Homiliae

and both of us in the house are afflicted, and for many years now I have been sitting here (as you see) begging, and whatever I can obtain, I bring to my fellow sufferer for food. Let what I have said about myself suffice for now; it remains that you are preventing me from fulfilling the promise to give the poison, so that I may give it to her who desires to die, and thus I too may be able to exchange life for death (as you said). When the woman said these things, Peter seemed to be suspended in thought, wavering under many considerations. But I came up and said, "I have been looking for you for a long time, wandering around, and now what are we doing?" Peter ordered me to go ahead and wait for him on the ship. And since it was not possible to contradict him when he gave an order, I did as I was commanded. But Peter, with some slight suspicion (as he later told me everything), his heart beating, inquired of the woman, saying, "Tell me, woman, your lineage and your city and the names of your children, and I will give you the poison at once." She, being pressed and unwilling to speak, but desiring to receive the poison, contrived to say one thing instead of another, and falsely said that she was an Ephesian, and her husband a Sicilian, and likewise she changed the names of the three children. And Peter, thinking she was telling the truth, said, "Come, woman; I thought I was going to have a day of great joy today, suspecting you were someone I thought you were, whose circumstances I have heard accurately and know well." But she adjured him, saying, "I beg you, tell me, so that I may know if there is any woman more wretched than I." And Peter, not knowing how to lie, moved by pity for her, began to tell the truth.

Now someone, already a young man, accompanies me, a Roman citizen, who yearns for the words of piety. He told me how he has a father and two twin brothers, yet sees none of them. For his mother, he said, as his father related to me, after seeing a dream, left the city of Rome for a time with her twin children, so that she might not die an evil fate, and after disembarking with them, she is not to be found. And her husband, his father, having himself gone out in search of her, is not to be found. When Peter said these things, the woman, as if struck, fainted. Peter approached and, having restrained her, urged her to come to her senses, persuading her to confess what it was she was suffering. She, as if from drunkenness, having relaxed the rest of her body, turned herself to be able to endure the magnitude of the hoped-for joy, and rubbing her face, said, "Where is this young man?" He, already having understood the whole matter, said, "First tell me (for otherwise you cannot see him)." She, hastening, said, "I am the mother of the young man." And Peter said, "What is his name?" She said, "Clement." And Peter said, "This is he, and he was the one who spoke to me a short while ago, whom I instructed to wait for me at the ship." She, falling at Peter's feet, begged him to hasten to go to the ship. And Peter said, "If you keep the agreements for me, I will do this." She said, "I will do everything, only show me my only child. For through him I will seem to see my two who have died here.

children. And Peter said, "When you see him, be silent until we leave the island." And she said, "I will do so." Then Peter, taking her by the hand, led her to the boat. And I, seeing him leading a woman by the hand, laughed and, approaching to honor him, attempted to lead her by the hand in his stead. And as soon as I touched her hand, she cried out loudly like a mother and, embracing me tightly, kissed me, her son. But I, ignorant of the whole matter, shook her off as if she were mad, and, being ashamed, I also reproached Peter. But Peter said, "Stop. What are you doing, child Clement, shaking off your own mother like this?" And I, hearing this, became tearful and, falling upon my mother who had fallen down, kissed her. For as soon as this was said to me, I dimly recalled her appearance. Many crowds then ran together to see the beggar woman, saying to one another that her son, a man of worth, had recognized her. As we were about to leave the island immediately with my mother, my mother said, "My beloved child, it is fitting to bid farewell to the woman who received me, who, being poor and completely prostrate, lies in her house." And Peter, hearing this, marveled, as did all the surrounding crowds, at the woman's good character. And immediately Peter ordered some to go and bring the woman on a bed. And when she was brought and the bed was set down, with all the crowds listening, Peter said, "I, who am a herald of the truth, for the faith of those present, so that they may know that there is one God who made the world, let her rise up healthy at once.

And as Peter said these things, the woman arose healed and fell at Peter's feet, and having kissed her familiar friend, she asked what this was. And she related the whole matter of the recognition to her briefly, and those who heard were astonished. Then the mother, having seen the hostess healed, also begged to obtain healing. And he, laying on his hand, healed her as well. And then Peter, having spoken about God and the worship that pertains to him, added at the end: "If anyone wishes to learn these things accurately, let him come to Antioch, where I have decided to remain for several days, and learn what pertains to his own salvation. For you know how to leave your homeland for the sake of trade or military service and to go to distant places, but for the sake of eternal salvation you are unwilling to travel even a three days' journey?" Then after Peter's address, I gave the healed woman a thousand drachmas for food in the presence of the whole crowd, entrusting her to a certain good man, who was a leading citizen of the city, naturally disposed to do this with joy. And having also distributed silver to many others, and having thanked those who had once comforted my mother, I sailed to Antaradus together with my mother and Peter and the rest of the companions, and thus we set out for the lodging.

After we had taken food and given thanks as usual, while it was still early, I said to Peter, "My mother performed an act of philanthropy, my lord Peter, when she remembered the woman who had received her as a guest." And Peter answered, "Do you really think, O Clement, that your mother performed an act of philanthropy because she requited the woman who had received her after shipwreck, or did you say this as one who is greatly gratifying his mother? But if you spoke not as one gratifying her but as one speaking the truth, you seem to me to be ignorant of what the magnitude of philanthropy is, which is affection toward anyone simply because he is a human being, without the natural compeller. But I do not yet dare to call even the hostess who received your mother after shipwreck philanthropic. For, seduced by pity, she was persuaded to become a benefactress to a woman who had suffered shipwreck, who was mourning her children, who was a stranger, naked, alone, and lamenting greatly over her misfortunes. Since she was in such great misfortunes, who, even among the impious, seeing her would not have taken pity? So the hostess does not yet appear to have performed an act of philanthropy, but rather to have been moved to beneficence by pity over countless misfortunes. How much more so your mother, who, being well off in life and having requited the hostess, did not perform an act of philanthropy but of friendship? There is a great difference between friendship and philanthropy, for friendship arises from requital, while philanthropy, without the natural compeller, loves and benefits every human being simply because he is a human being.

If, then, the hostess who showed mercy and pitied even wrongdoers who were enemies did good, she would be philanthropic. But if she is a friend or an enemy because of some cause, and an enemy or a friend because of some cause, such a woman is a friend or an enemy of that cause, not of the person. And I replied, "Does it seem to you, then, that she is philanthropic, even if the hostess did good to a stranger whom she did not know?" And Peter said, "I know how to call her merciful, but I do not dare to call her philanthropic, just as I would not call a mother fond of her child; for she is compelled to love by the pangs of birth and by rearing. Just as the lover is flattered by habit and by the bed, and the friend by reciprocity, so also the one who shows mercy is moved by the calamity. Nevertheless, the merciful person is close to the philanthropic one, because he is persuaded to do good without seeking to gain anything. Yet he is not yet philanthropic." And I said, "By what actions, then, can one be philanthropic?" And Peter answered, "Since I see that you are eager to hear what the work of philanthropy is, I will not hesitate to say. A philanthropic person is one who does good even to enemies. And that this is so, listen. Philanthropy is androgynous, of which the female part is called mercy, and the male part of it is named love for one's neighbor. And a neighbor to a person is every human being, not just some human being; for a human being is both the bad and the good, both the enemy and the friend. Therefore, one who practices philanthropy must be an imitator of God, doing good to the just and the unjust, just as God himself provides his sun and his rains to all in the present world.

But if you wish to do good to the good and no longer to the bad, or even to punish them, you are attempting to perform the work of a judge, not striving to possess that of philanthropy. And I said, "Then is God, who is going to judge at that time, as you teach us, not philanthropic?" And Peter said, "You say the opposite. For because he judges, for this reason he is philanthropic. For loving and pitying those who have been wronged, he punishes those who have done wrong." And I said, "Therefore, if I also do good to the good, and punish those who do wrong insofar as they have wronged people, am I philanthropic?" And Peter answered, "If you had foreknowledge and the authority to judge, you would do this correctly, condemning those whom God created because you have received the authority, and through foreknowledge judging unerringly, acquitting some as just and condemning others as unjust." And I said, "You spoke correctly and truly; for it is impossible for someone without foreknowledge to judge correctly. For sometimes some appear good while secretly doing unlawful things, and some are considered bad because of slander from enemies. But even if someone having the authority to torture and examine judges, even so it would not be possible for him to judge entirely justly. For some who are murderers, having endured tortures, are released as innocent, while others who are innocent, not having endured tortures, falsely accuse themselves and are punished as guilty." And Peter said, "These things are moderate, but hear the greater matter.

of some men sinning or doing well, of which some actions are their own, others alien; and it is just that each be punished for his own sins or rewarded for his own good deeds. But it is impossible for anyone except a prophet alone, who has foreknowledge, to know which of the things done by someone are his own and which are not; for all things done through him are seen. And I said, "I wished to learn how among wrongdoings or good deeds some are one's own and others alien." And Peter answered, "The prophet of the truth said, 'Good things must come, and blessed (he says) is the one through whom they come; likewise, evil things must necessarily come, and woe to the one through whom they come.'" If evil comes through evil men and good is brought through good men, each must have his own attribute, whether good or evil, and from what they have previously done, the second good or evil things come through them, which, being proper to their own choice, have been arranged by the providence of God to pass through them, since this is a judgment of God, as in a contest: the one who has passed through every hardship and is found blameless is deemed worthy of eternal life; for those who have advanced in good by their own will are tempted, persecuted, hated, reviled, plotted against, beaten, defrauded, slandered, pressed into service, insulted, suffering all those things through which anger reasonably seems to arise and to impel toward defense.

The teacher, knowing that those who do these things unjustly are condemned because of prior sins and that the spirit of wickedness works these things through condemned persons, advised that men, insofar as they are men and become instruments of wickedness through sin, should be pitied, as those who practice philanthropy, and that, as far as it depends on them, those who are wronged should release those who wrong them from condemnation, so that, just as the sober help the drunk, they may help with prayers, fasts, and blessings, not resisting, not defending themselves, lest they compel them to sin all the more. For if it is absolutely decreed for someone to suffer, it is not reasonable to be angry at the one through whom the suffering occurs, considering that, even if that one had not maltreated him, since he was destined to be maltreated in any case, the suffering would have come through another. Why then am I angry at the one who inflicted it, when it is decreed that I must suffer in any case? Moreover, if we do the same things as the wicked under the pretext of self-defense, we good people do the same as the wicked, being second instead of first. And (as I said) one ought not to be angry, knowing that by divine providence the wicked punish the good. Therefore, those who are angry at the punishers sin as if insulting the apostles of God, while those who honor them and behave in the opposite way toward those considered to be wrongdoers show piety toward God who so ordained. And I replied to these things: So then, those who wrong others are not responsible, because they wrong the righteous by God's judgment. And Peter said: They sin greatly, for they have given themselves over to sinning.

Hence, knowing this, he selects from among them to justly punish those who have repented of their former sins, so that for the righteous, through such punishment, the evils committed before repentance may be forgiven, while for the impious punishers who desire to do evil and are unwilling to repent, it is permitted to justly oppress the righteous for the fulfillment of their own punishment. For without the will of God, not even a sparrow can fall into a snare; thus, even the hairs of the righteous are numbered by God. A righteous man is one who fights for the sake of reason against nature. For example, while it is natural for all to love those who love them, the righteous man tries to love even enemies and to bless those who revile him, and further, to pray for enemies. He pities those who do wrong; therefore, he endures being wronged, blesses those who curse him, forgives those who strike him, withdraws from those who persecute him, greets those who do not greet him, shares what he has with those who have not, persuades the angry, reconciles the enemy, exhorts the disobedient, catechizes the unbeliever, comforts the mourner, endures insult, and is not vexed by ingratitude. Having devoted himself to loving his neighbor as himself, he does not fear poverty, but by sharing his own with those who have not, he becomes poor. Yet he does not punish those who sin. For he who loves his neighbor as himself knows that, as he himself would not wish to be punished for sinning, so he does not punish those who sin. And as he wishes to be flattered, blessed, honored, and to have all his sins forgiven, so he does to his neighbor, loving him as himself. In a word, what he wishes for himself, he wishes also for his neighbor.

This is the law of God and of the prophets, this is the teaching of truth. And this love toward every person is the male part of philanthropy, being perfect, while mercy is its female part. This consists in feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, clothing the naked, visiting the sick, receiving the stranger, helping as far as possible the one in prison, and, in a word, showing mercy to those in misfortune. And I, having heard, said: These things it is possible to do, but to benefit enemies, enduring all their insolence, I do not think possible for human nature. And Peter answered: You have spoken rightly; for philanthropy, being the cause of immortality, is given at a high price. And I said: How then can one conceive it? And Peter answered: This, my friend Clement, can be attained if one is fully convinced that enemies, by afflicting for a time those whom they hate, become the cause of their deliverance from eternal punishment; and further, they will love them intensely as benefactors. And the way to attain this, my friend Clement, is one, namely, fear of God. For he who fears God cannot at first love his neighbor as himself (since such a command does not approach the soul), but by fear of God he can do the things that lovers do, and then, having done the works of love, love itself, being like a bride, presents itself to fear as to a bridegroom, and thus, giving birth to philanthropic thoughts, it renders the one who possesses it immortal, as a likeness of God, whose nature cannot be insulted by corruption.

Likewise, after he had set forth for us the discourse on philanthropy, evening overtook us, and we turned to sleep. [ M L G. ] At dawn, Peter entered and said: "Let Clement, with his mother Mattidia and my wife, sit together on the carriage." And so it was done. As we set out on the road to Balanaea, my mother asked me how my father was faring. And I said: "Having set out in search of you and of my twin brothers Faustinus and Faustinianus, he is not to be found. I think that, in all likelihood, he has died, either having met with a shipwreck, or having met with an accident on the road, or having wasted away from grief." And she, upon hearing this, became tearful and groaned in sorrow, but rejoicing at the discovery of me, she moderately blunted the pain from the recollection. So then we arrived at Balanaea. On the following day we came to Palton, and from there to Gabala, and on the next day we arrived at Laodicea. And behold, Nicetes and Aquilas met us before the gates, and after embracing us, they led us to the lodging. And Peter, seeing a fine and great city, said: "It is worthwhile to remain here for some days; for, as a rule, the multitude is more capable of producing those who are sought." Then Nicetes and Aquilas asked me who this foreign woman was. And I said: "My mother, whom God, through Peter my master, granted me to recognize.

When I had said this, Peter set forth everything to them in summary, how I, Clement, had related to him my lineage and my mother's departure from home, caused by the fabricated pretext of the dream, together with her twin children, and also my father's departure in search of her, and then how Peter himself, after hearing these things, went to the island, met the woman, saw her begging, and learning the cause of her begging, recognized her lineage, upbringing, the fabricated dream, and the names of the children—both of me, who was left behind with my father, and of the twin children who had traveled with her—and how she was thought to have perished in the deep. When these matters had been summarized by Peter, Nicetes and Aquilas, astonished, said: "Is this really true, master and lord of all, or is it a dream?" And Peter said: "If we are not asleep, it is true." They remained silent for a short time and, becoming thoughtful, said: "We are Faustinus and Faustinianus, and from the beginning of your discourse, looking at each other, we conjectured much about ourselves, lest the things said might not pertain to us, reasoning that many similar things happen in life; therefore we kept silent, our hearts pounding. But looking at the end of what was said, we realized that the things said pertained to us, and then we acknowledged ourselves." And having said this, with tears they went in to their mother, and finding her already asleep, they wished to embrace her. But Peter prevented them, saying:

Let me present you to your mother gradually, lest from the sudden great joy she fall into a state of mental distraction, since she is asleep and her spirit is occupied by sleep. Nevertheless, when she had had enough sleep, after she awoke Peter began to speak to her gradually: "I want you to know, woman, the way of life of our religion. We worship one God, the maker of the world you see, and we keep his law, which first of all requires that we worship him alone and honor his holy name, and that we respect our parents, live temperately, and live justly. In addition to these things, not living indifferently, we do not partake of the table of Gentiles, since we cannot even eat with them because they live impurely. However, whenever we persuade them to think and do the things of truth, after baptizing them with a certain thrice-blessed invocation, then we eat with them. For even if it is a father or mother or wife or child or brother or anyone else bound by natural affection, we cannot dare to eat with him; for we do this by reason of religion. Do not therefore consider it an insult that your son does not eat with you, until you think and do the same things as he." And she, having heard, said: "What then prevents me from being baptized today? For even before I saw you, I turned away from the so-called gods with this reasoning: that although I sacrificed to them almost daily, they did not stand by me in my distress. And concerning adultery, why need I even speak?

since not even when I was wealthy did luxury deceive me into this, nor did the poverty that followed compel me to come to this, because I clung to chastity as the greatest beauty, for the sake of which I came into such a predicament. But I do not think, my lord Peter, that you are unaware that the greater part of desire arises from states of well-being. Hence, having been chaste in well-being, I do not give myself over to pleasures in distress. But do not think that my soul, having received some consolation through the recognition of Clement, is now freed from hardship. For the loss of my two children, entering in exchange, dims even that slight joy. I will be consoled concerning them that they perished at sea, but not that, in addition to this, they perished outside the walls of the worship of God, their bodies and souls destroyed. Their father, my husband (as I learned from Clement), having set out in search of me and the children, has been unseen for so many years; he has surely died. For the poor man, loving me out of chastity, was fond of his children. Hence, deprived of all of us, who were loved by him above all, the old man perished from the greatest despondency. While the mother was saying these things, in accordance with Peter's exhortation, the boys could no longer contain themselves, but rose up and embraced her, weeping much and kissing her. And she said, "What does this mean?" And Peter answered, "Steel your mind, woman, nobly, so that you may enjoy your children. For these are Faustinus and Faustinianus, your sons, whom you said had died in the deep.

How those who died on that most terrible night in your presence now live, and how one of them is called Nicetes and the other Aquila, they themselves will be able to tell you; for we are to learn this together with you. When Peter said this, the mother, greatly rejoicing, fainted from a slight faintness. When we revived her, she sat down and, coming to herself, said: I beg you, my beloved children, tell me what happened to you after that terrible night. And Nicetes began to speak: On that same night, as you know, when the ship was breaking up, some men, not fearing to plunder us in the deep, took us up, placed us in a skiff, and rowing with oars, sometimes brought us near land, sometimes also sending for provisions, they led us to Caesarea Stratonis. And there, while we wept from hunger, fear, and blows, so that we might not speak rashly anything that did not please them, and also having changed our names, they were able to sell us. But a certain woman, a proselyte to Judaism, very worthy, named Justa, having bought us, kept us in the place of children and zealously educated us in all Greek learning. And when we reached the age of understanding, we loved the religion and diligently pursued our studies, so that we might be able to dispute with the other nations and refute them concerning their error. Moreover, we thoroughly studied the teachings of the philosophers, especially the most godless ones, I mean those of Epicurus and Pyrrho, so that we might be better able to refute them. And having become almost foster-brothers with a certain Simon the Magician, we were in danger of being deceived through the path of friendship.

There is a certain story about a man, upon whose appearance in the kingdom a multitude of the god-fearing are able to live without death and without pain. However, these things, mother, will be set forth to you more precisely at the proper time. But as we were about to be deceived by Simon, a certain companion of our lord Peter, named Zacchaeus, having received us, admonished us not to be deceived by the magician, and when Peter arrived, he brought us to him, so that he might fully inform us and persuade us concerning the matters pertaining to piety. Therefore we also pray, mother, that you may partake of the same good things of which we have been deemed worthy, so that we may be able to partake of common salt and table together. This, then, is the reason, mother, why you thought we had died, because on that most terrible night we were taken by pirates on the sea, and you believed we had perished. When Faustinus said these things, our mother fell at the feet of Peter, beseeching and entreating that he summon her and her hostess and baptize her immediately, so that (she said) not a single day might be without a share, from the day she recovered her own children, in which she did not feast with them. And when we also joined our mother in this entreaty, Peter said: What do you think? Am I the only one without compassion because I do not wish you to feast with your mother, having baptized her today? But she must fast for at least one day before being baptized. And this is because she uttered something simply on her own behalf, which I recognized as a sufficient interpreter of her faith; for she needed to be purified from Hellenic ways for many days. And I said: Tell us what word she uttered that revealed her faith. And Peter said:

Her request was that her benefactress the innkeeper be baptized along with her. She would not have begged for this to be granted to the one she longed for, unless she herself had first been disposed as if toward a great gift in the matter of baptism. Hence I condemn many, when, having been baptized and claiming to believe, they do nothing worthy of belief, nor do they urge those whom they love (I mean their wives, sons, or friends) toward this. For if they have believed that God bestows eternal life together with good works, they would without delay urge those whom they loved to be baptized. But one of you will say: They love them and care for them. This is naive. For why, then, when they see them sick or being led away to death or suffering some other hardships, do they lament and pity them? Thus, if they had believed that eternal fire awaits those who do not honor God, they would not cease admonishing, or even, seeing them disobedient, would grieve as over unbelievers, being fully convinced of the punishment against them. And now, having sent for the innkeeper, I will inquire whether she chooses to love the law through us, and thus we will do accordingly what must be done. Your mother, since she is faithfully disposed concerning baptism, let her fast for one day before baptism. And she swore: For two of the past days, while relating the recognition to the woman, due to great joy I was unable to partake of food, except yesterday only a little water. And Peter's wife testified to the oath, saying: Truly she did not taste. And Aquila (rather, from now on, Faustinianus) said: Therefore nothing prevents her from being baptized. And Peter, laughing, replied:

But this is not a fast of baptism, which did not happen for its own sake. And Faustinus answered: Perhaps then God, wishing that our mother not be separated from our table for even one day after our recognition, prearranged the fast. For just as she was temperate in ignorance, doing what is fitting for the truth, so also now God perhaps arranged that she fast one day in ignorance for the sake of the true baptism, so that from the first day of recognizing us she might be able to partake of salt with us. And Peter said: Let not evil overcome us, finding a pretext in providence and a mother's affection, but rather let you and I with you remain today, and tomorrow she will be baptized. For the hour of today is not suitable for baptism. And we all agreed that it should be so. On that evening we all enjoyed Peter's teachings, as he showed us from the pretext concerning our mother by what reasoning the ends of temperance are good, while those of adultery, being grievous, have the nature to bring destruction to the whole race, even if not quickly, yet at least slowly. And to such an extent (he says) does temperance please God, that even for those in error he grants some small grace for it in the present life (for salvation there is given only to those baptized through hope in him and who act righteously with temperance), as you have recognized happening in the case of your mother, I mean the good outcomes at the end. But perhaps if she had committed adultery, she would have been killed. Therefore, because she was temperate, God took pity, turned away the murder intended against her, and restored the children who had been taken away. But someone may perhaps say:

How many have perished because of self-control? I mean, due to insensibility. For the woman who perceives that a certain lover has appeared must flee from association with him as from a blazing fire or a rabid dog. This is what your mother did, truly loving the beauty of self-control; therefore, being preserved together with you, she received the knowledge of the eternal kingdom. The woman who wishes to be self-controlled must know that, envied by vice under the pretext of love, she has many who plot against her, but by persisting in self-control alone, remaining chaste, she takes victory over all and can be saved. For even if someone does everything well, they must be punished for the single sin of committing adultery, as the prophet said. The self-controlled woman, doing the will of God, becomes a good reminder of his first creation, that God, being one, created one woman for one man. She remains even more self-controlled if she does not forget the creation and foresees the punishment and is not ignorant of the loss of eternal goods. The self-controlled woman, rejoicing in those who wish to be saved, becomes a pious example for the god-fearing; for she is a law of a good life. The woman who wishes to be self-controlled cuts off the pretexts for slander; but if she is slandered as by an enemy while not providing a pretext, she is blessed and avenged by God. The self-controlled woman yearns for God, loves God, pleases God, glorifies God; she does not provide men with a pretext for slander. The self-controlled woman perfumes the church with good honor and glorifies it with modesty; moreover, she is a praise of teachers and becomes a fellow worker with them in their self-control.

The self-controlled woman adorns herself as a bride for the Son of God, clothed in the reverent light. Her beauty is the good order in her soul. She emits the fragrance of good repute. She is clad in fair garments, modesty, and wears precious pearls, the words that instill self-control. She is white when her mind is illumined. She looks into a beautiful mirror, gazing at God. She uses a fine ornament, admonishing her soul with fear of God. A beautiful woman is not one bound by gold, but one freed from transient desires. The self-controlled woman is beloved by a great king; she is betrothed to him, preserved for him, loved by him. The self-controlled woman gives no pretext for being desired except by her own husband. The self-controlled woman is grieved when desired by another. The self-controlled woman loves her husband deeply, kisses him, flatters him, pleases him, serves him, and obeys him in all things except disobeying God. For the woman who obeys God, without guards, both keeps her soul self-controlled and her body pure. Foolish, then, is every man who separates his wife from fear of God, because the woman who does not fear God does not fear her husband either. If she does not fear God, who sees the unseen, how will she keep her unseen will self-controlled? And how will she be self-controlled if she does not come to hear the words that instill self-control? And how will she receive admonition? And how will she be self-controlled without guards, if she is not taught about the coming judgment of God and is not fully convinced of the eternal loss for a small pleasure? Therefore, on the contrary, compel her, coax her, to always come to the word that instills self-control. But it is much better if you lead her by the hand and come, so that you yourself may become self-controlled.

You will wish to become self-controlled, so that you may know the end of a reverent marriage—and you will not hesitate, if you love, I mean to become a father, to love your own children and to be loved by your own children. He who wishes to have a self-controlled woman is himself self-controlled, renders the owed bed, feasts with her, dwells with her, goes with her to the word that instills self-control, does not grieve her, does not fight idly, does not make himself hateful, provides what good things he can, and for what he lacks, fills the deficiency with flattery. The self-controlled woman does not wait to be flattered, recognizes her husband as lord, bears poverty when he is poor, hungers with him when he is hungry, travels with him when he is away, comforts him when he is grieved, and even if she has a larger dowry, submits as if she had nothing. And the husband, even if he has a poor wife, should consider her self-control a great dowry. The self-controlled woman uses food and drink with moderation, so that the body, not fattened by weight, may not drag the soul down to lawless desires. Moreover, she does not associate with young men and is suspicious even of old men, rejects disorderly laughter, devoting herself to God alone she does not err, delights in hearing reverent words, and rejects those not spoken for self-control. God is witness: one act of adultery is many murders; and the terrible thing is that the fearful and impious nature of her murders is not seen. For when blood is shed, a body lies dead, and the horror of the calamity shocks everyone, but the murders of the soul from adultery, being more fearful, since they are not seen by men, provide an unhesitating impulse to those who dare. Know, man, from whom you have your breath for living, and you will not wish to defile it.

Only by adultery is the breath of God polluted, and for this reason it drags the one who has polluted it into fire; for it hastens to deliver the insolent one to eternal punishment. Saying these things, Peter, seeing the good and chaste Mattidia weeping with joy, thinking she was grieved at the promise of what had happened, said: Take courage, woman; many have suffered many evils through adultery, but you have suffered through chastity, and for this reason you have not died. Even if you had died, you would have had your soul saved. You left your homeland Rome because of chastity; but by this pretext you found truth, the crown of the eternal kingdom. You were in danger in the deep and did not die, and if you had died, the deep itself, for you dying because of chastity, would have become a baptism for the salvation of your soul. You were separated from your children, for a short time, children who, being of legitimate birth, are found among the better ones. Hungry, you begged for food; but you did not defile your body with prostitution. You tormented your body; but you saved your soul. You fled an adulterer, so as not to defile your husband's bed; but because of your chastity, God, who knew your flight, will fill your husband's place. Grieved and alone, you were separated from your husband and children for a short time; but you were destined to leave all these at the appointed time of death, and it is better that you were separated willingly because of chastity than that you perished unwillingly after a time in sins. Therefore it is much better that the first things are grievous. For when they are present, with the hope that they will pass, they do not greatly grieve, and with the expectation of something better, they even provide joy. Above all, I want you to know how much chastity pleases God.

The chaste woman is God's choice, God's pleasure, God's glory, God's child. So great a good is chastity that, if there were no law and no requirement that the unbaptized not enter the kingdom of God, perhaps some of the Gentiles who have gone astray could be saved by chastity alone. Therefore I am greatly distressed about those who are chaste in error, because, having chosen to be chaste without good hope, they are reluctant to be baptized. Hence they are not saved, for God's decree stands that the unbaptized shall not enter his kingdom. When he had said these things and more besides, we turned to sleep. [ M L D.] Much earlier than usual, Peter, having woken up, came to us and, having roused us, said: "Faustinus and Faustinianus together with Clement, along with their household, follow me, so that, going to a place sheltered from the sea, we might be able to baptize her in an unobserved spot." When we reached the shore, having found a calm and clean place among some rocks, he baptized her. And we brothers, for the sake of the women, having withdrawn with some others and bathed, then came and took the women, and thus, going to a hidden place, we prayed. Then Peter sent the women ahead because of the crowd, ordering them to come to the lodging by another road, and that only we men should be with the mother and the other women. So, coming to the lodging and waiting for him to arrive, we conversed with one another. After several hours, Peter came, broke the bread for the Eucharist, placed salt on it, and gave it first to the mother, and after her to us, her sons.

and thus we feasted with her and blessed God. Then Peter, seeing the crowd that had entered, sat down and bade us sit beside him, and began to instruct us, first persuading us as to why he had sent us ahead from the baptism and had himself delayed and then come. And he said the reason was this: "As soon as you departed," he said, "an old working man came in with me, stealthily hiding himself, having spied on us beforehand (as he later confessed) to see what we might do when we entered the secluded place. He secretly got out and followed. Approaching at a suitable place and greeting me, he said: 'I have been following you for a long time and wishing to converse with you, but I was ashamed lest you be angry with me as a meddler. Now, if you wish, I will say what seems true to me.' And I answered: 'Tell us what seems good to you, and we will receive you; even if what is said is not truly good, since you wished to say what seems good to you with good intention.' And the old man began to speak thus: 'Seeing you bathed in the sea and withdrawing to the hidden place, I approached secretly and spied on what you might do entering the secret place, and when I saw you praying, I withdrew. But taking pity on you, I waited so that I might speak to you as you came out and persuade you not to be deceived. For there is neither God nor providence, but everything is subject to fate, as I have been fully convinced by what I have suffered, having studied the doctrine thoroughly for a long time. So do not be deceived, child. For whether you pray or not, you are compelled to suffer what comes from fate; for if prayers could accomplish anything or do good, I myself would be among the better off.'

And now, if this shabby clothing of mine does not deceive you, you will not disbelieve what I say. Once, when I was in great abundance of life, I sacrificed much both to the gods and provided for the needy, and yet, though I prayed and was pious, I was unable to escape fate. And I said: What are the things you have suffered? And he answered: There is no need to speak now; perhaps at the end you will hear who I am and of what lineage, and in what circumstances of life I have been. But now I want you to be fully convinced that everything is subject to genesis. And I said: If everything is subject to genesis, and you are fully convinced that this is so, you advise me while thinking contrary to yourself. For if it is not possible even to think contrary to genesis, why do you labor in vain advising that what is impossible to happen should happen? But still, if genesis exists, do not hasten to persuade me not to worship the master even of the stars, by whose will it is possible for something not to happen, and for something to happen. For that which is subject must always obey that which rules. However, to worship the so-called gods when genesis prevails is superfluous. For nothing happens contrary to what is fated, nor can they themselves do anything, being subject to universal genesis. If genesis exists, the contrary is that the first does not rule. That which is subject cannot, as unbegotten, have anything older than itself. While we were saying such things to each other, a large crowd stood by. And then, looking at the crowd, I said:

I and my family, having received from our ancestors the worship of God and having the commandment not to pay attention to birth (I mean the science of astrology), for this reason I did not pay attention. Hence I am not experienced in astrology, but I will explain what I am. Since I cannot refute birth from the very science of birth, I wish to demonstrate in another way that affairs are administered according to providence and that each person, according to what he does, will meet with honor or punishment, whether now or later, it makes no difference to me, except that each will certainly enjoy the consequences of what he has done. And the proof that birth does not exist is this: if one of those present is deprived of eyes, or has a crippled hand, or a lame foot, or some other bodily defect which has no return to healing and is beyond any medical art, which even astrologers do not claim to heal, because such a thing has occurred from the long ages, but I, having prayed to God, provide the healing, since such a thing could never be corrected from birth—if this happens, do not those who blaspheme the God who created everything sin? And the old man answered: Is it blasphemy to say that everything is subject to birth? And I answered: Very much so; for if all human sins and impieties and debaucheries come from the stars, and the stars were ordered by God to produce these things, so that they become the agents of all evils, then all sins are referred back to him who placed birth in the stars. And the old man answered:

Truly you have spoken greatly, but my conscience hinders me from accepting your incomparable demonstration. For I, being an astrologer and having first lived in Rome, became friends with a certain man who was related to Caesar by birth, and I knew the horoscope of both him and his wife, and having observed that their actions followed their horoscope and were accomplished in fact, I cannot be persuaded by your argument. For the configuration of her horoscope indicated that she would be an adulteress, would fall in love with her own slaves, and would die in a foreign land in the waters. And so it happened. For having fallen in love with her own slave and not bearing the reproach, she fled with him, and having rushed into a foreign land and having intercourse with him, she perished in the sea. And I replied: How do you know that the woman who fled, being in a foreign land, married the slave and, having married, died? And the old man said: I know the truth for certain, not that she married (since I did not even know that she was in love), but after her departure, her husband's brother related to me everything concerning her love, and how, being a virtuous man (since he was the brother), he did not wish to defile the marriage bed, and how, both desiring and being ashamed of him and of the reproach, the wretched woman (for it is not possible to blame her, since she was compelled by her horoscope to do and suffer these things) fabricated a dream, whether true or false I cannot say; for he said that she had stated: Someone standing by in a vision commanded me to leave the city of Rome immediately with my children.

The man, eager that she be saved together with her sons, immediately sent them to Athens to be educated, along with their mother and slaves, but kept his third, younger son with him, as the one who had appeared in a dream had permitted him to keep the boy with him. After a long time had passed, since he received no letters from her, he himself sent many times to Athens, and taking me along as the most genuine of all his friends, he set out on the search. I labored eagerly with him through many hardships during the journey, remembering that he had made me a partner in all his former prosperity, loving me more than all his other friends. And so we sailed from Rome and thus came to these parts of Syria, and we put in at Seleucia, and after we disembarked from the ship, within not many days he died of grief, and I came here, and since then, supporting myself by the work of my hands, I have procured my food up to the present. When the old man said these things, I realized that the old man he said had died was himself (from what he said) your father, but I did not wish to confront him with the matter concerning you until I had consulted with you. However, having learned the circumstances of his hospitality and having revealed my own, for the sake of accuracy I asked only this: what was the old man's name? He said: Faustus. And what were the names of the twin sons? He answered: Faustinus and Faustinianus. And what was the name of the third son? He said: Clement. And what was the name of their mother? He said: Mattidia. Therefore, overcome with sympathy and in tears, I dismissed the crowds and came to you, so that after sharing salt with you I might consult with you about these matters.

Before partaking of the salt, I did not wish to speak to you, lest, overcome by grief, you should spend the day of baptism in mourning, when even angels rejoice. While Peter was saying this, we all wept together with our mother. Seeing us weeping, he said: “Now let each of you, out of fear of God, bear what has been said nobly; for your father did not die today, but long ago, as you yourselves have surmised and said.” When Peter said this, our mother, unable to bear it, cried out: “Alas, my husband, you died loving us without distinction, while we, living, see the light and partake of food.” But before this single lament had ceased, behold, the old man entered, and as he was about to inquire into the cause of the outcry, he looked at the woman and said: “Alas, what does this mean? Whom do I see?” Approaching and looking more closely, and being seen, he embraced her. Both, from sudden joy, were speechless, and though wishing to speak to each other, they were seized by aphasia from insatiable joy and could not control themselves. Yet after a short time, our mother said: “I have you, Faustus, who are to me the sweetest in every way. How is it that you live, whom we heard a little while ago as dead? But these are our sons, Faustinus, Faustinianus, and Clement.” When she said this, we three fell upon him and, kissing him, somehow dimly recalled his form. Seeing this, Peter said: “Are you Faustus, the husband of this woman and the father of her children?” He replied: “I am.” And Peter said: “How then did you relate to me your own affairs as if about another, telling of labors, grief, and a tomb?” And our father answered:

Being of the lineage of Caesar and not wishing to be recognized, I set forth the account as if it were another’s, so that I myself might not be known. For I knew that if I became known, the local leaders, upon hearing, would recall me, doing what is pleasing to Caesar, and would place upon me the happiness of life, which I had renounced. For I could not, having judged the greatest things concerning those I loved as if they were dead, give myself over to the luxury of life. And Peter said: You did these things as you planned, but concerning fate, did you assert it falsely or confirm it as truth? And the father said: I will not lie to you; I confirmed it as truth, as if fate existed. For I am not uninitiated in the theory; moreover, there was with me a certain man, the best of astrologers, an Egyptian named Annoubion, who, having become my friend during my travels from the beginning, foretold the death of my wife and children. And Peter said: Then are you convinced by experience that the matter of fate does not hold? And the father answered: I must set forth everything that comes into my mind to you, so that I may learn by hearing your response. I know that astrologers often err, but also often speak truth. I suspect, therefore, that perhaps what they get right they speak truly, and what they err in they suffer through ignorance, so that I am inclined to think the science itself holds, but they themselves lie through ignorance, because they cannot all be accurate about everything. And Peter answered: Beware lest concerning what they speak truly, they hit upon it by chance and not by accuracy. For it is entirely necessary that out of many statements some turn out true. And the old man said:

How then is it possible to be assured concerning this, whether the account of the birth holds together or not? When both were silent, I said: Since I know the teaching accurately, but the lord and father do not, I would have wished that Annubion himself were present, and I would have made the argument before my father. For in this way the matter could be brought to light, with a craftsman holding the inquiry with a fellow craftsman. And my father answered: Where then is it possible to meet Annubion? And Peter said: In Antioch; for I learn that Simon the Magician is there, with whom Annubion is inseparably attendant. So when we get there, if indeed we overtake them, the inquiry can take place. And after conversing much together, rejoicing at the recognition and giving thanks to God, when evening overtook us we turned to sleep. At dawn, my father, together with my mother and the three sons, entered where Peter was, greeted him, and sat down, and then we also sat at his bidding. And Peter, looking at my father, said: I am eager that you become of one mind with your wife and children, so that you may live with them here in harmony and there, after the separation of the soul from the body, be together without grief. For does it not grieve you and them greatly that you are not together? And my father said: Very much so. And Peter said:

If, then, here also being separated from one another grieves you, and after death you are certainly owed not being with one another, how much more will it not grieve you, a wise man, to be separated from your own by the reasoning of your opinion, and them to be much more pained by knowing that eternal punishment awaits you, who think otherwise, by the decree of the doctrine? And the father said: But it is not, dearest one, that souls are punished in Hades, being dissolved into air at the same time as they depart from the body. And Peter said: Until, then, we persuade you about this, answer me: does it not seem to you that you, disbelieving the punishment, are not grieved, but that they, being convinced, must be distressed about you? And the father: You speak consistently. And Peter: Why, then, do you not release them from the greatest grief concerning you by assenting to the religion, not, I say, out of shame, but out of goodwill, listening to what is said to you by me and judging whether these things are so or not? And if they are so as we say, you will both enjoy here with your dearest ones and rest there with them; but if in the examination of the arguments you show that what is said by us is some false myth, you will also do well, having taken them as of one mind with you, and you will stop them from relying on empty hopes and free them from false fears. And the father: You seem to me to say many reasonable things. And Peter said: What, then, is it that restrains you from coming to our faith? Tell me, so that we may begin to speak to that. For many things restrain: some are convinced by preoccupations with markets, business, farming, cares, and all such things.

They disbelieve, from which you yourself are, suppositions of thinking either that gods which do not exist are, or that all things are subject to generation, or to chance, or that souls are mortal, or that our own account is false as if there were no providence. But I say that all things are administered by the providence of God, from what is said concerning you, that the separation of you and your own happened after so many years. For since, while being with you, they perhaps would not have listened to the words of piety, the journey with your mother was arranged, and the shipwreck, and the suspicion of death, and also that they be educated in Greek and godless doctrines, so that, knowing these things, they might be able to refute them—for this purpose, to love the word of piety and to be able to be united with me, to assist in my proclamation—but still, that your brother Clement might come together, and thus your mother be recognized, and through treatment the divinity be fully confirmed—and not long after, straightway the twin children, being recognized and recognizing, and on the next day to meet you and to recover your own. Such great

I do not think that the swift harmony which has run together from all sides to a single goal of opinion is without providence. And the father began to say to Peter: Do not suppose, my dearest Peter, that I have no thought concerning the word proclaimed by you. At the end of this past night, indeed, when Clement was strongly urging me toward the truth proclaimed by you, I answered: What newer command can one give than what the ancients recommended? And he, smiling gently, said: There is a great difference, father, between the words of piety and those of philosophy. For the one has proof from prophecy, while the other, providing fine speech, seems to present proofs from conjectures. And having said this, by way of example he set forth for me the discourse concerning philanthropy which you taught him, which seemed to me rather unjust. And I will tell you how. He asserted that it is just to offer the other cheek to the one striking his cheek, and to give also the cloak to the one taking his garment, and to go two miles with the one compelling a mile, and all such things. And Peter answered: But you thought it unjust because it is most just. If it pleases you, listen. And the father said: It pleases me greatly. And Peter said: Does it seem to you that if there are two hostile kings having divided territories, and if someone from the subjects of one is caught in the territory of the other and for this reason owes death, and if he is released from punishment by a fine and not by death, does not the one who released him appear philanthropic? And the father said: Very much so. And Peter said: What then?

Even if this same person has taken something of his own or something else, and if, having been caught in this act, he pays double, owing four times and death, as one caught within the terms of the adversary, does it not seem to you that the one who receives the double and releases him from death is philanthropic? And the father said: It appears so. And Peter said: What then? Must not one who is in the kingdom of another, and that of a certain evil enemy, for the sake of life flatter everyone and yield even more to those who impose compulsory service, address those who do not address him, reconcile enemies, not quarrel with those who are angry, provide his own possessions fearlessly to anyone who asks, and all such things? And the father said: He would reasonably endure anything at all, if he prefers life to these things. And Peter said: Therefore, those whom you said were wronged are themselves transgressors, insofar as they are in the kingdom of another, and they are such great coveters as the possessions they have? And those who are thought to do wrong grant to each one who is on the opposite side as many things as they allow them to have. For these things belong to those who have chosen the present circumstances. And they are so philanthropic as to allow them to live. And the example is thus; now hear the matter itself. The prophet of truth, being present, taught us that the creator and god of all things assigned two kingdoms to two beings, to a good one and to an evil one, giving to the evil one the kingdom of the present world with law, so that he would have authority to punish those who do wrong, and to the good one the future eternal age.

Each person he made free, having the authority to assign himself to whichever he wishes, either to the present evil or to the future good. Those who choose the present have the authority to be wealthy, to live luxuriously, to take pleasure, and to do whatever they are able; for they will have none of the future goods. But those who have decided to take the things of the future kingdom are not permitted to appropriate for themselves the things here (as if they were the possessions of another king) except water alone and bread, and these procured with sweat for the sake of living (since it is not permitted to die voluntarily), and also one garment; for it is not allowed to stand naked because of the all-seeing sky. If, then, you wish to hear the precise account of the matter, those whom you said a little earlier are wronged, they themselves rather do wrong, because those who have chosen the future things associate in the present with the evil, enjoying many of the same things as they do (life itself, light, bread, water, clothing, and some other such things), while those considered by you to do wrong have no share at all with the men of the future goods. And the father replied to these things: Now that you have persuaded me that those who do wrong are themselves wronged, and those who are wronged rather have the advantage, the whole matter seems to me even more unjust, because those who seem to do wrong concede many things to those who have chosen the future things, while those who seem to be wronged themselves do wrong, because they do not provide the same things there to those who have conceded to them here [what they themselves conceded to them]. And Peter:

Nor is this unjust, because each person has the authority to choose either the present or the future, whether they be small or great. By his own judgment and will, the one who chooses is not wronged, I say, not even if he chooses the small, since the great were set before him; for the small were also set before him. And the father said: "You have spoken correctly; for it has been said by some Greek wise man: 'The responsibility is of those who choose; God is blameless.' But still, explain this matter to me as well. I remember Clement telling me that we suffer injustices and passions for the remission of sins." And Peter said: "This is also correct. For we who have chosen the things that will be, whatever more we possess—whether clothing, food, drink, or anything else—we possess sins, because it is necessary to have nothing, as I divided the argument a little earlier. All possessions are sins. The deprivation of these in any way is a removal of sins." And the father said: "It follows consistently, just as you divided the two definitions of the two kings, that those under their authority choose whatever they wish for each. What then? Do we also suffer passions justly?" And Peter said: "Most justly. For since the definition of those who are saved is (as I said) to have nothing belonging to anyone, and many have many possessions (which are otherwise sins), for this reason, by the exceeding philanthropy of God, passions are brought upon those who do not live purely, so that through a certain love of God they may be saved from eternal punishments by temporary punishments." And the father said: "What then? Do we not see many impious people who are poor? Besides this, are these also among those who are saved?" And Peter said: "Not at all. For the poverty of the poor person is not acceptable if he desires what he should not.

Thus some, by their own choice, are wealthy in possessions and, because they desire to take more than their share, are punished. But neither is a person necessarily just simply because he is poor; for he may be poor in material wealth, yet desire or even do what is not proper. For he either worships idols, or blasphemes, or commits fornication, or lives indifferently, or perjures himself, or lies, or lives without faith. However, our Teacher declared the faithful poor blessed, and not because they had contributed anything (for they had nothing), but because, committing no sin, they are not condemned for failing to practice charity solely due to their lack of means. And the Father said: "Truly, matters appear to be quite correct according to the hypothesis; therefore I have chosen, in order, to listen to the entire discourse." And Peter said: "Therefore, since you are eager to learn about our religion, I ought to set forth the discourse in order, beginning from God himself and showing that he alone must be called God, and that others must neither be called nor considered such, and that whoever acts contrary to this must be punished eternally, as having committed the greatest impiety against the Lord of all." And having said this, and having laid his hands on those troubled by passions, diseases, and demons, and having prayed and healed them, he dismissed the crowds. And then, entering, he partook of the customary salt and slept.

At dawn, Peter went out and, arriving at his usual place for discourse, saw a large crowd gathered. And just as he was about to speak, one of his deacons entered and said: "Simon has come from Antioch, having learned last evening that you promised to give a discourse on the monarchy, and he is ready, together with Athenodorus the Epicurean, to come against you while you are speaking, in order to publicly contradict all the arguments you may ever put forward concerning the monarchy." While the deacon was saying this, Simon himself entered with Athenodorus and some other companions, and before Peter could utter a word, he spoke first and said: "I have learned that yesterday you promised Faustus that today you would demonstrate, proceeding in order and beginning from the master of all, that he alone must be called God, and that others must neither be called nor considered such, because whoever acts contrary to this will be punished eternally. Above all, I am truly astounded at your audacity, that you hoped to persuade a wise man, and an old one at that, to your will. But you will not succeed in your designs, especially with me present to refute your false arguments; for perhaps if I were not present, the wise old man, being unacquainted with the books publicly accepted among the Jews, might have been deceived. And now I will omit many arguments, so that I may more quickly refute your promise. Therefore, begin to say what you promised, in the presence of us who know the scriptures.

If you, being ashamed of refutation, wish to abandon your promise in our presence, the proof that you lie is sufficient even so, in that you did not dare to speak before those who know the scriptures. And now, why should I wait for you to speak, having as the greatest witness of your promise this old man who stands here? And having said this, looking at the father, he said: Tell me, most honorable of all men, did not this man promise to show you today that there is one God and that one ought neither to speak of nor think of any other as God, and that he who acts contrary to this is to be punished eternally as one who commits the greatest sins? Or will you not answer me? And the father said: You would rightly demand testimony from me, Simon, if Peter had first denied it; but now I will not be ashamed to say what must be said. I think you wish to argue inflamed with anger, which is unseemly for you to do and for us to hear such things, because it is to engage in a fight and not to benefit in regard to truth. And now, knowing from Greek education how those who seek should proceed, I will remind you. Let each of you set forth his own doctrine, and let the arguments be directed to the other. But if Peter alone sets forth his own opinion, while you keep silent about yours, it is possible that some argument advanced by you may oppress both his opinion and yours, and that both of you, being defeated by the argument, may not appear defeated, but the one who set forth the opinion may be evident, while the one who did not set forth his opinion, though similarly defeated, may not be obvious, but may even be thought to have prevailed. And Simon answered: I will do as you say, but I am disheartened lest, already prejudiced by his words, you may not be a truth-loving judge. And the father answered:

Do not force me to agree with you without judgment, so that I may appear to be a truth-loving judge. But if you wish to hear the truth, I am already prejudiced in favor of your opinion. And Simon said: How are you prejudiced, not knowing what I think? And the father said: This is easy to know; and how, listen. You promised to refute Peter, who says that God is one, as lying; but he who promises to refute as false one who says one thing, it is entirely clear that he who speaks the truth does not say the same thing. For if he says the same thing as the one who lies, he also lies; but if he says the opposite and demonstrates it, then he speaks the truth. Therefore, you cannot call the one who says that God is one a liar, unless you believe that there are many gods. And I also say that there are many gods. Therefore, by saying the same thing to you before the inquiry, I am already prejudiced in your favor. And on this account you ought not to be anxious about me, but rather Peter, because I still hold the opposite opinion to him; but I, being a truth-loving judge, hope after your debate, having put aside prejudice, to agree with the prevailing argument. When the father said these things, a gentle murmur of praise arose from the crowds because the father had spoken in this way. And likewise Peter said: I am ready to do as the mediator of the debates has said, and I will set forth my opinion about God without any delay. And I say that God is one, who made the heaven and the earth and all things in them. It is not lawful to say or think of another. And Simon said: But I say that the scriptures believed among the Jews speak of many gods, and that God is not angry at this, since he himself through his scriptures has spoken of many gods.

For example, in the first utterance of the law, it is evident that he speaks of them as like himself. For it is written thus: that the first man, having a command from God to eat from every tree in the paradise, but not to eat from the tree of knowing good and evil, the serpent through the woman, on the promise that they would become gods, persuaded them to eat and made them look up, and then God said to them as they looked up: "Behold, Adam has become as one of us." So the serpent, saying "You will be as gods," appears to have spoken as if they were actually gods, especially since God testified to this by saying, "Behold, Adam has become as one of us." Thus the serpent, who said the many were gods, did not lie. Again, the writing "You shall not speak ill of gods and you shall not speak evil of the rulers of your people" indicates many gods, whom he does not wish to be spoken ill of. But also elsewhere it is written: "If another god dared to enter and take for himself a nation from the midst of a nation, as I, the Lord God." By saying "If another god dared," he speaks as if there are others. And elsewhere: "Gods who did not make the heaven and the earth, let them perish," as if those who did not make them are about to perish. And in another place it says: "Beware, lest you go and serve other gods, whom your fathers did not know," as if there are other gods, whom he says they should not follow. And again: "The names of other gods shall not rise upon your lips." And here he speaks of many gods, whose names he does not wish to be named. And again it is written: "The Lord your God, this is the god of gods." And again: "Who

Like you, Lord, among gods?" And again: "God of gods, Lord." And again: "The god stood in an assembly of gods, and in the midst he judges gods." Hence I am amazed how, with so many voices testifying in writing that there are many gods, you insist that one must neither speak of nor believe in them. So, if you have anything to say in response to what has been clearly stated, say it before all. And Peter said: Listen more briefly to what I have said in reply. The law itself, which often spoke of gods, says to the Jewish multitude: "Behold, the heaven of heaven of your Lord God, and all that is in them," implying that even if there are gods, they are under him, that is, under the God of the Jews. And again: "For your Lord God, this is God in the heaven above and on the earth below, and there is no other besides him." And elsewhere the scripture says to the Jewish multitude: "Your Lord God, this is God of gods," as if to say that even if there are gods, they are under the God of the Jews. And elsewhere the scripture says about him: "The great and true God, who does not accept a bribe nor take a gift, rendering judgment for the orphan and the widow." By calling the God of the Jews "great" and "true" and "rendering judgment," the scripture indicated that the others are small and not true. But also elsewhere the scripture says: "I live, says the Lord, there is no other god besides me. I am first, I am after these things, besides me there is no god." And again: "You shall fear your Lord God and serve him alone." And again: "Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is one Lord.

And yet many voices with an oath seal that there is one God and besides him there is no God. Hence I am amazed how, with so many voices testifying that there is one God, you say there are many. And Simon said: "The argument from the beginning was for me to refute you from the scriptures that you lie in saying that one should not speak of many gods. Hence I showed many written voices that the divine scriptures themselves speak of many gods." And Peter said: "The very scriptures that speak of many gods also admonished us, saying: 'Names of other gods shall not ascend upon your lips.' Thus I did not speak contrary to what is written, O Simon." And Simon said: "Listen to this also, O Peter. You seem to me to err because you speak ill of them, while the scripture says: 'You shall not speak evil, and you shall not speak ill of the ruler of your people.'" And Peter said: "I do not err, Simon, in indicating their destruction in accordance with the scriptures; for thus it is written: 'Gods who did not make the heaven and the earth, let them perish,' and this I said not as if some had made and were not perishing, as you interpreted. For it is made clear that the one who made is the one from the beginning, as it is written: 'In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.' And it did not say: 'Gods.' And elsewhere it says: 'The firmament proclaims the work of his hands.' And in another place it is written: 'The heavens themselves will perish, but you will endure forever.'" And Simon said:

To show that there are many gods, I presented clear voices from the scriptures, and you brought forth as many or more voices from the same scriptures, showing that there is one God and that he is the God of the Jews. And to my saying, "One must not speak ill of gods," you responded to this by showing that there is one who has made, and that those who have not made are to perish. And to my saying that one must speak of gods, inasmuch as the scriptures themselves speak of them, you also showed in response that one must not utter their names, because the same scripture says not to utter the names of other gods. Since, then, the same scriptures say that there are many gods and at other times that there is only one—and sometimes that they are not to be spoken ill of, and at other times that they are to be spoken ill of—what must one conclude from this except that the scriptures themselves lead us astray? And Peter said: They do not lead astray, but they expose and bring to light the evil intention lurking in each person against God, like a serpent. For they lie before us like many and varied forms. Each person, having his own intention like wax, looks at them and, finding everything in them, whatever kind of god he wishes to exist, he applies his intention (like wax, as I said) and molds it. Since, then, whatever one wishes to think about God, one finds in them, for this reason one molds from them the ideas of many gods, and we have molded the idea of the one who truly is, recognizing the true form from our own form. But also our inner soul has been clothed with his image for immortality.

If I abandon the one who gave birth to me, she will with just judgment also abandon me (having recognized the injustice by the very audacity) and will justly leave me as from a just cause, and thus I will be destroyed in soul after punishment, deprived of her help. But if there is another, let him first put on another form, another shape, so that through the new form of the body I may recognize the new god. And if he changes his form, will he not also change the essence of the soul? And if he changes it, I am no longer myself, having become another in both form and essence. Let him then fashion others, if he is another. But he is not. For if he were, he would have fashioned them. Since he did not fashion them, let him, as one who is not, leave the one who is to the one who is. For there is no one except in the sole opinion of Simon. I accept no other god than the one who created me alone. And Simon said: Since I see you making the argument more frequently on behalf of the god who created you, learn from me how you are impious even toward him. The creators appear to be two, as the scripture says: "And God said, 'Let us make man according to our image and likeness.'" The "let us make" signifies two or more, but not one. And Peter answered: He is one who, by his own wisdom, said, "Let us make man." And wisdom, with which he always rejoiced as with his own spirit, is united as a soul to God, but extends from him like a hand, fashioning the universe. For this reason also one man came to be, and from him the female also proceeded. And being a monad in kind, it is a dyad. For by extension and contraction the monad is considered to be a dyad. So I rightly refer all honor to one God as to parents.

And Simon said, "What then? If the Scriptures speak of other gods, will you not accept them?" And Peter answered, "If either the Scriptures or the prophets speak of gods, they speak thus to test the hearers. For it is written: 'If a prophet arises among you, giving you signs and wonders, and that sign and wonder comes to pass, but he says to you, "Let us go and worship other gods, whom your fathers did not know," you shall not listen to that prophet; let your hands be the first to stone him. For he tempted you to depart from the Lord your God. But if you say in your heart, "How did he perform that sign or wonder?" you will know, by knowing, that the tempter tempted to see if you fear the Lord your God.'" That the tempter tempted is stated, but it appears otherwise after the deportation to Babylon. For God, who knows all things (as can be shown from many instances), would not tempt in order to know, since He foreknows all things. If you wish, let us discuss this matter, and I will show that God foreknows. But that He is ignorant is a falsehood, and this too has been demonstrated to be written for the purpose of temptation. Thus we, O Simon, can be scandalized neither by the Scriptures nor by anything else, nor are we deceived into accepting many gods, nor do we assent to any word spoken against God. For we ourselves know from the Scriptures that angels have been called gods—I mean, for instance, the one who spoke from the bush and wrestled with Jacob, and also the one born, Emmanuel, called the mighty God. Moreover, Moses became a god to Pharaoh, but in truth he was a man.

And also the idols of the nations. But for us there is one God, one who has made the creations and ordered all things, whose son is also the Christ, by obeying whom we recognize the falsehoods from the scriptures. Moreover, being supplied from the fathers of the scriptures, we know only one who has made both the heavens and the earth, the God of the Jews and of all who choose to worship him. This one the fathers, having dogmatized as true with a God-loving reasoning, handed down to us, so that we may know that if anything is said against God, it is false. But I will also say something exceedingly: if this is not as I have said, may it be for me and for those who love the truth to be in danger concerning the praise of the God who made us. Hearing this, Simon said, "Since you say that one should not believe the prophet who gives signs and wonders but speaks of another god, knowing that he also owes death, then your teacher, having given signs and wonders, was reasonably put to death." And Peter answered, "Our Lord neither declared that there are gods besides the one who created all things, nor proclaimed himself to be God, but he rightly blessed the one who called him son of God, who ordered all things." And Simon answered, "Does it seem to you, then, that the one from God is God?" And Peter said, "How can this be? Explain to us. For we cannot tell you this, because we have not heard it from him. Moreover, it belongs to the father not to have been born, and to the son to have been born; but that which is born is not compared to the unbegotten or even the self-begotten." And Simon said, "Is it not the same with generation?" And Peter said,

One who is not in every respect the same as another cannot have all the same appellations as that other. And Simon said: "This is to speak, not to prove." And Peter said: "Why do you not understand that what is self-begotten or even unbegotten, and what is begotten, cannot be called by the same names, not even if the one begotten is of the same substance as the one who begot him? But learn this also: human bodies have immortal souls, clothed with the breath of God. And having come forth from God, they are of the same substance, but they are not gods. But if they are gods, then by this reasoning the souls of all men—both those who have died and those who are living and those who will be born—are gods. And if you, being contentious, say to me that even these are gods, then what great thing is this still for Christ, to be called a god? For he has what all have. We call God that which is proper to be incapable of belonging to another. For just as that which is infinite from all sides is for this reason called boundless, and it is absolutely necessary, since another cannot likewise be infinite, that there not be two that are called boundless (and if anyone says it is possible, he lies; for two things infinite from all sides cannot coexist, for the one is bounded by the other), so it is by nature that the unbegotten is one. And if it is in form, even so the incomparable is one. For this reason it is also called highest, because being above all, it has all things subject to itself.

And Simon said: "Surely this is not his ineffable name, 'God,' which everyone speaks, that you contend so much about a name, lest it be given to another?" And Peter said: "I know that this is not his ineffable name, but the name spoken by human convention, which if you give to another, you will also attach the unspoken name to that other, by the logic of intention. The spoken name is a progression of the unspoken one. By this reasoning, insult is also reckoned to what has not yet been spoken, just as honor toward what is known is referred to what is not yet known." And Simon said: "I would like to know, Peter, whether you truly believe that the human form is modeled after his form." And Peter said: "Truly, Simon, I am fully persuaded that this is so." And Simon said: "How can death dissolve the body, which is stamped with the greatest seal?" And Peter said: "It is the form of a righteous God. Therefore, when it begins to act unjustly, the idea in it departs, and thus the body is dissolved, so that the form may become invisible, lest an unjust body bear the form of a righteous God. The dissolution, however, does not occur concerning the seal, but concerning the sealed body. Without the one who sealed, the sealed is not dissolved. Thus, without judgment, it is not possible to die." And Simon said: "What necessity was there, then, to give the form of such a one to the man raised from the earth?" And Peter said: "This happened because of the love of the creating God for humanity.

Since by the essential account everything is superior to human flesh—I mean the ether, the sun, the moon, the stars, the air, the water, the fire, in a word all the rest, which, having come into being for the service of man and being superior in essence, willingly submit to serving that which is inferior in essence because of the form of the superior (for just as those who honor a clay statue of a king have the honor referred to him whose form the clay bears, so also the whole creation gladly serves man, who is made from earth, looking to that honor)—see, Simon, to what god you wish to persuade us to be ungrateful. And the earth bears you, perhaps wishing to see who will dare to think like you. For you were the first to dare what no one dared; you were the first to utter what we heard for the first time. We are the first and only ones to have witnessed the infinite patience of God at such impiety of yours, and of no other than the creator of the world, against whom you dared to be impious. And no chasms of the earth opened, no fire was sent down from heaven, no conflagration went forth against men, no rain was poured down, no multitude of beasts was sent from the forests, and against us because of one who sins, as in the case of spiritual adultery, which is worse than carnal, the destructive wrath of God did not begin. Is it not the same God who then punished the sins, the creator of heaven and earth? For even now, when blasphemed in the greatest matters, he would punish the greatest offenses.

On the contrary, he is patient, calls to repentance, and has arrows stored in his treasuries for the destruction of the impious, which he will discharge as living creatures when he sits to render judgment against his enemies. Therefore let us fear a just God, whose image the human body bears for honor. When Peter said this, Simon answered: Since I see you wisely hinting that the things written against the creator in the books are not true, tomorrow from the words of your teacher I will show that the creator does not say he is the highest god. And Simon, having said this, went out. Peter said to the crowds standing by: Even if Simon is able to harm us in nothing else concerning God, he at least hinders you from hearing the words that can purify the soul. When Peter said this, there was much murmuring among the crowds, who said: What need is there to let him come in here and speak blasphemies against God? And Peter, hearing this, said: May the word against God for the temptation of men be sufficient only for Simon. For, as the Lord said, "There will be false apostles, false prophets, heresies, and love of rule," which, as I suppose, having taken their beginning from Simon who blasphemes God, will cooperate in saying the same things against God as Simon. And having said this with tears, he beckoned the crowds with his hand, and laying his hands on those who came forward and praying, he dismissed them, telling them to assemble earlier. Having said this and sighing, he entered, and without taking food, he slept.

[ M L Z.] On the following day, Peter, intending to dispute with Simon, rose earlier than usual and prayed. As soon as he finished, Zacchaeus entered and said: "Simon is sitting outside with about thirty of his own people, conversing." And Peter said: "Let him speak until a crowd gathers, and then we will begin the dispute, so that we, having heard what is said by him, may adapt ourselves to it and go out and converse." And so it happened. Then Zacchaeus, going out and after a short time returning, reported to Peter the words spoken by Simon. He said: "He accuses you, Peter, of being a servant of evil, powerful in magic, and worse than idolatry in deluding the souls of men. As proof that you are a magician, he seems to offer this: 'I am aware that, when I consider within myself what I intend to say and come to dispute with him, I remember not a single word. For while he is speaking and I am occupying my mind with recalling what I had planned to say to him, I do not hear anything of what he says. Since I suffer nothing of this kind with anyone else but only with him, how am I not being bewitched by him?' And that what he teaches is worse than idolatry will be clear to anyone with understanding, as I have indicated. For there is no other benefit than that the soul become free from all kinds of idols. For when it is deluded by a form, it is bound by fear, and by the anxiety of suffering something it withers and, being altered, raves, and raving it seems to many to be sane. This Peter provides you with the promise of making you sane.

Under the pretext of one God, he seems to free you from many lifeless idols, which do not greatly harm those who worship them, since they are seen with the same eyes to be made of stone or bronze or gold or some other inanimate material. Therefore, because it is known that what is seen is nothing, the soul cannot be as much agitated by fear as it is by the visible. But when it looks to a fearsome God through deceptive teaching, it is undermined in its natural state. And I say this not because I urge you to worship idols, but because Peter, while seeming to free your souls from fearsome ideas, makes the mind of each of you enthusiastic for a more fearsome idea, introducing God in a form, and that supremely just, to which fearfulness and dread for the understanding soul are attached, capable of loosening the tension of even right reasonings. For in such a storm the mind, like the depths stirred by a violent wind, clouds its clarity. Therefore, if he comes for your benefit, let him not, while seeming to release you from the gentle fears arising from lifeless forms, introduce instead a fearsome form of God. Does God have a form? If he does, he is in a shape. And if he is in a shape, how is he not limited? And if limited, he is in a place. And if in a place, he is inferior to the place that contains him. And if inferior to something, how is he greater or stronger or highest of all? And so it is with these matters. That he does not truly believe even the things said by his own teacher is evident; for the opposite

He proclaims him. For when he said to someone (as I learn), "Do not call me good, for the good one is one," and having said "good," he no longer means that righteous one whom the scriptures proclaim, who kills and makes alive, killing those who sin and making alive those who live according to his will. That he truly did not mean the creator when he said "good" is clear to anyone capable of reasoning. For the creator was known both to Adam, who was formed, and to Enoch, who pleased him, and to Noah, who was seen by him as righteous, and likewise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and also to Moses, the people, and the whole world. But his teacher, Jesus of Peter, came and said, "No one knew the Father except the Son, just as no one knows the Son except the Father and those to whom the Son wishes to reveal him." So if he himself was the Son who was present, from the time of his presence he revealed to those he wished the one unknown to all. And thus the Father was unknown to all before him, not being this one who was known to all. And in saying this, Jesus does not even agree with himself. For at times with other words he presents the fearful and righteous God of the scriptures, saying, "Do not fear the one who kills the body, who can do nothing to the soul; but fear the one who can cast both body and soul into the gehenna of fire. Yes, I tell you, fear this one." And that he truly said to fear this one as the righteous God, to whom he says those who are wronged cry out, he introduces a parable for this and then adds the interpretation, saying:

If, then, the judge of injustice acted thus because he was entreated each time, how much more will the father exact vengeance for those who cry out to him day and night? Or do you think that because he is patient with them he will not act? I tell you, yes, he will act, and quickly. But the one who says that God exacts vengeance and punishes represents him as just by nature and not good. Moreover, he also confesses the lord of heaven and earth. But if he is lord of heaven and earth, he is acknowledged as creator, and being creator he is just. By sometimes calling him good and sometimes just, he does not even thus agree. Thirdly, his wise disciple yesterday insisted that clarity of vision is more powerful, not knowing that clarity can be human, while vision is acknowledged to be of divinity. These things and things like them, Peter, Simon, standing outside and conversing with the crowds, seems to me to disturb the majority. Therefore go out immediately, with the power of truth dissolving his false words. When Zacchaeus said this, Peter, having prayed as usual, went out and, standing in the place from the day before and having greeted the crowds according to the custom of piety, began to speak thus:

Our Lord Jesus, being a true prophet (as I will also demonstrate concerning this matter at the appropriate time), made his pronouncements concisely about matters pertaining to the truth for these two reasons: first, because he was speaking to God-fearing people who knew to believe the pronouncements brought forth by him (for what was said was not foreign to their custom), and second, because he had a set time to proclaim and did not employ the argument of demonstration, lest he spend the entire allotted time on words, and thus it would happen that, while occupied with resolving a few words, he would not bring forth more words concerning matters that could be understood by the soul's effort and that pertain to the truth. Since he made pronouncements about what he wished as to a people capable of understanding—from whom we also come, we who, whenever on rare occasion we did not understand something said by him, would inquire privately so that nothing said by him might be unintelligible to us. Knowing, then, that we knew all that was said by him and were able to provide demonstrations, when sending us to baptize the ignorant nations for the remission of sins, he commanded us first to teach them. Among these commands, this is the first and great one: to fear the Lord God and to serve him alone. And he said that to fear God is that whose angels—those of the least of us believers—stand in heaven, continually beholding the face of the Father. For he has a form—on account of the first and only beauty—and all limbs, not for use.

For he does not have eyes in order to see from there (for he sees from everywhere, being incomparably brighter in body than the seeing spirit within us and more radiant than any light, so that compared to him the light of the sun would be considered darkness), nor does he have ears in order to hear (for he hears, thinks, moves, acts, and works from everywhere). He has the most beautiful form for the sake of man, so that those pure in heart may be able to see him, so that they may rejoice because of what they have endured. For by his form, as by a great seal, he shaped man, so that man might rule and have dominion over all things and all things might serve him. Therefore, having judged that the whole is himself and his image, man (he being invisible, but his image, man, being visible), whoever wishes to revere him honors his visible image, which is man. For whatever one does to a man (whether good or evil) is referred to him. Hence also judgment from him, apportioning to each according to merit, will come to all; for he avenges his own form. But someone will say: If he has form, then he also has shape and is in a place; but being in a place and contained by it as inferior, how is he greater than all? And how can he be everywhere while being in a shape? To one who says these things, it must first be said: Such things persuade and convince one to think and believe about him... but we know as true the things testified by our Lord Jesus Christ, at whose command we must necessarily provide you with proofs that it is so. First, I will speak about place and God. Place is that which is not; God is that which is; and that which is not is not compared to that which is.

For how can he be a place? Unless there were a second space, such as heaven, earth, water, air, and if there is any other body, which would fill the void, which is called void for this reason, because it is nothing. For this (nothing) is a more proper name for it; for what is the so-called void but a vessel having nothing? Yet the vessel itself is not a place, but that in which the void itself is, if indeed it is a vessel. For it is absolutely necessary that the void be in that which is nothing. And this nothing (which by some is called place) is nothing. How then is nothing compared with that which is? Unless among opposites, so that the one is not, and the other, which is not, is called place. But if it is something, although many examples press to come forth from me for proof, I wish to use only one, to show that the container is not always superior to the contained. The sun is a round shape and is entirely surrounded by air, but it illuminates this air, warms it, cuts it, and if it departs from it, it is enveloped in darkness, and whatever part of it becomes bright, as if dead it grows cold, but is again illuminated by its rising, and wherever it is warmed by it, it is adorned with greater beauty. And it does these things by its own presence, having a circumscribed substance. What then still prevents God, being the creator and master of this and of all things, himself being in shape and form and beauty, from having his presence extended infinitely?

There is therefore one true God, who presides in a superior form, being the heart of both above and below—and from him, as from a center, gushing forth the vital and incorporeal power, all things together with stars and the sole regions of heaven, air, water, earth, fire, and if there is anything else, an infinite substance reaches into height, boundless into depth, immeasurable into breadth, extending thrice to infinity the life-giving and intelligent nature from him. This infinite from him on all sides must therefore exist, having as its heart the one truly above all in form, who, wherever he may be, is as the middle in the infinite, being the boundary of the whole. From him, then, the six extensions have their nature as infinite. Of these, one, taking its beginning from him, reaches into height above, another into depth below, another to the right, another to the left, another forward, another backward, into which he, looking as at a number equal from all sides, completes the world with six temporal intervals, himself being rest and having the coming infinite age as an image, being beginning and end. For into him the six infinities end and from him they receive their infinite extension. This is the mystery of the hebdomad. For he himself is the rest of all things, as he grants his own great self to those who imitate him in the small for rest. He alone is in one way comprehensible, in another incomprehensible, in one way finite, in another infinite, having the extensions from him into infinity.

Thus he is both comprehensible and incomprehensible, near and far, being here and there, as he alone exists and imparts participation in the infinite mind from all sides, which all souls breathe in and thereby have life; and if they are separated from the body and are found to have longing for him, they are borne into his bosom as immortal, just as in winter the vapors of the mountains are drawn by the rays of the sun and borne toward it. What affection, then, can we conceive if we contemplate his beauty with the mind? Otherwise it is impossible; for it is impossible for beauty to exist without form and to draw anyone to love of it, or even to seem to see a god who has no form. But some, being alien to the truth and allied with evil, on the pretext of praise say he is formless, so that being shapeless and without form he may be visible to no one, that he may not become an object of desire. For a mind that does not see the form of God is empty of him. And how can one pray, having no one to whom to flee, on whom to lean? For having no resistance, it is cast into the void. Yes, one says, one ought not to fear God, but to love him. I say the same. But this will be provided by the good conscience of each good deed. And good deed comes from fear. But fear, he says, terrifies the soul. But I say that it does not terrify, but awakens and converts. Perhaps it would be rightly said that one ought not to fear God, if we did not fear many other things—I mean plots from our fellows, and also beasts, reptiles, diseases, passions, demons, and countless others. Therefore, let him who demands that we not fear God free us from these, so that we may not fear these either.

But if he cannot, why does he begrudge us that by one fear—fear of the righteous one—we might be freed from countless fears, and by a brief faith in him we might become able to transform countless sufferings, both our own and those of others, while also receiving a reward of good things and, because of fear of the all-seeing God, doing no evil and continuing in peace in the present? Thus, grateful servitude to the true master sets all others free. If, then, it is possible for someone to refrain from sin without fearing God, let him not fear. For it is possible, through love for him, not to do what displeases him. For it is written both to fear and to love is commanded, so that each may use the remedy suitable to his own temperament. Therefore, it is possible to fear him because he is just. So whether fearing or loving, do not sin. But may it be that someone, through fear, can restrain lawless pleasures, not covet others' goods, practice philanthropy, be temperate, and act justly. For I see some who are imperfect in their fear of him committing many sins. Let us therefore fear God not only because he is just; for, being merciful to the wronged, he punishes the wrongdoers. Just as water extinguishes fire, so fear destroys the desire for evils. He who teaches fearlessness does not himself fear, and he who does not fear does not believe that judgment will come, increases desires, practices sorcery, and slanders others for what he himself does. Hearing this, Simon interrupted and said:

I know to whom you are saying these things, but so that I myself, by saying the same things, do not waste time refuting you on matters I do not wish to, you promised to answer what was determined for us, saying that you have sufficiently understood the teachings of your teacher because you see and hear him in person with clarity, and that it is not possible for anyone else to have the same by means of a vision or an apparition. But that this is false, I will show. The one who hears someone clearly is not fully assured of what is said; for his mind can reason that perhaps the visible person, being human, is lying. But an apparition, as soon as it appears, provides faith to the beholder that it is divine. Answer me this first. And Peter said: Having proposed one thing to say, you answered another; for you proposed that someone can understand more by hearing from an apparition than from clarity, and then you tried to persuade us that the one who hears from an apparition is more secure than the one who hears from clarity itself. At any rate, because of this you claimed to know the things of Jesus more adequately, as having heard his word from an apparition. Nevertheless, I answer what was proposed from the beginning. The prophet, because prophet

first having been fully assured, what is clearly said by him is securely believed, and being true, having been known beforehand, and, as the learner wishes, having been examined and questioned, he answers—but he who trusts in an apparition or a vision and a dream is unreliable; for he does not know whom he trusts; for it is possible that it is either an evil demon or a deceptive spirit pretending in speech to be what it is not. If someone should wish to inquire who the one who appeared might be, he can say to himself whatever he wishes. And thus, like a wicked flash, having remained as long as it wishes, it is extinguished, not remaining with the inquirer for questioning as long as he wished. Through dreams, one who sees cannot even inquire about what he wishes; for the reasoning of the sleeper is not under his own control. Hence, indeed, many of us, desiring to learn while awake, in a dream inquire about other things, or even without inquiring we hear about things that do not concern us, and upon waking we are disheartened because we neither heard nor examined what we desired to learn. And Simon said: If you say that apparitions do not always speak truth, yet at least visions and dreams, being god-sent, do not lie about what they wish to say. And Peter said: You spoke correctly, that being god-sent they do not lie. But it is unclear whether the one who saw has seen a god-sent dream. And Simon: If the one who saw is righteous, he has seen what is true. And Peter: You spoke correctly. But who is righteous, if he needs a vision in order to learn what he must learn and do what he must do? And Simon: Grant me this, that only the righteous can see a true vision, and I will answer you on that.

For I have judged that an impious man does not see a true dream. And Peter said: This is false, and concerning this I can demonstrate both without writing and in writing, but I do not promise to persuade. For a man who has inclined toward the desire of a wicked woman does not transfer his own mind to lawful cohabitation with another woman who is altogether beautiful; sometimes, even knowing in themselves the better, they are prejudiced and love the worse. Something of this sort you also suffer, though you are unaware. And Simon said: Setting aside these things, speak to what you promised. For it seems impossible to me that impious men are ever visited by dreams from God in any manner. And Peter said: I remember that I promised to provide the demonstration concerning this both without writing and in writing. And now listen as I speak. We know many—if indeed you are reasonable, since I have those present as judges—who worship idols and commit adultery and sin in every way, yet see visions and true dreams, and some even have apparitions of demons. For I do not say that the incorporeal form of the Father or the Son can be seen, because the eyes of mortals are dazzled by the greatest light. Hence, that it is not seen by a man turned to flesh is not due to God's envy, but to his mercy. For he who sees it cannot live. For the excess of light dissolves the flesh of the beholder, unless by God's ineffable power the flesh is transformed into the nature of light, so that it may be able to see light—or the substance of light is transformed into flesh, so that it may be able to be seen by flesh. For to see the Father unchanged is the prerogative of the Son alone. The righteous, however, not in like manner—

For in the resurrection of the dead, when the bodies, transformed into light, become equal to angels, then they will be able to see. At any rate, even if some angel is sent to appear to a man, he is transformed into flesh, so that he may be able to be seen by flesh. For no one can see a bodiless power, not only of a son but not even of an angel. But if someone sees a vision, let him consider it to be of an evil demon. Nevertheless, that even impious men see true visions and dreams is evident, and I can demonstrate it in writing. At any rate, it is written in the Law that Abimelech (being impious, having wished to defile the wife of the righteous Abraham for intercourse) heard from God in sleep (as the Scripture says) not to touch her, because she was married to a man. But also Pharaoh (an impious man) saw a dream concerning both abundance and scarcity of wheat, which Joseph, interpreting from God, said the dream had come from God. And Nebuchadnezzar (who worshipped idols and ordered those who worshipped God to be thrown into the fire) sees a dream of the whole length of an age. And let no one say: "But no impious man beholds a vision while awake." That is false. For Nebuchadnezzar himself, having ordered three men to be thrown into the fire, looking into the furnace, said a fourth: "I see the fourth as a son of God." And yet those who saw visions and dreams and dreams were impious. Thus, it is not at all the case that someone who sees visions and dreams and apparitions is necessarily pious. For in the pious man, the truth wells up in his mind, innate and pure, not sought after by a dream, but given to the good by understanding.

Thus also the Son was revealed to me from the Father. Therefore I know what the power of revelation is, having learned it from my own experience. For as soon as the Lord said what they call him, and I heard others calling him different things, it arose in my heart: I do not know, then, how I said, "You are the Son of the living God." And the one who called me blessed indicated to me that the revealer was the Father, and I learned from that time that to learn without teaching, without vision and dreams, is revelation. And truly it is so. For in the seed placed in us by God... all truth is present, but it is covered and revealed by the hand of God, who knows how to act according to each one's worth. That something is indicated from outside through visions and dreams is shown to be not of revelation but of wrath. At any rate, it is written in the Law that God, being angry with Aaron and Miriam, said: "If a prophet arises from among you, I will make myself known to him through visions and dreams, but not as to my servant Moses, for I will speak to him in form and not through dreams, as one speaks to his own friend." You see how the things of wrath are through visions and dreams, while those to a friend are mouth to mouth, in form and not through riddles and visions and dreams, as to an enemy. If, then, our Jesus also appeared to you in a vision and was known and spoke as one angry with an opponent, therefore he spoke through visions and dreams, or even through revelations that are from outside. But can anyone be made wise for teaching through a vision? And if you say, "It is possible," why did the teacher, remaining awake, speak for a whole year to those who were awake?

How then shall we believe you, even that he appeared to you? And how did he appear to you, when you hold opinions contrary to his teaching? But if, having been seen and instructed by him for a single hour, you became an apostle, proclaim his words, interpret his teachings, love his apostles, and do not fight with me, who associated with him. For you have set yourself against me, who am a firm rock, a foundation of the church. If you were not opposed, you would not, by slandering me, revile the proclamation made through me, so that what I myself heard from the Lord when present, and which I speak, might not be believed, evidently because I am condemned and you are approved. Or if you call me "condemned," you accuse the God who revealed Christ to me, and you attack the one who blessed me for that revelation. But since you truly wish to work together with the truth, first learn from us what we learned from him, and having become a disciple of the truth, become our fellow worker. When Simon heard this, he said: Far be it from me to become a disciple either of him or of you. For I am not ignorant of what I need to know; but I inquired as one learning, in order to know whether you can show the evidence of a vision more clearly. But you spoke as you wished, and did not show it. And now tomorrow, coming to you for the discussion about God, whom you insist is the creator, I will show that he is not the highest and good, and I will prove that your teacher said the same things as I do, but that you have not understood. And having said this, he went out, not wishing to hear what was proposed to him.

When morning came and Peter went out to converse, Simon, having anticipated him, said: "Yesterday, as I was leaving, I promised you that I would return today and, after debating, show that the one who created the world is not the highest god, but another, who alone is good and until now unknown. So then, do you say that the creator himself is also the lawgiver, or not? If he is the lawgiver, he is just, and being just, he is not good. But if he is not, then Jesus proclaimed another when he said, 'Do not call me good; for the good one is one, the father in the heavens.' He does not agree with the lawgiver, who is both just and good." And Peter said: "First tell us, on the basis of what actions do you think the good one is good, and on the basis of what actions the just one is just, so that we may direct our words to the point accordingly." And Simon said: "You first tell me what you think the good is, or the just." And Peter said: "Lest I waste time by debating too contentiously, demanding that you make your answers to my questions fairly, as you think, I will make the answers myself, since I was the one who asked. I say that the good is the one who provides, as I see the creator himself doing, giving the sun to both good and bad, and rain to both just and unjust." And Simon said: "This is most unjust, that he provides the same things to just and unjust." And Peter said: "Then you tell us from now on how he would be good by acting." And Simon said: "You must speak." And Peter said: "I will speak.

If he provides the same things to the good and the just, and also to the evil and the unjust, according to you he is not even just; and if he provided good things to the good and evil things to the evil, you would reasonably call him just. By what other action, then, would he be acting, if he does not use this method—providing temporal things to the evil (if they should change), and eternal things to the good (if they should persevere)? And thus, while providing to all, yet bestowing differently, his justice is good and long-suffering, especially in this: if he forgives the sins of sinners who repent, and for those who do good he prescribes eternal life. But when judging finally and assigning to each according to merit, he is just. If, then, these things are correctly so, agree; but if it does not seem correct to you, refute it. And Simon said: "I said once: Every lawgiver, looking to justice, is just." And Peter said: "It belongs to the good not to set down a law, but to the just to set it down; and thus the creator is both good and just: good, because from the time of Adam until Moses he does not appear to have set down the law in writing—but from Moses down to the present time, as it is written, he is also just." And Simon said: "Show from the words of your teacher that it belongs to the same one to be both good and just. For it seems impossible to me that the lawgiver, being good, is also the same and just." And Peter said: "That the good itself is also just, listen. Our teacher himself, to the Pharisee who said, 'What shall I do to inherit eternal life?' first said, 'Do not call me good; for the good one is one, the father in the heavens'; and immediately adding, he says:

But if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” And when he said, “Which ones?” he referred him to those of the law. He would not have referred him to the commandments of the just, signifying something else good. That the just is one thing and the good another, I myself also admit, but you are ignorant that it belongs to the same one to be good and just. For he is good, being patient with those who repent now and accepting them, and he is just when, in judging, he assigns to each according to merit. And Simon said: How then, when the creator is known—who also formed Adam and is known to those who are just according to the law, and moreover to the just and unjust and to the whole world—does your teacher, coming after all those, say, “No one knew the Father except the Son, just as no one knows the Son except the Father and those to whom the Son wishes to reveal him”? He would not have said these things unless he was announcing some Father existing in secret, whom the law also calls the Most High, from whom neither good nor evil voice has been heard (as in the Lamentations and Jeremiah testifies), who, according to the number of the sons of Israel who entered Egypt—which is seventy—and having circumscribed the boundaries of the nations with seventy languages, gave the Hebrews as a portion to his own son, who is also called “Lord” and who ordered heaven and earth, and ordained that he himself be god of gods—gods, I say, who have received the other portions of the nations.

Laws therefore came forth from all the gods mentioned, for their own portions (which are the remaining other nations), and likewise from the son of the lord of all, the law laid down among the Hebrews came forth. And it was determined that this should be so, that if anyone should take refuge in the law of someone, he would belong to the portion of that one whose law he undertook to practice. No one knew the most high father, who is ineffable, nor that his son is son. For instance, you, giving to the son what belongs to the ineffable most high, do not know that he is son, being the father of Jesus, who among you is called Christ. When Simon said this, Peter said to him: Can you testify concerning that one that you believe thus, not the one you now speak of as ineffable, but the one you believe but do not confess? For you talk nonsense, defining one thing instead of another. Therefore, if you testify that you believe what you say, I will answer you—but if you stand disputing with me about what you do not believe, you force me to beat the air. And Simon said: I heard it from one of your disciples. And Peter said: Do not bear false witness. And Simon said: Do not revile me, most reckless one. And Peter: Until you name the one who said it, you are a liar. And Simon: Consider that I invented these things or heard them from another; answer me concerning them. For if it cannot be refuted, I have learned that this is the truth. And Peter: If it is a human fabrication, I do not answer it; but if you are possessed by the opinion that it is true, confess this itself to me, and I have something to say about it myself. And Simon: It seems to me once for all that this is so.

If you have something to say in response to these things, answer. And Peter said: If this is so, you are guilty of the greatest impiety. For if it belongs to the son of the one who ordered heaven and earth to reveal his father, who is hidden in mysteries, to whomever he wishes, you are guilty of the greatest impiety (as I said) by revealing to those to whom he did not reveal. And Simon said: But he himself wishes me to reveal. And Peter said: You do not understand what I am saying, Simon; nevertheless, listen and comprehend. The statement "to whomever the son wishes, he will reveal" does not mean that anyone can learn such a thing through teaching, but only that he will reveal. Revelation is that which lies hidden in all human hearts, concealed, and is revealed without voice by his will. And thus it comes to be known not by being taught, but by understanding. But to one who understands, it is not possible to demonstrate this to another (since he himself was not taught), nor can he reveal it (since he himself is not the son), unless he claims to be the son. But you are not the son who stands. For if you were the son, you would certainly know those worthy of such revelation. But you do not know. For if you knew, you would do what those who know do. And Simon said: I admit, I did not understand how you mean "you would do what those who know do." And Peter said: Since you did not understand, you cannot know the mind of each one—and if you are ignorant, you do not know those worthy of revelation; but if you do not know, you are not the son; but the son knows; therefore he reveals to whomever he wishes, as being worthy. And Simon said: Do not deceive me; I know the worthy, and I am not the son. However, what this "to whomever he wishes to reveal" means, I did not understand as you say.

I did not say that I did not understand because I did not know, but because I knew that those present did not understand, so that you might state it more clearly, that they might comprehend for what reason we are even conducting the inquiry. And Peter said: I cannot state it more clearly; you yourself, since you have understood, explain it. And Simon said: I am not obliged to state your views. And Peter said: It seems to me, Simon, that you do not understand it and are unwilling to admit it, so that you may not be caught in ignorance and convicted of not being the son who stands. For you hint at this, even if you are unwilling to state it plainly. So I, being a disciple of a true prophet, not a prophet, understand your intentions from what you hint at. But you, not even understanding what is said plainly, wish to call yourself son, standing against us. And Simon said: I will remove every pretext from you; I admit that I did not understand what this means: "and to whomsoever the son wishes to reveal." So state it more clearly. And Peter said: Since you have admitted, even if in pretense, that you do not understand, answer what I ask you, and you will learn. Tell me: do you affirm that the son, whoever he is, is just, or not? And Simon said: Most just. And Peter said: But being just, why does he not reveal to all, but only to whom he wishes? And Simon said: Because, being just, he wishes to reveal to those who are worthy. And Peter said: Then must he necessarily know the mind of each one, so that he may reveal to the worthy? And Simon said: It must necessarily be so. And Peter said: Then he alone is reasonably appointed to reveal, since he alone knows the mind of each one, and not you, who cannot even understand what is said by us. When Peter said this, applause arose from the crowds.

Simon, having been caught red-handed, blushed from shame, rubbed his forehead, and said: "But they say I am a magician, being defeated by Peter, and also being refuted in argument. But if someone is refuted, having been carried away, the truth within him is defeated; for the weakness of the defeated is not the truth of the one who prosecutes. Nevertheless, I tell you that I judged all those present worthy to know the Father who is ineffable. Therefore, while I was revealing him to them publicly, you, out of envy, are angry with me, who wishes to benefit them." And Peter said: "Since you spoke in a manner pleasing to the crowds present, I will speak not in a pleasing manner, but truthfully. Tell me, how do you know that all those present are worthy, when not one of them agreed with you as you were revealing? For their giving praise to me against you is not an agreement with you, but with me, to whom they also awarded the praise as having spoken correctly. But since God, being just, arbitrates each person's mind, what you claim to be true would not have been intended by him to be given to the right through the left, by which reasoning one who takes something from a thief is also liable. Therefore, for this reason, he did not wish them to receive what is borne by you, but through the son appointed for revealing. For to whom is it reasonable to reveal the Father except to the son alone, because he knows who is worthy of such a revelation? Thus, this is not to be taught or learned, but to be revealed by an ineffable hand to the one worthy of knowing this." And Simon said: "It greatly contributes to victory for the one fighting to use his own weapons.

For what one truly loves and can genuinely defend, when genuinely defended, possesses no ordinary strength. Therefore, from now on I will set forth what I truly think. I affirm that there is a certain power in the ineffable realm, unknown to all, and even to the creator himself (as Jesus himself said, not knowing what he uttered; for from much speaking one sometimes hits upon the truth, not knowing what one says). And I speak also concerning this which he said: "No one has known the Father." And Peter said: "Do not any longer profess to know those things of his." And Simon said: "I do not profess to believe those things of his, but I argue with you concerning the things that have been accomplished by him." And Peter said: "So that I may not give you a pretext for flight, I will question you as you wish; but I call all to witness that you do not believe even the statement you have just now made. For I know what you think. And so that you may not think I am lying, I will hint at your own views, so that you may know that you are arguing with one who knows. We, Simon, from the great power, and also from that called the Lordly, do not say that two angels were sent, one to create the world and the other to establish the law—nor that each one, having come to what he made as if he himself were the author, himself announced it—nor that the one who stands will stand as an adversary. Learn how you disbelieve even this hypothesis. The power which you say exists in the ineffable realm is full of ignorance; for it did not foreknow the ignorance of the angels sent by it." And Simon, greatly angered at Peter saying these things, interrupted him as he was speaking, saying: "Why do you prattle, you rash and most reckless of all, unskillfully revealing the ineffable things before ignorant crowds?" And Peter said:

Why do you begrudge the present hearers being benefited? And Simon said: So do you acknowledge that such knowledge is a benefit? And Peter said: I acknowledge it; for falsehood, when known, benefits by preventing one from falling into it through ignorance. And Simon said: It seems to me that you are unable to answer what I proposed. I say that even your teacher says that in ineffable matters there is a certain father. And Peter said: I will answer what you wish, concerning the saying: "No one knows the father except the son—nor does anyone know the son except the father and those to whom the son wishes to reveal him." First, I marvel that, although this saying admits of countless interpretations, you have chosen the most dangerous part, claiming that the saying was spoken to promote ignorance of the creator and of all things by him. For first, the saying can be understood as addressed to all Jews, who thought that David was the father of Christ, and that they did not know Christ himself, who is son and son of God. Hence it is fittingly said: "No one knew the father," since instead of God they all said David. And the addition, "nor does anyone know the son," because they did not know him as son, and the saying "to whom the son wishes to reveal him" is correctly spoken; for the son, who exists from the beginning, was alone appointed to reveal to whom he wishes. And thus it is possible that Adam, the first-formed, did not ignore him, nor Enoch, who pleased God, fail to know him, nor Noah, the righteous, be ignorant of him, nor Abraham, the friend, fail to understand, nor Isaac fail to have perceived, nor Jacob, the wrestler, fail to have believed, and that he was not revealed to all those in the people who were worthy.

But if (as you claim) it will be the case that through Jesus knowledge is now revealed to all, how can you not be saying something utterly unjust—that those who were seven pillars of the world and were able to please the most just God did not know, while now so many from the nations, who are impious in every respect, come to know? Were these, who are superior to all, not deemed worthy to know? And how is this good, which is not just? Unless you wish to call good not the one who benefits those who have acted justly, but the one who loves the unjust even if they do not believe, to whom he also reveals secrets that he did not wish to reveal to the just. For such a thing befits neither a good nor a just being, but one who hates the pious. Is it not you, Simon, who stand there, who have the audacity to say these things that have never been said before? And Simon, indignant at this, said: I blame your teacher for saying: "I confess to you, lord of heaven and earth, that what was hidden from the wise, you have revealed to nursing infants." And Peter said: That saying was not uttered in that way; but I will first speak as if it were said as it seemed to you. Our Lord, even if he had said, "What was hidden from the wise, the Father revealed to infants," not even thus would he be thought to signify another god and father besides the creator of the world. For it is possible that the hidden things he spoke of belong to the creator himself, since Isaiah also said: "I will open my mouth in parables and bring forth things hidden from the foundation of the world." Do you then acknowledge the prophet, who was not ignorant of the hidden things, which Jesus says were hidden from the wise but revealed to infants?

How could the creator be ignorant of his prophet, when Isaiah was not ignorant? And our Jesus truly did not say, "Things that were [not] hidden," but he said something that seems harsher; for he said, "You revealed them to nursing infants." But to say "you hid them," as if they were once known to them. For the key of the kingdom of heaven lay with them, that is, the knowledge of the secret things. And do not say, "He committed impiety against the wise by hiding these things from them." Do not suppose this. For he did not commit impiety, but because they hid the knowledge of the kingdom and neither entered themselves nor provided for those who wished to enter, for this reason, justly, as they themselves hid the ways from those who desired, so also the secret things were hidden from them, so that as they did, the same might happen to them, and with the measure they measured, it might be measured back to them equally. For what is owed to the worthy is to know what he does not know, but from the unworthy (even if he seems to have it) it is taken away (even if he is wise in other things) and given to the worthy (even if they are infants in the time of discipleship). And if someone says, "Nothing was hidden from the sons of Israel because it is written, 'Nothing escaped you, Israel; for do not say, Jacob, "The way was hidden from me,"'" one must understand that the things pertaining to the kingdom were hidden from them, but the way that leads into the kingdom, which is the way of life, was not hidden. For this reason it says, "For do not say that the way was hidden from me." And the way is the way of life, since Moses also says, "Behold, I have set before you the way of life and the way of death.

And the teacher said in agreement: "Enter through the narrow and oppressed road, through which you will enter into life." And elsewhere, when someone asked, "What shall I do to inherit eternal life?" he pointed to the commandments of the law. But from Isaiah's saying in the person of God, "Israel did not know me, and my people did not understand me," it does not follow that Isaiah hinted at another god besides the known creator; rather, he called the known god unknown by a different riddle, in that the people, being ignorant of the just disposition of the known god, sinned and did not suppose they would be judged by the good god. Therefore, after saying, "Israel did not know me, and my people did not understand me," he adds, "Woe to the sinful nation, a people full of sins." For through their ignorance of his justice (as I said), not fearing, they became full of sins, having supposed him to be only good (as not punishing their sins). And some sinned in this way from the undiscriminating supposition of his goodness, while others sinned from the opposite. For taking the voices against the god of the scriptures, which are unjust and false, as true, they did not know his true divinity and power. Therefore, as if he were ignorant and rejoiced in murders and released the wicked through gifts of sacrifices, and also deceived and lied and did all unjust things, they themselves, having done similar things to god, insisted they were pious while sinning. Hence they were unchangeable toward the better and, when admonished, did not turn back. For they did not fear, as if they were becoming like god through such actions.

But to those who consider him to be such, one might reasonably say that it has been spoken: "No one knows the Father except the Son, just as no one knows the Son except the Father." And fittingly. For if they had known, they would not err by trusting the books that were actually written to test God. But elsewhere he says, wishing to show them more clearly the cause of their error: "For this reason you err, not knowing the true things of the Scriptures, on account of which you are also ignorant of the power of God." Therefore every man who wishes to be saved must become, as the teacher said, a judge of the books written to test. For he spoke thus: "Become approved money-changers." And there is need of money-changers because the spurious are mixed with the genuine. When Peter said these things, Simon, pretending to be astounded at what was said about the Scriptures, as if terrified, said: "Far be it from me and from those who love me to listen to your words. And as long as I did not know that you held these opinions about the Scriptures, I endured and debated, but now I desist. Yet I ought to have withdrawn from the beginning, because I heard you saying: 'I believe nothing said by anyone against the creator of the world, neither angels nor prophets, nor Scriptures, nor priests, nor teachers, nor anyone else, even if someone performs signs and wonders, even if he flashes openly in the air or reveals through visions or dreams.' Who then can persuade you to think either well or ill something different from what seems right to you, when you remain so strongly and immovably fixed in your own knowledge?

And Peter, as Simon was about to depart after saying these things, said: "Hear this one more thing from me, and go wherever you wish." When Simon turned back and waited, Peter said: "I know how you were astonished when you heard me say: 'Whoever says anything against the God who created the world, I do not believe him.' Now hear something greater than this. If the God who created the world is truly of such a character as the scriptures describe—and if he is otherwise incomparably evil, as neither the scriptures were able to express nor anyone else can even conceive—I will likewise not cease to revere only him and to do his will. For I want you to know and be convinced that one who has no affection for his own maker can never have affection for another. But if he has it for another, having it contrary to nature, he is ignorant that he has a passion for unjust things from an evil source, as one who cannot even keep that other securely. And if there is indeed some other being superior to the creator, he will accept me as good all the more because I love my own father, but he will not accept you, knowing that you abandoned your natural maker (I do not say father) in hope of a greater one, without regard for what is reasonable. Thus, even if you find one superior to him, he knows that you will also abandon him someday, and all the more because he has not become your father, since you abandoned your true father. But you will say: 'He knows that there is no other superior to him, and therefore he cannot be abandoned.' Thanks, then, that he does not exist; but he knows your disposition is ready for ingratitude.

If, knowing you to be ungrateful, he accepts you, but knowing me to be grateful, he does not admit me, he is irrational according to your argument, not employing reason. Thus, O Simon, being a servant of wickedness, you are ignorant. And Simon answered: "Whence then has evil arisen? Tell us." And Peter said: "Since today you have happened to depart and have said that for the future you will not listen to me as a blasphemer, tomorrow, if you wish to learn, I will explain to you when you come, and I will allow you to examine me as you wish without contention." And Simon said: "I will do as it seems good to me." And having said this, he went away. But none of those who had entered with him went out with him; rather, falling at Peter's feet, they begged to obtain pardon for having been carried away by Simon and to be accepted as repentant. And Peter received both those who repented and the other crowds, laid his hands on them, praying and healing those who were suffering, and thus dismissing them, he instructed them to hasten at daybreak. And having said this and entered with his companions, he did the customary things for the urgent quiet, as evening had come.

The next day, Peter came out earlier, and seeing Simon waiting for him with many others, he greeted the crowd and began to speak. But as soon as he began, Simon interrupted and said: "Leaving aside these long preludes of yours, answer me the question I put to you concerning the matter at hand. Since I perceive that you (as I have understood from hearing you from the beginning, that nothing else is before you than to show by every means that the creator himself alone is a blameless god) have such a strong desire and determination to insist, that you even dare to call false some passages of the scriptures that clearly speak against him, for this reason I have resolved today to demonstrate that it is impossible for him, being the creator of all things, to be blameless. And I can begin the demonstration now, if only you will answer what I ask you. Do you say that there is a ruler of evil, or not? For if you say there is not, I can prove from many things, including those of your teacher, that there is; but if you, being reasonable, admit that the evil one exists, I will then proceed with the argument." And Peter said: "It is impossible for me to deny the voice of my teacher, therefore I also admit that the evil one exists, because my teacher, who always spoke the truth, has often said that he exists. For instance, he admits that he tempted him, having conversed with him for forty days. And elsewhere I know he said: 'If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then does his kingdom stand?' And he revealed that he saw the evil one 'falling like lightning from the sky.' And elsewhere he said: 'The one who sowed the evil seed is the devil.' And again:

Do not give a pretext to the evil one.” But also, advising, he said: “Let your yes be yes and your no be no, and anything beyond these is from the evil one.” And also in the prayer which he delivered we have it said: “Deliver us from the evil one.” And elsewhere he promised to say to the impious: “Go into the outer darkness, which the Father prepared for the devil and his angels.” And that I may not prolong my speech unduly, I know that my teacher often said that the evil one exists. Therefore I also agree that he exists. So if you have anything to say consistently, as you promised, say it. And Simon said: Since then, having been reasonable, you have admitted that the evil one exists, tell us from the scriptures how he came to be, if indeed he came to be, and by whom and why. And Peter said: Pardon me, Simon, for not daring to say what is not written. If you claim it is written, show it; but if, as it is not written, you cannot show it either, why do we risk making declarations about things not written? For have we not believed that we will be judged not only for what we do, but also for what we say in faith, and that we therefore speak more rashly about God? And Simon, understanding that he had spoken in response to his own folly, said: Let me take the risk; do not take the blasphemy you speak of as a pretext for withdrawal. For I perceive that you wish to withdraw, in order to escape refutation before the crowds, at one time as if fearing to hear blasphemy, at another (since it is not written how and by whom and why the evil one came to be) that one ought not to dare say more than scripture; therefore, as a cautious

You confirm only that it exists. But in contriving these things, you deceive yourself, not knowing that if it is blasphemy to be precise about the evil one, the cause pertains to me, the accuser, not to you, who pleads the case for God. And if the matter under inquiry is unwritten and for this reason you do not wish to investigate, there are sufficient ways, capable of showing the matters under inquiry no less than scriptures. For instance, is it not necessary that the evil one (whom you also affirm to exist) be either created or uncreated? And Peter said: "It is necessary." And Simon said: "Therefore, if he is created, he has been made by the same God who made all things, either born as a living being or projected substantially and having come to be externally by mixture. For if the matter, animate or inanimate, from which he came to be was outside him, it came about either through God himself, or from itself, or also from non-existence, or it always was in relation to something. Since every path, as I think, is here divided for the discovery of him, it is necessary that by traveling one of them he be discoverable; therefore, one must travel each path seeking his origin and, having found the cause, consider that cause to be subject to blame. Is it not so? What do you think?" And Peter said: "It seems to me that if he is shown to have been made by God, the maker should not yet be subject to blame, lest the usefulness of him be found more necessary than all.

But if it should be shown that he has not come into being but always exists, even in this the creator is not blameworthy, since he is the superior of all, if he has been unable to put an end to an unoriginated beginning because it has no nature, or being able he does not destroy it, having judged it unjust to put an end to that which has not taken a beginning, and to pardon that which is evil by nature because it cannot become anything else, even if it had the desire to become something. But if, wishing to do good, he were unable, even so he is good, because he wishes but is unable; and in that wherein he is unable, he is the most powerful of all, because the power is not left to another. But if there is some other who is powerful and does not succeed, in that wherein being powerful he does not succeed, he is confessed to be evil, not ceasing from it as one delighting in what is done by him. But if he himself is not able, the one who, besides being unable, does not shrink from benefiting us according to his power is superior. And Simon said: When I have argued with you concerning each of the points I have proposed and shown you the cause of evil, then I will answer what you have said and show that the god you affirm to be blameless is subject to blame. And Peter said: Since from what you utter from the beginning I perceive that you are zealous for nothing else than to subject God to blame as the leader of evil, I have chosen, accompanying you on all the ways you wish, to show that God is beyond all blame. And Simon said: You say these things as one loving the god you have assumed, but you do not speak the truth. And Peter said: But you, as one evil, hating the god you have not known, utter blasphemous words. And Simon said: Remember that you compared me to the leader of evil. And Peter said: I confess, I lied in comparing you to the evil one.

I was compelled because I could not find anyone equal to you or even worse. For this reason I compared you to the evil one; for you happen to be much more wicked than even the leader of wickedness. For no one can show that the evil one has spoken ill of God, but we all who are present observe you recklessly speaking ill. And Simon said: "One who seeks the truth owes nothing to anyone except to gratify the Christ. For why else does he seek from the beginning? What then? Am I not able, neglecting to examine matters accurately, to spend all my time in praise of a God whom I do not know?" And Peter said: "You are neither so blessed as to hymn him, nor can you do this good thing; for you would be full of him. For our truthful teacher said thus: 'The mouth speaks from the abundance of the heart.' Hence, being abundant in evil purpose, you speak ill of the only good God on account of ignorance, and you have not yet suffered as you deserve for what you dared to say. If you think there will be no judgment, perhaps you even suppose that God does not exist. Hence, not perceiving his great forbearance, you extend yourself further into madness." And Simon said: "Do not hope to shame me by fear so that I do not seek from you the true examples; for I am so eager for truth that for its sake I do not shrink from even undertaking danger. However, regarding the matters proposed by me to you from the beginning, if you have anything to say, say it now.

And Peter said: “Since you compel us to dare to speak precisely of the arts of God, and that to men who cannot even master the arts of their fellows, I will, for the sake of those present, discuss what you wish instead of the most pious silence. I agree with you that there is a leader of wickedness, whose origin the Scripture has dared to call neither true nor false. But let us inquire together in many ways how he came to be (if indeed he came to be), and let us choose the more reverent of the plausible views, since from probabilities this is firmly taken: that it is fitting to give the more reverent view to God, when all such suspicions have been purified and another sufficient and less dangerous hypothesis lies at hand. Yet I promise you now, before the inquiry, that every path of inquiry can show only God himself to be blameless. But (as you said) if the evil one is created, either he was born as a living being, or was substantially projected by him, or was mixed from outside, or his will coincided with the mixture, or without mixture and God’s will he happened to come into being from non-existence, or was made by God from nowhere and in no way, or was outside God, or came from matter either lifeless or animate, or created himself, or was made by God, or is among relative things, or always existed. For we cannot say he does not exist; we have agreed that he exists.” And Simon said: “You have well divided all his paths, the main point of him; it remains for me, after examining the division, to show you that the creator is subject to blame; and your task is to show him, as you have promised, to be free from all blame. But I wonder if you will be able.

First, if the evil one has been generated as a living being from God, it follows that he partakes of the same wickedness as the one who produced him. And Peter said: “Not at all; for we see many men who are good and have begotten evil children, and others who are evil and have had good children, and still others who are evil and have produced both good and evil, and others who are good and have fathered both evil and good. For instance, the first created man begot the unjust Cain and the just Abel.” To this Simon said: “You act foolishly, discussing God while using human examples.” And Peter said: “Then you tell us about God without using human examples, yet in such a way that what is said can be understood; but you will not be able. For what were you saying at the start? If the evil one has been generated from God, being of the same substance as him, he is evil. But when I showed, from the very example you gave, that from good men evil ones are born and from evil men good ones, you did not accept it, claiming the example was human. Hence now I do not even accept that God has been generated, because generation belongs to men, not to God. But neither can God be good or evil or just or unjust, nor wise nor a living being nor any other attributes that can belong to men; for such things are human. And if, when inquiring about God, we must not attribute to him the good qualities that belong to men, then there is nothing left to think or say, except to seek only this: his will, which he himself has permitted us to understand, so that we, being judged, may be without excuse concerning what we knew but did not observe.

And Simon, having heard, said: "You will put me to shame, so that I am silent about his essence and seek only his choice. For it is possible both to think and to speak about his essence, I mean from the good qualities that belong to humans. For example, living and dying belong to humans, but to God belongs not dying, but living, and living eternally. Moreover, being evil and being good belong to humans, but to God belongs being incomparably good. And so that I may not prolong the discourse excessively, the better of the qualities that belong to humans belong eternally to God." And Peter said: "Tell me, Simon, does begetting evil and good people and doing evil and good deeds belong to humans?" And Simon said: "It does." And Peter said: "Since you have spoken thus, of the qualities that belong to humans, the better ones must be assigned to God. Since humans beget both evil and good people, God can beget only good people; and since humans do both evil and good deeds, he himself, doing only good deeds, takes pleasure. Thus concerning God, either one must not speak of the qualities that belong to humans and it is possible to be silent, or it is reasonable to assign to him the better of the qualities that belong to humans, and thus he alone is the cause of all good things." And Simon said: "Therefore, if God is the cause only of good things, what else is there to think but that evil was begotten by some other principle, if indeed it is begotten?" And Peter said: "Neither did some other power beget the evil one, nor is evil unbegotten, as I will show at the end. For now it is my purpose to demonstrate (as I promised from the beginning) that in every way God is blameless.

We have therefore shown that God incomparably possesses the better of the qualities that belong to human beings. Hence it is possible for him to be the projector of the four substances, I mean hot and cold, wet and dry. These, as primary, simple, and unmixed, have an inclination toward neither, but when projected by God and blended externally, they become a living being, having a choice to destroy the wicked. And thus, with all things having come from him, the evil one is neither from elsewhere nor has he received wickedness from the all-creating God himself, in whom it is impossible for it to exist, because the substances, being neutral, have been projected from him after being distinguished, and externally, by the mixture wrought by his art, the desire for the destruction of the wicked has come to be according to his will—but the evil that has come to be cannot destroy the good, even if it wished; for it has authority by law only over those who sin. Therefore, being ignorant of each person's character, it makes trial of them, and having convicted them, it punishes. And Simon said: "Since God is able to mix the elements and make mixtures for whatever choices he wishes to come into being, why did he not make the mixture of each one choice-worthy of good things?" And Peter said: "Now our task is to show how the evil one came to be, if indeed he came to be, and by whom; but whether blamelessly, when I go through the account now before us, then I will show how and why he came to be, and I will fully demonstrate that the maker is blameless.

We said, however, that the four substances were projected by God, and thus by the will of the one who combined them, it came about as the choice of evils wished. For if it had happened contrary to his choice or from some other substance or pretext, the firmness of God's will would not be secure, lest, against his will, leaders of evil should always come together, warring against his purposes. But it is impossible for these things to be so. For no living being, especially a ruling one, can come into being by accident; for everything that comes into being must come into being by something. And Simon said: What then? If matter, being coeval with him and of equal power, as an enemy projects leaders against him, hindering his purposes? And Peter said: If matter is eternal, it is not an enemy of anything; for what is eternal is also impassible, and what is impassible is blessed, and what is blessed cannot become receptive of enmity, not fearing to be deprived of anything by an eternal creation. And how does matter not rather love the creator, since it appears to produce fruits for the nourishment of all things generated by him? And how does it not fear him as superior, as it confesses even through earthquakes trembling, and as, when greatly agitated, it quickly obeyed the teacher sailing and commanding calm? What then? Did not the demons also come out with fear and respect, while others first begged to enter into swine, deeming it worthy that they did not even have the power to enter into swine without his permission? And Simon said: What then? If it is inanimate, does it have a nature to produce both evils and goods? And Peter said:

According to this reasoning, it is neither good nor evil, because it does not act by choice, being soulless and insensate. Hence it is possible to see here how, being soulless, it produces ensouled things, and being insensate, it appears to fashion the technical forms of both animals and plants. And Simon said: What then? If God himself ensouled it, is he not himself the cause of the evils which it brings forth? And Peter said: If God ensouled it according to his own will, his own spirit works it, and nothing is any longer hostile to God or equal in power or impossible, because everything that comes to be by him comes to be as he wills. But you will say: He is the cause of evil, if indeed he works evils through it. What then will you call evils? Venomous reptiles and deadly plants, or demons, or other things capable of troubling men? These things now grievous would not exist had not man sinned, on whose account death entered; for when man was sinless, the venom of reptiles did not work, the effects of evil plants did not occur, disturbances of demons did not happen, nor did any other suffering naturally belong to him; but by sin having fallen from being immortal, as I said, he became receptive of every suffering. And if you say: Why then was human nature originally made receptive of death? I say to you: Because of free will. For if we were not receptive of death, we could not be punished for a sin committed by free will as immortals, and thus, because of impassibility, we would have been even more evil in our choice, or justice would have been weakened, since those with evil choices could not be punished by reason of impassibility. And Simon said to these things:

Concerning the evil one, what more can I say than that God made him from non-existence, and according to this, the maker is evil, who made what was not to be, and this while being able to make him good, since the one who came to be does not possess by nature any personal inclination toward wickedness? And Peter said: Making him from non-existence while he possesses free choice is similar to the argument we previously stated, that by making the mixture so that he rejoices in evils, the maker himself appears responsible for what came to be. Since the resolution of both is one, we will later state why he made him rejoice in the destruction of evils. And Simon said: He also made the angels self-determined, but the evil one departed from being just, and for this reason he has been honored with rule; the one who honored him, through the one he honored, appears as rejoicing in evils. And Peter said: If God, when he had departed, appointed him to rule over those like him, commanding him by law to inflict punishment on those who sin, he is not unjust. But if he honored him when he had departed, the one who honored him foresaw the usefulness, that the honor is temporary and that it is just for the evil to be ruled by an evil one and for those who sin to be punished by him. And Simon said: If he always exists, and thus the principle of monarchy is abolished, with another power according to matter co-ruling? And Peter said: If they are different in substance, they are also different in powers, and the stronger rules the weaker; but if they are of the same substance, then they are equal in power and equally good or evil. But that they are not equal in power is evident.

by the craftsman, matter was brought into whatever form of cosmos he wished, and indeed it is possible to say that substance always existed, not as matter, as a treasury of God. For it cannot be said: There was a time when God was without property, but he was always the sole ruler of it. Therefore he is eternal monarch, and on this hypothesis it would be well said that both the ruler and the ruled are eternal. And Simon said: What then? If the evil one made himself? And thus is God good, that knowing he would be for evil, he did not destroy him when, as incomplete, he was capable of being destroyed? For if it happened suddenly and he was perfect, and because of this he wars against the craftsman as having suddenly become equal in power to him. And Peter said: You speak of impossibilities; for he could have destroyed him gradually as he came into being, as an enemy, by his own choice. And if he foreknew that he would become not good, he would not have permitted it, unless he knew that his coming into being was useful to him. And it was not possible for him to become perfect suddenly from himself; for he who did not yet exist could not fashion himself, nor can anything come into being from non-existence and have substance, and one would not rightly say that what is generated is always equal in power. And Simon said: Is it then among the relative, and thus is it evil? Evil as water to fire, but good to the earth that is seasonably thirsty.

Just as iron is good for farming but bad for murder, and desire is not bad for marriage but grievous for adultery, and as killing is evil but good for the one who has planned to kill, and greed is evil but pleasant for the greedy, and all such things are of this kind. By this reasoning, evil is not evil nor is good good, for each produces the other. Does not what seems to happen badly delight the doer but punish the sufferer? And if it seems unjust that one who loves himself should delight as far as possible, and for this reason suffer harshly at the hands of a just judge for having loved himself, to whom does it not appear unjust? And Peter said: One must then restrain oneself with self-control when desire wishes to rush to the harm of another, knowing that the wicked one can destroy the wicked, having received authority over them from the beginning; and this is not yet evil for those who have done evil, but that after destruction their souls remain punished, this is truly grievous, since the one who has rightly defined the evil beforehand has spoken correctly; for this reason one must (as I said) avoid wronging another for the sake of brief pleasure, so as not to envelop oneself in eternal punishment for the sake of a little pleasure. And Simon said: Is it not then that evil or good is not by nature, but differs by law and custom... Among Persians it is customary to marry mothers, sisters, daughters, while for others it is forbidden as most grievous. Hence, since evils are not defined for all, there is no expectation of judgment from God. And Peter said:

You cannot establish this; for it is evident to all that intercourse with mothers is abominable, even if the Persians, being a part of the whole, do not perceive the lawlessness of their abominable practice due to evil custom. Just as the Britons openly have intercourse in the sight of all and are not ashamed—and others eat human flesh and are not disgusted, and others eat dogs—and others do unspeakable things. Thus one must not make judgments by a sense that has been perverted from the natural by custom. For being killed is evil, even if not all say that no one wishes to suffer it, and no one delights in theft when it is his own punishment. Even if there is one universally acknowledged sin, it is necessarily possible to expect a third judgment concerning sins correctly. When Peter said this, Simon answered: If this is how you think things concerning the evil one are, tell me. And Peter: We remember our Lord and teacher saying to us as a command: "Keep the mysteries for me and the sons of my house"; therefore "he explained to his disciples in private" the mysteries of the kingdom of the heavens. But for you, who war against us and examine nothing else than our affairs (whether true or false), it is impiety to speak the secret things. But so that some of those present may not think that I am unable

I contrive a pretext to answer what you have said, but I will first ask you: if not feeling pain were the case, what would the evil one be then? And Simon said: Nothing. And Peter said: Then is evil pain and death? And Simon: It seems so. And Peter: Evil, then, does not exist always, nor can it even come to be; for pain and death are among the things that happen, neither of which is present when good health is present. For what is pain but a lack of harmony? And what is death but a separation of soul from body? So when harmony exists, pain does not exist; for death is not at all among the things that exist, because death is nothing, as I said, but a separation of soul from body, and when this occurs, the body, being by nature insensible, is dissolved, while the soul, being sentient, continues to live—hence, when harmony exists, there is no pain, no death, nor indeed deadly plants, venomous reptiles, or anything else of that sort whose end is death. Hence, when immortality prevails, all things will reasonably appear to have come into being. And this will be the case when, by reason of justice, man becomes immortal under the peaceful reign of Christ, when his mixture is well-tempered, so that he does not suffer sharp impulses, and also when his knowledge is infallible, so that he does not call any evil thing good, and when he is free from pain, so that he is not mortal. And Simon said: You have spoken rightly about these things; but in the present world, does it not seem to you that man is susceptible to every passion? I mean desire, anger, grief, and the like. And Peter said: These too are among the things that happen, not among the things that always exist.