Chapter XVII.--Men Enemies to God.
"But, inasmuch as inborn affection towards God the Creator seemed to suffice for salvation to those who loved Him, the enemy studies to pervert this affection in men, and to render them hostile and ungrateful to their Creator. For I call heaven and earth to witness, that if God permitted the enemy to rage as much as he desires, all men should have perished long ere now; but for His mercy's sake God doth not suffer him. But if men would turn their affection towards God, all would doubtless be saved, even if for some faults they might seem to be corrected for righteousness. But now the most of men have been made enemies of God, whose hearts the wicked one has entered, and has turned aside towards himself the affection which God the Creator had implanted in them, that they might have it towards Him. But of the rest, who seemed for a time to be watchful, the enemy, appearing in a phantasy of glory and splendour, and promising them certain great and mighty things, has caused their mind and heart to wander away from God; yet it is for some just reason that he is permitted to accomplish these things."
Chapter XVIII.--Responsibility of Men.
"To this Aquila answered: "How, then, are men in fault, if the wicked one, transforming himself into the brightness of light, [612] promises to men greater things than the Creator Himself does?" Then Peter answered: "I think," says he "that nothing is more unjust than this; and now listen while I tell you how unjust it is. If your son, whom you have trained and nourished with all care, and brought to man's estate, should be ungrateful to you, and should leave you and go to another, whom perhaps he may have seen to be richer, and should show to him the honour which he owed to you, and, through hope of greater profit, should deny his birth, and refuse you your paternal rights, would this seem to you right or wicked?" Then Aquila answered: "It is manifest to all that it would be wicked." Then Peter said: "If you say that this would be wicked among men, how much more so is it in the case of God, who, above all men, is worthy of honour from men; whose benefits we not only enjoy, but by whose means and power it is that we began to be when we were not, and whom, if we please, we shall obtain from Him to be for ever in blessedness! In order, therefore, that the unfaithful may be distinguished from the faithful, and the pious from the impious, it has been permitted to the wicked one to use those arts by which the affections of every one towards the true Father may be proved. But if there were in truth some strange God, were it right to leave our own God, who created us, and who is our Father and our Maker, and to pass over to another?" "God forbid!" said Aquila. Then said Peter: "How, then, shall we say that the wicked one is the cause of our sin, when this is done by permission of God, that those may be proved and condemned in the day of judgment, who, allured by greater promises, have abandoned their duty towards their true Father and Creator; while those who have kept the faith and the love of their own Father, even with poverty, if so it has befallen, and with tribulation, may enjoy heavenly gifts and immortal dignities in His kingdom. But we shall expound these things more carefully at another time. Meantime I desire to know what Simon did after this."
[612] 2 Cor. xi. 14.
Chapter XIX.--Disputation Begun.
And Niceta answered: "When he perceived that we had found him out, having spoken to one another concerning his crimes, we left him, and came to Zacchæus, telling him those same things which we have now told to you. But he, receiving us most kindly, and instructing us concerning the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, enrolled us in the number of the faithful." When Niceta had done speaking, Zacchæus, who had gone out a little before, entered, saying, "It is time, O Peter, that you proceed to the disputation; for a great crowd, collected in the court of the house, is awaiting you, in the midst of whom stands Simon, supported by many attendants." Then Peter, when he heard this, ordering me to withdraw for the sake of prayer (for I had not yet been washed from the sins which I had committed in ignorance), said to the rest, "Brethren, let us pray that God, for His unspeakable mercy through His Christ, would help me going out on behalf of the salvation of men who have been created by Him." Having said this, and having prayed, he went forth to the court of the house, in which a great multitude of people were assembled; and when he saw them all looking intently on him in profound silence, and Simon the magician standing in the midst of them like a standard-bearer, he began in manner following.
[613] [Three discussions with Simon Magus are detailed in the pseudo-Clementine literature,--one in the Recognitions, ii. 20-iii. 48; two in the Homilies, iii. 30-58 and xvi.-xix. The differences between these are quite remarkable. I. External Differences.--That in the Recognitions is assigned to Cæsarea and is represented as lasting three days, details of each day's discussion being given. The earlier one in the Homilies is given the same place and time, but it is very brief. The details of the first day alone are mentioned; and it resembles that in the Recognitions less than does the later one. This is represented as taking place at Laodicea, and as occupying four days. The account is the longest of the three. In its historical setting this discussion has no parallel in the Recognitions. Faustus, the father of Clement, is made the umpire; and this discussion before him takes the place of the discussions with him which occupy so large a part of Recognitions, viii.-x. II. Internal Differences.--Of course there are many thoughts common to the discussions; but the treatment is so varied as to form one of the most perplexing points in the literary problem. All are somewhat irregular in arrangement, hence an analysis is difficult. The discussion in the Recognitions seems to be more ethical and philosophical than those in the Homilies; the latter contain more theosophical views. Both of them emphasize the falsehoods of Scripture and abound more in sophistries and verbal sword-play. In the Recognitions against Simon's polytheism and theory of an unknown God, Peter opposes the righteousness of God, emphasizing the freedom of the will, discussing the existence and origin of evil, reverting to the righteousness of God as proving the immortality of the soul. The defeat of Simon is narrated in a peculiar way. The Cæsarean discussion in the Homilies is very briefly narrated. After the preliminary parley, Simon attacks the God of the Scriptures attributing defects to Him. Peter's reply, while explaining many passages correctly, is largely taken up with a statement of the view of the Scripture peculiar to the Homilies. This is really the weapon with which Simon is defeated. The discussion, therefore, presents few points of resemblance to that in the Recognitions. The Laodicean discussion in the Homilies, covering four days, is of a higher character than the preceding. It is not strictly parallel to that in the Recognitions. The opening argument is concerning polytheism. To Peter's monotheism Simon opposes the contradictions of Scripture: these Peter explains, including some christological statements which lead to a declaration of the nature, name and character of God. On the second day, after some personal discussion, Simon asserts that Christ's teaching differs from that of Peter; the argument reverts to the shape and figure of God. The evidence of the senses is urged against fancied revelations, which are attributed to demons. On the third day the question of God the Framer of the world is introduced, and His moral character. Peter explains the nature of revelation, with some sharp personal thrusts at Simon, but soon reverts to the usual explanation of Scripture. On the fourth day the existence of the evil one becomes the prominent topic: the existence of sin is pressed; and the discussion closes with a justification of the inequalities of human life, and an expression of judgment against Simon by Faustus. Throughout these portions footnotes have been added, to indicate the correspondences of thought in the several accounts--R.]