknowledges
himself the Son of man, as being a descendant of Anthropos. Others still,
assert that he was produced by Christ and the Holy Spirit, who were brought
forth for the security of the Pleroma; and that on this account he was called
Christ, thus preserving the appellation of the Father, by whom he was produced.
And there are yet others among them who declare that the Propator of the whole,
Proarche, and Proanennoetos is called Anthropos; and that this is the great and
abstruse mystery, namely, that the Power which is above all others, and
contains all in his embrace, is termed Anthropos; hence does the Saviour style
himself the "Son of man."
