Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VI/Archelaus/Acts of Disputation/Chapter LI

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol. VI, Acts of Disputation
by Archelaus, translated by Stewart Dingwall Fordyce Salmond
Chapter LI
158435Ante-Nicene Fathers Vol. VI, Acts of Disputation — Chapter LIStewart Dingwall Fordyce SalmondArchelaus

51. When Archelaus had finished this speech, the crowds of people marvelled at the truth of his doctrine, and expressed their vehement commendations of the man with loud outcries, so that they exerted themselves most energetically, and would have kept him from his return.[1] Thereafter, however, they withdrew. After some time, again, when they were gathered together, Archelaus persuaded them to accede to his desire, and listen quietly to the word. And among his auditors were not only those who were with Diodorus, but also all who were present from his province and from the neighbouring districts. When silence, then, was secured, Archelaus proceeded to speak to them of Manes in the following manner: You have heard, indeed, what is the character of the doctrine which we teach, and you have got some proof of our faith; for I have expounded the Scriptures before you all, precisely in accordance with the views which I myself have been able to reach in studying them. But I entreat you now to listen to me in all silence, while I speak with the utmost possible brevity, with the view of giving you to understand who this person is who has made his appearance among us, and whence he comes, and what character he has, exactly as a certain man of the name of Sisinius, one[2] of his comrades, has indicated the facts to me; which individual[3] I am also prepared, if it please you, to summon in evidence of the statements I am about to make. And, in truth, this person did not decline to affirm the very same facts which we now adduce,[4] even when Manes was present; for the above-mentioned individual became a believer of our doctrine, as did also another person who was with me, named Turbo. Accordingly, all that these parties have conveyed in their testimony to me, and also all that we ourselves have discovered in the man, I shall not suffer to be kept back from your cognizance.

Then, indeed, the multitudes became all the more excited, and crowded together to listen to Archelaus; for, in good sooth, the statements which were made by him offered them the greatest enjoyment. Accordingly, they earnestly urged him to tell them all that he pleased, and all that he had on his mind; and they declared themselves ready to listen to him there and then, and engaged to stay on even to the evening, and until the lights should be lit.

Stimulated therefore by their heartiness, Archelaus began his address with all confidence in the following terms:—My brethren, you have heard, indeed, the primary causes[5] relating to my Lord Jesus,—I mean those which are decided out of the law and the prophets; and of the subsidiary causes also relating to my Lord Jesus Christ, our Saviour, you are not ignorant. And why should I say more? From the loving desire for the Saviour we have been called Christians, as the whole world itself attests, and as the apostles also plainly declare. Yea, further, that best master-builder of His, Paul himself,[6] has laid our foundation,[7] that is, the foundation of the Church and has put us in trust of the law, ordaining ministers, and presbyters,[8] and bishops in the same, and describing in the places severally assigned to that purpose, in what manner and with what character the ministers of God ought to conduct themselves, of what repute the presbyters ought to be possessed, and how they should be constituted, and what manner of persons those also ought to be who desire the office of bishop.[9] And all these institutions, which were once settled well and rightly for us, preserve their proper standing and order with us to this day, and the regular administration of these rules abides amongst us still. But as to this fellow, Manes by name, who has at present burst boastfully forth upon us from the province of Persia, and between whom and me disputation has now for the second time been stirred, I shall tell you about his lineage, and that, too, in all fulness; and I shall also show you most lucidly the source from which his doctrine has descended. This man is neither the first nor the only originator of this type of doctrine. But a certain person belonging to Scythia, bearing the name Scythianus,[10] and living in the time of the apostles, was the founder and leader of this sect, just as many other apostates have constituted themselves founders and leaders, who from time to time, through the ambitious desire of arrogating positions of superior importance to themselves, have given out falsehoods for the truth, and have perverted the simpler class of people to their own lustful appetencies, on whose names and treacheries, however, time does not permit us at present to descant. This Scythianus, then, was the person who introduced this self-contradictory dualism; and for that, too, he was himself indebted to Pythagoras, as also all the other followers of this dogma have been, who all uphold the notion of a dualism, and turn aside from the direct course of Scripture: but they shall not gain any further success therein.


Footnotes

[edit]
  1. The text is, “et ultra ei non sinerent ad propria remeare.” Routh suggests ultro for ultra.
  2. Reading unus, instead of “vos, comitibus,” etc.
  3. Reading “quem etiam” instead of “quæ etiam.”
  4. The Codex Casinensis gives, “ipse quidem me dicere recusavit,” etc. We adopt the correction in Migne, “sed ne ipse quidem dicere recusavit,” etc.
  5. Superiores quidem causas Domini, etc.
  6. Reading “sed et optimus architectus ejus, fundamentum,” etc. The Codex Casinensis has the corrupt lection, “sed et optimos architectos ei fundamentum,” etc. [Had this been said of Peter?]
  7. Cf. 1 Cor. iii. 10. [Had this been said of Peter, what then?]
  8. Cf. Acts xiv. 23.
  9. Cf. 1 Tim. iii. 1. [Clement cap. xliv., vol. i. p. 17, this series.]
  10. Various other forms are found for this name Scythianus. Thus we find Scutianus and Excutianus,—forms which may have arisen through mere clerical errors. The Codex Reg. Alex. Vat. gives Stutianus. [But see Routh, R. S., vol. v. p. 186.]