Dialogues. The “Eranistes” or “Polymorphus” of the Blessed Theodoretus, Bishop of Cyrus.
Eran. —But to the same nature belong both health and sickness.
Orth. —So the body is called substance; disease and health are called accident.
Eran. —Of course. For these things are accidents of the body, and again cease to be so.
Orth. —In the same way corruption and death must be called accidents, and not substances, for they too are accidents and cease to be so.
Orth. —So the body of the Lord rose incorruptible, impassible, and immortal, and is worshipped by the powers of heaven, and is yet a body having its former limitation.
Eran. —In these points you seem to say sooth, but after its assumption into heaven I do not think that you will deny that it was changed into the nature of Godhead.
Orth. —I would not so say persuaded only by human arguments, for I am not so rash as to say anything concerning which divine Scripture is silent. But I have heard the divine Paul exclaiming “God hath appointed a day in the which He will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom He hath ordained whereof He hath given assurance unto all men in that He hath raised Him from the dead,” and I have learnt from the holy Angels that He will come in like manner as the disciples saw Him going into heaven. Now they saw His nature not unlimited. For I have heard the words of the Lord, “Ye shall see the Son of Man coming in the clouds of heaven,” and I acknowledge that what is seen of men is limited, for the unlimited nature is invisible. Furthermore to sit upon a throne of glory and to set the lambs upon the right and the kids upon the left indicates limitation.
Eran. —Then He was not unlimited even before the incarnation, for the prophet saw Him surrounded by the Seraphim.
Orth. —The prophet did not see the substance of God, but a certain appearance accommodated to his capacity. After the resurrection, however, all the world will see the very visible nature of the judge.
Eran. —You promised that you would adduce no argument without evidence, but you are introducing arguments adapted to us.
Orth. —I have learnt these things from the divine Scripture. I have heard the words of the prophet Zechariah “They shall look on Him whom they pierced,” and how shall the event follow the prophecy unless the crucifiers recognise the nature which they crucified? And I have heard the cry of the victorious martyr Stephen, “Behold I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing on the right hand of God,” and he saw the visible, not the invisible nature.
Eran. —These things are thus written, but I do not think that you will be able to show that the body, after the ascension into heaven, is called body by the inspired writers.
Orth. —What has been already said indicates the body perfectly plainly; for what is seen is a body; but I will nevertheless point out to you that even after the assumption the body of the Lord is called a body. Hear the teaching of the Apostle, “For our conversation is in Heaven from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus, who shall change our vile body that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body.” It was not changed into another nature, but remained a body, full however of divine glory, and sending forth beams of light. The bodies of the saints shall be fashioned like unto it. But if it was changed into another nature, their bodies will be likewise changed, for they shall be fashioned like unto it. But if the bodies of the saints preserve the character of their nature, then also the body of the Lord in like manner keeps its own nature unchanged.
Eran. —Then will the bodies of the saints be equal with the body of the Lord?
Orth. —In its incorruption and its immortality they too will share. Moreover in its glory they will participate, as says the Apostle, “If so be that we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified together.” It is in quantity that the vast difference may be found, a difference as great as between sun and stars, or rather between master and slaves, and that which gives and that which receives light. Yet has He given a share of His own name to His servants and as He is Light, calls His saints light, for “Ye,” He says, “are the Light of the world,” and being named servants and being named “Sun of Righteousness” He says of his servants “Then shall the righteous shine forth as the Sun.” It is therefore according to quality, not according to quantity, that the bodies of the saints shall be fashioned like unto the body of the Lord. Now I have shewn you plainly what you bade me. Further, if you please, let us look at the matter in yet another way.
Eran. —One ought “to stir every stone,” as the proverb says, to get at the truth; above all when it is a question of divine doctrines.
Orth. —Tell me now; the mystic symbols which are offered to God by them who perform priestly rites, of what are they symbols?
Eran. —Of the body and blood of the Lord.
Orth. —Of the real body or not?
Eran. —The real.
Orth. —Good. For there must be the archetype of the image. So painters imitate nature and paint the images of visible objects.
Orth. —If, then, the divine mysteries are antitypes of the real body, therefore even now the body of the Lord is a body, not changed into nature of Godhead, but filled with divine glory.
Eran. —You have opportunely introduced the subject of the divine mysteries for from it I shall be able to show you the change of the Lord’s body into another nature. Answer now to my questions.
Orth. —I will answer.
Eran. —What do you call the gift which is offered before the priestly invocation?
Orth. —It were wrong to say openly; perhaps some uninitiated are present.
Eran. —Let your answer be put enigmatically.
Orth. —Food of grain of such a sort.
Eran. —And how name we the other symbol?
Orth. —This name too is common, signifying species of drink.
Eran. —And after the consecration how do you name these?
Orth. —Christ’s body and Christ’s blood.
Eran. —And do you believe that you partake of Christ’s body and blood?
Orth. —I do.
Eran. —As, then, the symbols of the Lord’s body and blood are one thing before the priestly invocation, and after the invocation are changed and become another thing; so the Lord’s body after the assumption is changed into the divine substance.
Orth. —You are caught in the net you have woven yourself. For even after the consecration the mystic symbols are not deprived of their own nature; they remain in their former substance figure and form; they are visible and tangible as they were before. But they are regarded as what they are become, and believed so to be, and are worshipped as being what they are believed to be. Compare then the image with the archetype, and you will see the likeness, for the type must be like the reality. For that body preserves its former form, figure, and limitation and in a word the substance of the body; but after the resurrection it has become immortal and superior to corruption; it has become worthy of a seat on the right hand; it is adored by every creature as being called the natural body of the Lord.
Eran. —Yes; and the mystic symbol changes its former appellation; it is no longer called by the name it went by before, but is styled body. So must the reality be called God, and not body.
Orth. —You seem to me to be ignorant—for He is called not only body but even bread of life. So the Lord Himself used this name and that very body we call divine body, and giver of life, and of the Master and of the Lord, teaching that it is not common to every man but belongs to our Lord Jesus Christ Who is God and Man. “For Jesus Christ” is “the same yesterday, to-day, and forever.”
Eran. —You have said a great deal about this, but I follow the saints who have shone of old in the Church; show me then, if you can, these in their writings dividing the natures after the union.
Orth. —I will read you their works, and I am sure you will be astonished at the countless mentions of the distinction which in their struggle against impious heretics they have inserted in their writings. Hear now those whose testimony I have already adduced speaking openly and distinctly on these points.
Testimony of the holy Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, and martyr:—
From the Epistle to the Smyrnæans: “I acknowledge and believe Him after His resurrection to be existent in the flesh: and when He came to them that were with Peter He said to them ‘Take; handle me and see, for I am not a bodiless dæmon.’ And straightway they took hold of him and believed.”
Of the same from the same epistle:—
“And after His Resurrection He ate with them, and drank with them, as being of the flesh, although He was spiritually one with the Father.”
Testimony of Irenæus, the ancient bishop of Lyons; —
From the third Book of his work “Against Heresies.” (Chap. XX.)
“As we have said before, He united man to God. For had not a man vanquished man’s adversary, the enemy would not have been vanquished aright; and again, had not God granted the boon of salvation we should not have possessed it in security. And had not man been united to God, he could not have shared in the incorruption. For it behoved the mediator of God and men, by means of His close kinship to either, to bring them both into friendship and unanimity, and to set man close to God and to make God known to men.”
Of the same from the third book of the same treatise (Chapter XVIII):—
“So again in his Epistle he says ‘Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God,’ recognising one and the same Jesus Christ to whom the gates of heaven were opened, on account of His assumption in the flesh. Who in the same flesh in which He also suffered shall come revealing the glory of the Father.”
Of the same from the fourth book (Chapter VII):—
“As Isaiah saith ‘He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root. Israel shall blossom and bud and fill the face of the world with fruit.’ So his fruit being scattered through the whole world, they who erst brought forth good fruit (for of them was produced the Christ in the flesh and the apostles) were abandoned and removed. And now they are no longer fit for bringing forth fruit.”
Of the same from the same book (Chapter LIX):—
“And he judges also them of Ebion. How can they be saved unless it was God who wrought their salvation on earth, or how shall man come to God unless God came to man?”
Of the same from the same book (Chapter LXIV):—
“They who preach that Emmanuel was of the Virgin set forth the union of God the Word with His creature.”
Of the same from the same treatise (Book V. Chap. I.):—