10. They ought first to condemn Arius, if they are to be heard.
Consider, whether this be not so. If, when there is no reason for their doing so, they write confessions of faith, it is a superfluous, and perhaps also a mischievous proceeding, because, when there is no enquiry, they offer occasion for controversy of words, and unsettle the simple hearts of the brethren, disseminating among them such notions as have never entered into their minds. And if they are attempting to write a defence of themselves in regard to the Arian heresy, they ought first to have removed the seeds of those evils which have sprung up, and to have proscribed those who produced them, and then in the room of former statements to set forth others which are sound; or else let them openly vindicate the opinions of Arius, that they may no longer covertly but openly shew themselves enemies of Christ, and that all men may fly from them as from the face of a serpent. But now they keep back those opinions, and for a pretence write on other matters; just as if a surgeon, when summoned to attend a person wounded and suffering, should upon coming in to him say not a word concerning his wounds, but proceed to discourse about his sound limbs. Such an one would be chargeable with utter stupidity, for saying nothing on the matter for which he came, but discoursing on those other points in which he was not needed. Yet just in the same manner these men omit those matters which concern their heresy, and take upon themselves to write on other subjects; whereas if they had any regard for the Faith, or any love for Christ, they ought first to have removed out of the way those blasphemous expressions uttered against Him, and then in the room of them to speak and to write the sound words. But this they neither do themselves, nor permit those that desire to do so, whether it be from ignorance, or through craft and artifice.
11. No profit to do right in one way, if we do wrong in another.
If they do this from ignorance they must be charged with rashness, because they affirm positively concerning things that they know not; but if they dissemble knowingly, their condemnation is the greater, because while they overlook nothing in consulting for their own interests, in writing about faith in our Lord they make a mockery, and do anything rather than speak the truth; they keep back those particulars respecting which their heresy is accused, and merely bring forward the language of the Scriptures. Now this is a manifest theft of the truth, and a practice full of all iniquity; and so I am sure your piety will readily perceive it to be from the following illustrations. No person being accused of adultery defends himself as innocent of theft; nor would any one in prosecuting a charge of murder suffer the accused parties to defend themselves by saying, We have not committed perjury, but have preserved the deposit which was entrusted to us.' This would be mere child's play, instead of a refutation of the charge and a demonstration of the truth. For what has murder to do with a deposit, or adultery with theft? The vices are indeed related to each other as proceeding from the same heart; yet in respect to the refutation of an alleged offence, they have no connection with each other. Accordingly as it is written in the Book of Joshua [1209] the son of Nun, when Achan was charged with theft, he did not excuse himself with the plea of his zeal in the wars; but being convicted of the offence was stoned by all the people. And when Saul was charged with negligence and a breach of the law, he did not benefit his cause by alleging his conduct on other matters [1210] . For a defence on one count will not operate to obtain an acquittal on another count; but if all things should be done according to law and justice, a man must defend himself in those particulars wherein he is accused, and must either disprove the past, or else confess it with the promise that he will desist, and do so no more. But if he is guilty of the crime, and will not confess, but in order to conceal the truth speaks on other points instead of the one in question, he shews plainly that he has acted amiss, nay, and is conscious of his delinquency. But what need of many words, seeing that these persons are themselves accusers of the Arian heresy? For since they have not the boldness to speak out, but conceal their blasphemous expressions, it is plain that they know that this heresy is separate and alien from the truth. But since they themselves conceal it and are afraid to speak, it is necessary for me to strip off the veil from their impiety, and to expose the heresy to public view, knowing as I do the statements which Arius and his fellows formerly made, and how they were cast out of the Church, and degraded from the Clergy. But here first I ask for pardon [1211] of the foul words which I am about to produce, since I use them, not because I thus think, but in order to convict the heretics.
[1147] Acts i. 1.
[1148] John iii. 17.
[1149] Matt. xxiv. 24, 25.
[1150] Luke xxi. 8.
[1151] balletai, vid. p. 170, note 6.
[1152] Is. x. 14. LXX., cf. p. 202, note 8.
[1153] Vid. Job xli. 5; xl. 24. LXX.
[1154] Isa. xi. 8; 2 Cor. xi. 3.
[1155] Is. xiv. 14.
[1156] Ezek. ix. 4. LXX.
[1157] Gal. i. 8, 9.
[1158] 2 Cor. ii. 11.
[1159] Ps. 1. 16; Ecclus. xv. 9.
[1160] Job xli. 13, v. 4. LXX. and cf. Orat. i. 1, and Vit. Ant. supr. p. 197, note 15.
[1161] Or sacred writers, hagion.
[1162] Matt. iv. 10.
[1163] Matt. viii. 29; Mark i. 24.
[1164] Matt. vii. 15.
[1165] 1 John iv. 1.
[1166] Phil. ii. 9.
[1167] Rom. i. 2.
[1168] John v. 39.
[1169] John i. 45.
[1170] Vid. Prideaux, Conn. ii. 5. (vol. 3, p. 474. ed. 1725).
[1171] John v. 46.
[1172] See Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (2) a.
[1173] See Orat. i. 49.
[1174] Rom. i. 25.
[1175] Prov. xiv. 15.
[1176] John viii. 44.
[1177] Matt. xxiv. 24.
[1178] vid. Orat. ii. §18.
[1179] Cf. p. 4, note 2.
[1180] [Probably Cyrenaica, see above, Introd. sub. fin.]
[1181] Cf. §23, and Apol. Const. 32.
[1182] Cf. de Syn. 7.
[1183] 2 Tim. ii. 17.
[1184] Cf. de Syn. §§3, 6.
[1185] Jer. xiv. 10.
[1186] Cf. de Syn. 5, note.
[1187] Cf. de Syn. 12; Prolegg. ch. ii. §3 (1), &c.
[1188] p. 104, note 3.
[1189] Supr. p. 119.
[1190] Supr. p. 107, note 9.
[1191] Omitted supr. p. 123.
[1192] De Syn. §9.
[1193] Of Nicomedia, see D.C.B. s.v.
[1194] Vid. Hist. Ar. §74 fin.
[1195] Hist. Ar. 75.
[1196] Cf. de Syn. 37.
[1197] Supr. Apol. Ar. 50.
[1198] Paulinus of Treveri, cf. supr. p. 130, note 10.
[1199] At Nicæa, as most of the others.
[1200] i.e. of Antioch.
[1201] [Unknown.]
[1202] [Of Nisibis. See D.C.B. iii. p. 325 and foll.]
[1203] Prov. xii. 6; xv. 28; xii. 5.
[1204] Ap. ad Const. §28. Hist. Arian. §73, supr.
[1205] Vid. Basil. Ep. 223. 3.
[1206] Matt. xxii. 29.
[1207] theomachoi
[1208] John i. 14; Ps. xciv. 11; John viii. 43, heko, vid. Hipp. contr. Noet. 16. and de Syn. 16.
[1209] Josh. vii. 20, & c.
[1210] 1 Sam. xv.
[1211] Cf. Orat. i. §25 note.