The Trinity And Plato

Πορφύριος γάρ φησι, Πλάτωνος ἐκτιθέμενος δόξαν, ἄχρι τριῶν ὑποστάσεων τὴν τοῦ θείου προελθεῖν οὐσίαν, εἶναι δὲ τὸν μὲν ἀνωτάτω θεὸν τἀγαθόν, μετ' αὐτὸν δὲ καὶ δεύτερον τὸν δημιουργόν, τρίτον δὲ καὶ τὴν τοῦ κόσμου ψυχήν· ἄχρι γὰρ ψυχῆς τὴν θειότητα προελθεῖν. Ἰδοὺ δὴ σαφῶς ἐν τούτοις ἄχρι τριῶν ὑποστάσεων τὴν τοῦ θείου προελθεῖν οὐσίαν ἰσχυρίζεται· εἷς μὲν γάρ ἐστιν ὁ τῶν ὅλων Θεός, κατευρύνεται δὲ ὥσπερ ἡ περὶ αὐτοῦ γνῶσις εἰς ἁγίαν τε καὶ ὁμοούσιον Τριάδα, εἴς τε Πατέρα φημὶ καὶ Υἱὸν καὶ ἅγιον Πνεῦμα, ὃ καὶ ψυχὴν τοῦ κόσμου φησὶν ὁ Πλάτων· ζωοποιεῖ δὲ τὸ Πνεῦμα, καὶ πρόεισιν ἐκ ζῶντος Πατρὸς δι' Υἱοῦ, καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ ζῶμεν καὶ κινούμεθα καὶ ἐσμέν. Ἀληθεύει γὰρ ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χριστός· Τὸ Πνεῦμά ἐστι τὸ ζωοποιοῦν. Καὶ πάλιν ὁ αὐτὸς Πορφύριος περὶ Πλάτωνος· ∆ιὸ ἐν ἀπορρήτοις περὶ τούτων αἰνιττόμενός φησι· Περὶ τὸν βασιλέα πάντα ἐστί, καὶ ἐκείνου ἕνεκα πάντα, καὶ ἐκεῖνο αἴτιον πάντων καλῶν, δεύτερον δὲ περὶ τὰ δεύτερα, καὶ τρίτον περὶ τὰ τρίτα. Ὡς γὰρ πάντων μὲν περὶ τοὺς τρεῖς ὄντων θεούς, ἀλλ' ἤδη πρώτως μὲν περὶ τὸν πάντων βασιλέα, δευτέρως δὲ περὶ τὸν ἀπ' ἐκείνου θεόν, καὶ τρίτως περὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τούτου. ∆εδήλωκε δὲ ἐμφαίνων καὶ τὴν ἐξ ἀλλήλων ὑπόστασιν, ἀρχομένην ἀπὸ τοῦ βασιλέως, καὶ τὴν ὑπόβασιν καὶ ὕφεσιν τῶν μετὰ τὸν πρῶτον, διὰ τοῦ πρώτως καὶ δευτέρως καὶ τρίτως εἰπεῖν, καὶ ὅτι ἐξ ἑνὸς τὰ πάντα καὶ δι' αὐτοῦ σῴζεται. Τεθεώρηκε μὲν οὖν οὐχ ὑγιῶς εἰσάπαν, ἀλλὰ τοῖς τὰ Ἀρείου πεφρονηκόσιν ἐν ἴσῳ, διαιρεῖ καὶ ὑφίστησιν, ὑποκαθημένας τε ἀλλήλαις τὰς ὑποστάσεις εἰσφέρει, καὶ τρεῖς οἴεται θεοὺς εἶναι διῃρημένως τὴν ἁγίαν καὶ ὁμοούσιον Τριάδα. Πλὴν οὐκ ἠγνόηκεν ὁλοτρόπως τὸ ἀληθές, οἶμαι δὲ ὅτι κἂν ὑγιῶς ἔφη τε καὶ πεφρόνηκεν, ἐξήνεγκε δὲ καὶ εἰς τοὺς ἄλλους ἅπαντας τῆς περὶ Θεοῦ δόξης τὸ ἀρτίως ἔχον, εἰ μὴ τάχα που τὴν Ἀνύτου καὶ Μελήτου γραφὴν ἐδεδίει καὶ τὸ Σωκράτους κώνειον. Ἅγιος Κύριλλος Ἀλεξανδρείας, Προς Τα Του Ἐν Ἀθεοις Ιὀυλιανου, Λογος B' Source: Migne PG 76.556a

Expounding an opinion of Plato, Porphyry says, 'The divine substance extends even to three persons, the highest and best God, and after Him there is a second maker, and the third is the soul of the universe, for divinity extends even to soul.' And behold in these things it is manifest that he contends that the three Divine hypostases proceed from the Divine substance, since certainly the God of all things is one, but extended, according to his own understanding, into the holy and consubstantial Trinity, into the Father, I say, and the Son and the Holy Spirit, whom Plato calls the soul of the world, for the Spirit gives life and proceeds from the living Father through the Son, and 'in Him we live and move and have our being.' 1 For our truthful Lord, Jesus Christ, says 'The Spirit is He who gives life,' 2 And again the same Porphyry says of Plato: 'Where secretly intimating these things and speaking obscurely and in a mystery, he says: 'To the king everything is related, and all things are caused by him, and he is the cause of all beautiful things, and related to the second are second things, and third things are related to the third, 3 so that everything exists in relation to three gods, but firstly to the king of all things, and secondly to the god from him, and thirdly to the one who is from that one.' He declares here what the hypostases have from themselves, and that it begins from the king, and there is a declension and descent of things after the first, through the first and the second and the third, he says, for everything is from one, and through him they are preserved. Certainly not everything was seen correctly here, for thinking of these things in the same way of Arius, he divides and imposes inferiority, and he introduces subordination among those subsisting, and he thinks the holy and consubstantial Trinity is three distinct gods. But I think Plato was not ignorant of the whole truth, and would have thought of it and spoken of it rightly, and also published the real and genuine truths about God publicly and openly, but he perhaps feared the accusations of Anytus and Melitus and the hemlock of Socrates. Saint Cyril of Alexandria, Against Julian, Book 2 1 Acts 17.28 2 Jn 6.63 3 Plato Letter 2 312e

A Place Far Off

Πάλιν· Ὁ Ἀβραὰμ ἐλθὼν εἰς τὸν τόπον ὃν εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεὸς τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ ἀναβλέψας ὁρᾷ τὸν τόπον μακρόθεν· πρώτη μὲν γὰρ ἡ δι´ ὄψεως τῶν καλῶν ἡμέρα, δευτέρα δὲ ἡ ψυχῆς τῶν ἀρίστων ἐπιθυμία, τῇ τρίτῃ δὲ ὁ νοῦς τὰ πνευματικὰ διορᾷ, διοιχθέντων τῶν τῆς διανοίας ὀμμάτων πρὸς τοῦ τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ διαναστάντος διδασκάλου. Eἶεν δ´ ἂν καὶ αἱ τρεῖς ἡμέραι τῆς σφραγῖδος μυστήριον, δι´ ἧς ὁ τῷ ὄντι πιστεύεται θεός. μακρόθεν οὖν ἀκολούθως ὁρᾷ τὸν τόπον· δυσάλωτος γὰρ ἡ χώρα τοῦ θεοῦ, ὃν χώραν ἰδεῶν ὁ Πλάτων κέκληκεν, παρὰ Μωυσέως λαβὼν τόπον εἶναι αὐτόν, ὡς τῶν ἁπάντων καὶ τῶν ὅλων περιεκτικόν. Ἀτὰρ εἰκότως πόρρωθεν ὁρᾶται τῷ Ἀβραὰμ διὰ τὸ ἐν γενέσει εἶναι, καὶ δι´ ἀγγέλου προσεχῶς μυσταγωγεῖται. Ἐντεῦθεν ὁ ἀπόστολος, Βλέπομεν νῦν ὡς δι´ ἐσόπτρου, φησί, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον, κατὰ μόνας ἐκείνας τὰς ἀκραιφνεῖς καὶ ἀσωμάτους τῆς διανοίας ἐπιβολάς. Δυνατὸν δὲ κἀν τῷ διαλέγεσθαι τὸ καταμαντεύεσθαι τοῦ θεοῦ, ἐὰν ἐπιχειρῇ τις ἄνευ πασῶν τῶν αἰσθήσεων διὰ τοῦ λόγου ἐπ´ αὐτὸ ὅ ἐστιν ἕκαστον ὁρμᾶν καὶ μὴ ἀποστατεῖν τῶν ὄντων, πρὶν ἄν, ἐπαναβαίνων ἐπὶ τὰ ὑπερκείμενα, αὐτὸ ὅ ἐστιν ἀγαθὸν αὐτῇ νοήσει λάβῃ, ἐπ´ αὐτῷ γινόμενος τῷ τοῦ νοητοῦ τέλει κατὰ Πλάτωνα. Κλήμης ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεύς, Στρωματεων, Λογος Ε' Κεφ IA' Source: Migne PG 9.109c-112b

Again: 'Abraham, coming to the place which God told him of on the third day, looking up, saw the place far off.' 1 For the first day is the sight of good things, and the second is the soul's desire for best things, and on the third the mind perceives spiritual things, the eyes of the understanding being opened by the teacher who rose on the third day. The three days may be the mystery of the seal, in which God is really believed. 2 In consequence he sees the place far off. For the place of God is hard to attain, which Plato called the place of ideas, taking from Moses that it was a place which contained all things universally. But it is rightly seen by Abraham far off since he is in the realms of generation, and he is immediately initiated into the mystery by an angel. Thence says the Apostle: 'Now we see as through a mirror, but then face to face,' 3 which latter is achieved only by the pure and incorporeal workings of the intellect. 'It is possible by reasoning to come to an understanding of God, if it is attempted without any of the senses, and by reason to strive to what is individual and does not perish from being, until, rising up to the things which which are above, by the mind itself man grasps what is good, being within the bounds of intellectual things,' according to Plato. 4 Clement of Alexandria, The Stromata, Book 5, Chapter 11 1 Gen 22.3-4 2 Baptism, The Three Persons 3 1 Cor 13.12 4 Plato, Repub Bk 7, 532a-b

A Philosopher Warned

Κομπάζεις φιλοσοφίαν ἐχθρὰν τῆς ὄντως σοφίας, καὶ αὐτὸ ἀρνούμενος τὸ τοῦ πράγματος ὄνομα. Οὐδὲν γὰρ ἕτερόν ἐστι φιλοσοφία, ἤ τὸ πάντως φιλεῖν τὴν σοφίαν. Εἰ οὖν ὄντως ἐραστὴς εἶναι βούλει σοφίας, τὴν ὄντως ἀγάπα σοφίαν, οὐ τὸν λόγον μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸν βίον συμνύνουσαν, καὶ τὴν ἀληθῆ θρησκείαν παιδεύουσαν. Ἥν γὰρ αὐτὸς ἐπαγγέλλῃ, καὶ νῦν ὀφλισκάνει γέλωτα, θεότητας καλοῦσα τὰς πηγὰς τῆς αἰσχρότητος, καὶ ἐν τῳ μέλλοντι τιμωρίαν ὠδίνει, ὅπου σοι τοὺς Κωκυτοὺς καὶ Πυριφλεγέθοντας ὁ Πλάτων ἠπείλησεν. Ἅγιος Ἰσίδωρος Του Πηλουσιώτου, Βιβλιον Πρῶτον, Ἐπιστολή ϟϚ' Μαξιμῳ Φιλοσοφῳ Ἐλληνι Source:  Migne PG 78. 248d-249a

The philosophy of which you boast is an enemy of true wisdom and denies itself the name of the deed. For philosophy is nothing but to love wisdom. If, then, you really wish to be a lover of wisdom, love the real wisdom, which is not only a word but even an adornment of life, and a preparation for the true religion. For what you now proclaim, even incurring laughter when it names the founts of shame divine, births punishment in the future, where Cocytus and Pyriphelgethon will await you, as Plato warned. 1 Saint Isidore of Pelusium, Book 1, Letter 96, to Maximus the Philosopher   1 1 Phadeo. 113d

Laughter and Man

Μιμηλοὺς δὲ ἀνθρώπους γελοίων, μᾶλλον δὲ καταγελάτων παθῶν, τῆς ἡμετέρας ἐξελαστέον πολιτείας. Πάντων γὰρ τῶν λόγων ἀπὸ διανοίας καὶ ἤθους ῥεόντων, οὐχ οἶόν τέ ἐστι γελοίους τινὰς προέσθαι λόγους, μὴ οὐχὶ ἀπὸ γελοίου ἤθους φερομένους. Τὸ γὰρ, ' Οὐκ ἔστι δένδρον καλὸν, ποιοῦν καρπὸν σαπρόν· οὐδὲ μὴν δένδρον σαπρὸν ποιοῦν καρπὸν καλὸν,' κανταῦθα ἁρμοστέον· καρπὸς διανοίας γὰρ ὁ λόγος ἐστίν. Εἰ τοίνυν τοὺς γελωτοποιοὺς ἐξοικιστέον τῆς ἡμεδαπῆς πολιτείας, πολλοῦ γε καὶ δεῖ ἡμῖν αὐτοῖς ἐπιτρέπειν γελωτοπειεῖν· ἄτοπον γὰρ, ὦν ἀκροατὰς γενέσθαι κεκώλυται, τούτων εὐρίσκεσθαι μιμητάς. Πολλῷ δὲ ἔτι ἀτοπώτερον, γελοῖον αὐτὸν σπουδὰζειν γενέσθαι, τουτέστιν ἐφυβριστον καὶ καταγελαστον. Εἰ γὰρ γελοίως σχηματισθῆναι, καθάπερ ἐν ταῖς πομπαῖς ὀρῶνται τινες, οὐκ ἂν ὑπομείναιμεν· πῶς  ἂν εἰκότως τὸν ἐντὸς ἄνθρωπον, ἐπὶ τὸ γελοιότερον σχηματιζόμενον, ἀνασχοίμεθα, καὶ εἰς τὸ πρόσωπον; Οὔκουν ἐκόντες ἐπὶ τὸ γελοιότερον μεταστρεψαιμεν ἄν ποτε. Καὶ πῶς ἂν κατὰ τοὺς λόγους ἐπιτηδεύσαιμεν εἶναί τε καὶ φαίνεσθαι γελοῖοι, τὸ τιμιώτερον πάντων τῶν ἐν ἀνθρώποις κτημάτων κατομωκώμενοι, τὸν λόγον; Κλεύη μὲν οὔν ἐπιτηδεύειν ταῦτα ἐπεὶ μηδὲ ὁ τῶν γελοίων λόγος τοῖος ἀιροάσεως ἄξιος, διὰ τῶν ὀνομάτων αὐτῶν ἐπὶ τὰ αἰσχρὰ τῶν ἔργων ἐθίζων· χαριεντιστέον τε, οὐ γελωτοποιητέον. Ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτὸν τὸν γέλωτα ἐπιστομιστέον· καὶ γὰρ αὖ καὶ αὐτὸς, ὅν μὲν δεῖ τρόπον ἐξαγόμενος, ἐμφαίνει κοσμιότητα· μὴ ταύτῃ δὲ χωρῶν, ἀκολασίαν ἐνδείκνυται. Ἁπλῶς γὰρ, ὁπόσα φυσικὰ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἐστὶ, ταῦτα ούκ ἀναιτεῖν ἐξ αὐτῶν δεῖ· μὰλλον δὲ μέτρον αὐτοῖς καὶ καιρὸνἐπιτιθέναι πρέποντα. Οὐ γὰρ ἐπειδὰν γελαστικὸν ζῶον ὁ ἄνθρωπος, γελαστέον τα πάντα· ἐπειδὰν οὐδὲ ὁ ἵππος, χρεμαετιστικὸς ὤν, χρεματίζει τὰ πάντα· ὡς δὲ ζῶα λογικὰ, σφᾶς αὐτοὺς ἁρμοστέον εὐκράτως, τὸ αὐστηρὸν τῆς σπουδῆς ἡμων καὶ τὸ ὑπέρτονον χαλῶντας ἐμμελῶς, οὐκ ἐκλύοντας ἐκμελῶς· Κλημεντος του Αλεξανδρεως, Ὁ Παιδαγωγός, Λόγος Δεύτερος

And those who are imitators of ludicrous things, or rather of ridiculous states, should be driven from our state. 1 For since all speech flows from mind and character, there could not be ludicrous speech unless it proceed from a ludicrous inner state. For when it is said, 'It is not a good tree which produces corrupt fruit, nor a corrupt tree which produces good fruit,'2 one must apply it in these matters, for speech is the fruit of the mind. If, then, buffoons are to be ejected from our state, much more it is necessary that we do not turn to inciting laughter, for it would be absurd to be imitators of things to which we are prohibited to listen. And still more absurd it is to be keen to be ridiculous, that is, the target of insult and derision. For if we could not endure a ridiculous figure, such as we see in some processions, how could we without disgrace have the inner man made ridiculous, and that to one's face? Thus we should never willingly assume a ludicrous character. And how, then, can we take to being and appearing to be ridiculous in conversation, which is the most honourable of all human possessions? It is therefore disgraceful to wish to do this, since the conversation of buffoons is not worthy to be received, as by the very words employed it accustoms one to shameful deeds.  One may be witty, yes, but not a buffoon. But even laughter should be kept under restraint, for when given seasonably it shows orderliness, but when inappropriately it shows a lack of self control. For, in a word, whatever is natural to men one must not take from them, but rather lay down a measure and indicate suitable times. For because man is a animal that laughs does not mean he should be laughing at everything, any more than the horse, which is an animal that neighs, should neigh at everything. But as rational animals we are to control ourselves wisely, harmoniously easing the roughness and strain of our serious affairs, not inharmoniously tearing them apart. Clement of Alexandria, The Teacher, Book 2.  1 cf Plato, Republic Bk 10, 606c -607e 2 Mt 7.18

The Garden of the Soul

Hinc hortum illum sibi Plato composuit, quem Jovis hortum alibi, alibi hortum mentis appellavit. Jovem enim et deum et mentem totius mundi dixit. In hunc introisse animam, quam Venerem nuncupat, ut se abundantia et divitiis hujus horti repleret, in quo repletus potu jaceret porus, qui nectar effunderet. Hoc igitur ex libro Canticorum composuit, eo quod anima Deo adhaerens in hortum mentis ingressa sit, in quo esset abundantia diversarum virtutum, floresque sermonum. Quis autem ignorat quod ex paradiso illo, quem legimus in Genesi habentem lignum vitae, et lignum scientiae boni et mali , et ligna caetera, abundantiam virtutum putaverit transferendam, et in horto mentis esse plantandam? Quem in Canticis canticorum Salomon hortum animae significavit, vel ipsam animam. Sic enim scriptum est: 'Hortus clausus, soror mea sponsa, hortus clausus, fons signatus, transmissiones tuae paradisus.' Et infra ait anima: Exsurge, aquilo, et veni, auster, perfla hortum meum, et defluant unguenta mea. Descendat frater meus in hortum suum. Quanto hoc pulchrius quod anima ornata virtutum floribus hortus sit, vel in se paradisum habeat germinantem. In quem hortum invitat Verbum Dei descendere, ut anima illa Verbi imbre coelestis, et ejus copiis irrigata fructificet. Verbum autem Dei pascitur animae virtutibus,quoties obedientem sibi et opimam invenerit, et carpit fructus ejus, atque his delectatur. Cum autem descenderit in eam Dei Verbum, defluunt ex ea salubrium unguenta verborum, et diversarum flagrant longe lateque redolentia gratiarum spiramina. Sanctus Ambrosius Mediolanensis, De Bono Mortis, Cap V

Hence that garden which Plato arranged, which elsewhere he named the garden of Zeus, or the garden of the mind. For Zeus he named both god and the mind of the whole world. Into this entered the soul, which he called Venus, that it take its fill of the abundance and riches of the garden, in which Plenty replete with drink lay, pouring forth nectar.1 This is derived from the book of the Song of Songs, by which the soul adhering to God enters into the garden of the mind, in which there are an abundance of diverse virtues and flowers of words. For who is ignorant that from that paradise, which we read in Genesis possessed the tree of life, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,2 and other trees, Plato has thought to transfer the abundance of virtues and plant it in the garden of the mind, that which in the Song of Songs Solomon names the garden of the soul, meaning the soul itself? So it is written, 'An enclosed garden, my sister bride, an enclosed garden, a fountain sealed , going though your paradise.'3 And below the soul says, ' Rise up, north wind, and come, south wind, blow through my garden and let flow my scents. Let my brother come down into his own garden.'4 How much more beautiful a garden is a soul adorned with the flowers of virtue, or which in itself has planted paradise. In which garden he invites the Word of God to descend, that the soul with rain of the heavenly Word watered may bear rich fruit. The word of God feeds on the virtues of the soul, as many times as it finds it richly obedient, and he picks its fruit and with them he is delighted. When indeed the Word of God  descends into it, there flows from his salutary words perfumes and a diversity of redolent graces is breathed out far and wide. Saint Ambrose, On the Good of Death, Chap. 5 1 cf Plato, Symposium 203b 2 Gen. 2.8 3 Song 4.12 -13  4 Song 4. 16

Warnings of Hell

Audetis ridere nos, cum gehennas dicimus et inextinguibiles quosdam ignes, in quos animas deici ab earum hostibus inimicisque cognovimus? Quid Plato idem vester in eo volumine, quod de animae immortalitate conposuit, non Acherontem, non Stygem, non Cocytum fluvios et Pyriphlegethontem nominat, in quibus animas adseverat volvi mergi exuri? Et homo prudentiae non pravae et examinis iudiciique perpensi rem inenodabilem suscipit, ut cum animas dicat immortales perpetuas et ex corporali soliditate privatas, puniri eas dicat tamen et doloris adficiat sensu. Quis autem hominum non videt quod sit immortale, quod simplex, nullum posse dolorem admittere, quod autem sentiat dolorem, immortalitatem habere non posse? Nec tamen eius auctoritas plurimum a veritate declinat. Quamvis enim vir lenis et benivolae voluntatis inhumanum esse crediderit capitali animas sententia condemnare, non est tamen absone suspicatus iaci eas in flumina torrentia flammarum globis et caenosis voraginibus taetra. Iaciuntur enim et ad nihilum redactae interitionis perpetuae frustratione vanescunt. Sunt enim mediae qualitatis, sicut Christo auctore compertum est, et interire quae possint deum si ignoraverint, vitae et ab exitio liberari, si ad eius se minas atque indulgentias adplicarint, et quod ignotum est pateat. Haec est hominis mors vera, haec nihil residuum faciens, nam illa quae sub oculis cernitur animarum est a corporibus diiugatio, non finis abolitionis extremus - haec inquam est hominis mors vera, cum animae nescientes deum per longissimi temporis cruciatum consumentur igni fero, in quem illas iacient quidam crudeliter saevi et ante Christum incogniti et ab solo sciente detecti. Arnobius, Adversus Nationes, Liber II, Cap XIV

You dare laugh at us when we speak of hell, and unquenchable fires, into which we have learned that souls are cast by their foes and enemies? Does not your Plato also, in that book which he wrote on the immortality of the soul, name the rivers Acheron, Styx, Cocytus, and Pyriphlegethon, in which he asserts souls are immersed, rolled along, and burned up?1 But though a man of no small wisdom, and of careful judgment and discernment, he has taken up a knotty matter when he says that the soul is immortal, everlasting, and lacking bodily substance and yet says that they are punished and makes them suffer pain. But what man does not see that that which is immortal, which is simple, cannot be subject to any pain, and that, on the contrary, that cannot be immortal which does suffer pain? And yet his opinion does not stray very far from the truth. For although the gentle and benevolent man thought it inhuman to condemn souls to death, he reasonably supposed that they are thrown into fiery rivers blazing with masses of flame, running filthy from their foul abysses. For they are cast in, and being reduced to nothing, vanish vainly into everlasting destruction. For theirs is an intermediate state, as is understood from Christ's teaching, and they may on the one hand perish if they have not known God, and on the other be delivered from life's end if they have heeded His warnings and kindness, that the unknown may be revealed. This is man's true death, this is what leaves nothing behind, for that which is seen by the eyes is but the separation of soul from the body, not the final end, but this, I say, is man's true death, when souls which do not know God shall be consumed in long torment with raging fire, into which fiercely cruel savages will cast them, unknown before Christ, and revealed only by His wisdom. Arnobius, Against the Heathen, Book II, Chapter 14 1 Phadeo. 113d

Knowledge And Union

Ὅλβιος, ὁστις τῆς ἱστορίας ἔσχε μάθησιν, μήτε πολιτῶν ἐπιπημοσύνῃ, μήτ' εἰς ἀδίκους πράξεις ὁρμῶν, ἀλλ' ἀθανάτου καθορῶν φύσεως κόσμον ἀγήρω. πῇ τε συνέστη, καὶ ὅπη, καὶ ὅπως, τοῖς δὲ τοιοὺτοις, οὐδέ ποτ' αἰσχρῶν ἔργων μελέτημα προσίζει.' Εἰκότως οὖν καὶ Πλάτων ' τὸν τῶν ἰδεῶν θεωρητικὸν Θεὸν ἐν ἀνθρώποις ζήσεσθαί φησι· νοῦς δὲ χώρα ἰδεῶν· νοῦς δὲ ὁ Θεός.' Τὸν ἀοπάτου Θεοῦ θεωρητικὸν Θεὸν ἐν ἀνθρώποις ζῶντα εἴρηκεν. Καὶ ἐν τῷ 'Σοφιστῇ' δὲ τὸν Ἐλεάτην ξένον, διαλεκτικὸν ὄντα, ὁ Σωκράτης 'Θεὸν' ὠνόμασεν· 'οἴους τοὺς Θεοὺς ξείνοισιν ἐοικότας ἀλλοδα ποῖσιν, ἐπιφοιτῶντας τοῖς ἄστεσιν. Ὅταν γὰρ ψυχὴ γενέσεως ὑπεξαβᾶσα, καθ' ἑαυτήν γε ᾖ, καὶ ὁμιλῇ τοῖς εἰδεσιν· 'οἶός ἐστιν ὁ ἐν τῷ ' Θεαιτήτῳ' κορυφαῖος· οἶον ἀγγελος ἤδη γενόμενος, σὺν Χριστῷ τε ἔσται, θεωρητικὸς ὤν, ἀεὶ τὸ βούλημα τοῦ Θεοῦ σκοπῶν, τῷ ὄντι. Οἴος πεπνυμένος, τοὶ δ' ὡς σκιαὶ ἀῖσσουσιν. Νεκροὶ γὰρ τοὺς ἑαυτῶν θάπτουσι νεκρούς. Ὅθεν Ἰερεμίας λέγει· 'Πληρώσω αὐτὴν νεκρῶν γηγενῶν, οὐς ἔπαισεν ἡ ὀργή μου. Ὁ μὲν οὖν Θεὸς ἀναπόδεικτος ὦν, οὐκ ἔστιν ἐπιστημονικός· ὁ δὲ Υἰὸς σοφία τέ ἐστι, καὶ ἐπιστήμη, καὶ ἀλήθεια, καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα τούτῳ συγγενῆ. Καὶ δὴ καὶ ἀπόδειξιν ἔχει, καὶ διέξοδον· πᾶσαι δὲ αἱ δυνάμεις Πνεύματος, συλλήβδην μὲν ἔν τι πρᾶγμα γενόμεναι, συντελοῦσιν εἰς τὸ αὐτὸ, τὸν Υἰόν· ἀπαρέμφατος δέ ἐστι τῆς περὶ ἐκάστης αὐτοῦ τῶν δυνάμεων ἐννοίας. Καὶ δὴ οὐ γένεται ἀτεχνῶς ἕν ὡς ἔν, ούδὲ πολλὰ ὡς μέρη ὁ Υἱὸς, ἀλλ' ὡς πάντα ἕν· ἔνθεν καὶ πάντα· κύκλος γὰρ ὁ αὐτὸς πασῶν τῶν δυνάμεων εἰς ἕν εἰλουμένων καὶ ἐνουμένων· διὰ τοῦτο 'Α καὶ Ω' ὁ Λόγος εἴρηται· οὖ μόνου τὸ τέλος ἀρχὴ γίνεται, καὶ τελευτᾷ πάλιν ἐπὶ τὴν ἄνωθεν ἀρχὴν, οὐδαμοῦ διάστασιν λαβών. Διὸ δὴ καὶ τὸ εἰς αὐτὸν καὶ τὸ δι' αὐτοῦ πιστεῦσαι μοναδικόν ἐστι γενέσθαι, ἀπερισπάστως ἐνούμενον ἐν αὐτῷ· τὸ δὲ ἀπιστῆσαι διστάσαι ἐστὶ, καὶ διαστῆναι, καὶ μερισθῆναι. Κλήμης ὁ Ἀλεξανδρεύς, Στρωματεων, Λόγος Τέταρτος, Κεφ ΚΕ' Source: Migne PG 8.1364b-1365c

Happy the one who has the culture of knowledge, and is not driven to the injury of neighbours or to unjust deeds, but beholds the undecaying order of immortal nature, the way it is and how it is and by what, to such a man the care for base deeds does not adhere. Rightly, then, Plato says, 'The man who contemplates the ideas will live as a god among men, and the mind is the place of ideas, and God is mind.' He says that he who contemplates the unseen God lives as a god among men. And in the Sophist, Socrates names the stranger of Elea, who was a dialectician, 'god': 'Such are the gods who, making themselves like foreign guests, come often to cities.' For when the soul, rising above the place of origin, is by itself apart, and is in the company of the ideas, like the Coryphæus in Theaetetus, now being like an angel, it will be with Christ, in contemplation, ever regarding the will of God in reality. 'Alone wise, while others fleet like shadows.' 1 'For the dead bury their dead.' 2 Whence Jeremiah says: 'I will fill it with the earth-born dead whom my anger has struck down.' 3 God, then, being not demonstrable, cannot be the object of knowledge, but the Son is wisdom and knowledge and truth, and all else that has affinity to this. And has demonstration and description, and all the powers of the Spirit, becoming collectively one thing, come to an end in the same, that is, in the Son, but He is not able to be declared, in the ideas of each of His powers. And He is neither simply one thing as one thing, nor is the Son many parts, but he is one thing in all, whence He is all things. For He is the circle of all powers rolled and united into one, by which the Word is called the Alpha and the Omega, of whom alone end becomes beginning, and ends again at the original beginning, having no rupture. Thus to believe in Him and by Him is to become a unit, being indissolubly united in Him, and to disbelieve is to be cut off, disjoined, divided. Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, Book 4, Ch 25 1 Hom. Odyssey, 10.495 2 Mt 8.22 3 Jerem 33.5

Kings of the World

Quid valeat apud homines saeculi eloquentia et sapientia saecularis, testes sunt Demosthenes, Tullius, Plato, Xenophon, Theophrastus, Aristoteles, et caeteri oratores ac philosophi, qui velut reges habentur hominum, et praecepta eorum non ut praecepta mortalium, sed quasi oracula accipuntur deorum. Unde et Plato dicit: Felices fore respublicas, si aut philosophi regnent, aut reges philosophentur. Quam autem difficile istiusmodi homines credant in Deum, ut quotidana exempla praeteream, et sileam de veteribus historiis ethnicorum, sufficit nobis Apostoli testimonium, qui ad Corinthios scribens, ait: ' Videte, frates, vocationem vestram, quia non sunt multi sapientes secundum carnem non multi potentes, non multi nobiles: sed stulta mundi elegit Deus, ut confundant sapientes, et infirma mundi elegit Deus, ut confundant fortia, et ignobilia mundi, et ea quae erant contemptibilia elegit Deus,' et caetera. Unde rursum dicit: 'Perdam sapientiam sapientium, et intelligentiam prudentium reprobabo.' Et: 'Videte, ne quis vos spoliet per philosophiam et inanem seductionem.' Ex quo perspicuum est, praedicationem Christi reges mundi audire novissimos, et deposito fulgore eloquentiae et ornamentis ac decore verborum, totos se simplicitati et rusticitati tradere, et in plebeium cultum redactos sedere in sordibus, et destruere quod ante praedicaverant. Proponamus nobis beatum Cyprianum (qui prius idololatriae assertor fuit, et in tantam gloriam venit eloquentiae, ut oratoriam quoque doceret Carthagini) audisse tandem sermonem Jonae et ad poenitentiam conversum, in tantam venisse virtutem, ut Christum publice praedicaret, et pro illo cervicem gladio flecteret. Profecto intelligimus regem Ninive descendiise de solio suo, et purpuram sacco, unquenta luto, munditias sordibus commutasse: non sordibus sensuum, sed verborum. Unde et de Babylone in Jeremia dicitur: Calix aureus Babylon inebrians omnem terram. Quem non inebriavit eloquentia saecularis? cujus non animos compositione verborum et disertitudinis suae fulgore perstrinxit? Difficile homines potentes et nobiles et divites, et multo his difficilius eloquentes credunt Deo: obcaecatur enim mens eorum divitiis et opibus atque luxuria et circumdati vitiis, non possunt videre virtutes simplicitatemque Scripturae sanctae, non ex majestate sensuum, sed ex verborum judicant vilitate. Cum autem ipsi qui prius mala docuerant, versi ad poenitentiam, docere coeperint bona, tunc videbimus Niniviticos populos una praedicatione converti, et fieri illud quod in Isaia legimus: Si nata est gens semel. Homines quoque et jumenta operta saccis, et clamantia ad Dominum, eodem sensu intellige: quod et rationabiles, et irrationabiles, et prudentes ac simplices ad pradicationem Jonae agant poenitentiam juxta illud, quod et alibi dicitur: 'Homines et jumenta salvabis, Domine.' Possumus autem jumenta operta saccis et aliter interpretari, de his maxime testimoniis, in quibus legimus: Sol et luna induentur sacco. Et in alio loco: Induam coelum sacco, pro lugubri sicilicet habitu et moerore atque moestitia, quae μεταφορικως saccus nominantur. Illud quoque quod dicitur: Quis scit si converatur et ignoscat Deus? Ideo ambiguum ponitur et incertum: ut dum homines dubii sunt de salute, fortius agant poenitentiam, et magis ad misericordiam provocent Deum. Sanctus Hieronimus, Commentarius In Jonam Prophetem

Worldly eloquence and wisdom, the heads of which are Demosthenes, Cicero, Plato, Xenophon, Theophrastus, Aristotle and other orators and philosophers, prevail over men in such a way that they are like kings over men and their precepts are not mortal precepts but they are received like the oracles of the gods. Whence Plato said: States would be happy if either philosophers ruled or kings philosophised. To show how difficult indeed it is for such men to believe in God I shall provide a common example and leave silent the ancient histories of the pagans, for it suffices for us the testimony of the Apostle who writing to the Corinthians said, 'See, brothers, your vocation, because not many of you are wise according to the flesh, nor many powerful, nor many noble, but God chose the stupid of the world to confound the wise, and the weak to confound the strong, and God chose the ignoble of the world and those who are contemptible.' and so on. Again he says, ' I shall destroy the wisdom of the wise and the I shall reprove the intelligence of the prudent.' And: 'Watch lest you are carried off by philosophy and inane seduction.' From all of which it is easy to see that it is most rare for the kings of the world to hear the preaching of Christ, that which, stripped of the blaze of eloquence and the ornamentation and decoration of words, taking to itself all things simple and rustic, sits down among the commoners amid squalor, to destroy what has been preached before. We propose to ourselves blessed Cyprian, he who once was an idolator and who came to such renown in the art of rhetoric that he taught oratory at Carthage, he who hearing a sermon of Jonah was converted to penance and came to such virtue that he preached Christ publicly, for which he was beheaded. This is how we understand the king of Nineveh coming down off his throne, changing his purple for sackcloth, his anointing oils for mud, his elegance for filth, that is, not the filth of meaning but of words. Whence concerning Babylon in Jeremiah it is said:' A golden cup made drunk all the land of Babylon. Who is not made drunk by the eloquence of the world? Whose souls are not touched by such arrangement of words and such brilliance of style? Difficult it is for the powerful and the rich and the noble to believe in God, and more difficult it is for the eloquent, for their minds are blinded by wealth and luxury and they are surrounded by vices so that they are not able to see the virtues and simplicity of the Holy Scriptures, not judging by the majesty by the sense but by the commonness of the words. When those who taught evil turn to penance they have begun to teach the good, so we see the people of Nineveh convert by the preaching of one man and they become that which in Isaiah reads: 'If a nation is born at once.'  That men and animals also put on sackcloth and cried out to the Lord, we understand in the same sense, that even rational and irrational, clever and simple were brought to penance by the preaching of Jonah, so in the Psalms it is said, ' You save men and animals, O Lord.' We are even able to interpret the animals donning sackcloth in the light of other passages in which it is written: Sun and earth put on sackcloth' and in another place, 'The sky shall put on sackcloth' as meaning grieving and weeping and sadness, since sackcloth is used here in a figurative sense. It is also said, ' Who knows if God shall turn and forgive?'  Thus ambiguity and uncertainty are proposed so that while men are doubtful of salvation they might more strongly take to penance and greater provoke the mercy of God. Saint Jerome, Commentary on Jonah

Against the Philosophers

Atque utinam nullas haereses oportuisset existere, ut probabiles quique emicarent. Nihil omnino cum philosophis super anima quoque experiremur, patriarchis, ut ita dixerim, haereticorum, siquidem et ab apostolo iam tunc philosophia concussio ueritatis prouidebatur; Athenis enim expertus linguatam ciuitatem cum omnes illic sapientiae atque facundiae caupones degustasset, inde concepit praemonitorium illud edictum.  Proinde enim et animae ratio per philosophatas doctrinas hominum miscentes aquas uino: alii immortalem negant animam, alii plus quam immortalem adfirmant, alii de substantia, alii de forma, alii de unaquaque dispositione disceptant; hi statum eius aliunde deducunt, hi exitum aliorsum abducunt, prout aut Platonis honor aut Zenonis uigor aut Aristotelis tenor aut Epicuri stupor aut Heracliti maeror aut Empedoclis furor persuaserunt. Deliquit, opinor, diuina doctrina ex Iudaea potius quam ex Graecia oriens. Errauit et Christus piscatores citius quam sophistam ad praeconium emittens. Si qua igitur in hunc modum de nidoribus philosophiae candidum et purum aerem ueritatis infuscant, ea erunt Christianis enubilanda et percutientibus argumentationes originales, id est philosophicas, et opponentibus definitiones caelestes, id est dominicas, ut et illa quibus ethnici a philosophia capiuntur, destruantur, et haec quibus fideles ab haeresi concutiuntur, retundantur.  Tertullianus, De Anima

Would to God that no heresies had existed that the approved might be made manifest. We should then never about the soul have to grapple with philosophers, those patriarchs, for so they may be entitled, of heretics. The Apostle in his own time foresaw that philosophy would do injury to the truth. Having experienced that chattering city of Athens, having tasted all its wisdom and the hawkers of it he coined that monitory edict. This is the account of the soul according to the doctrines of such philosophical men, who mix water with wine: some deny the immortality of the soul, others affirm that it is more than immortal, others give judgement about its substance, others about its form, others about its faculties. One group draws it forth from various sources, while another leads it off to different destinations.In so far as they honour Plato, or the vigour of Zeno, or the way of Aristotle, or the stupor of Epicurus, or the mourning of Heraclitus, or the madness of Empedocles, so are they persuaded. The Divine doctrine errs, I suppose, because it arose in Judea rather than Greece. And Christ made a mistake in sending forth fishermen to preach rather than intellectuals. Therefore whatever fumes of philosophy obscure the bright and pure air of truth, it will be for Christians to clear the clouds by piercing the original arguments, that is, the philosophical ones, and by opposing to them heavenly definitions, that is, those of the Lord, thus that by which philosophy captivates the Gentiles may be destroyed, and that by which the faithful are shaken by heretics may be blunted. Tertullian, On the Soul

Against Astrology

Sed quolibet modo superstitionis haec ab hominibus nuncupentur, sunt tamen sidera quae Deus in mundi principio condidit, ac certo motu distinguere tempora ordinavit. Horum igitur signorum observationes, vel geneses, vel cetera superstitiosa, quae se ad cognitionem siderum coniungunt, id est ad notitiam fatorum, et fidei nostrae sine dubitatione contraria sunt, sic ignorari debent a Christianis, ut nec scripta esse videantur. Sed nonnulli siderum pulcritudine et claritate perlecti in lapsus stellarum caecatis mentibus conruerunt, ita ut per subputationes noxias, quae mathesis dicitur, eventus rerum praescire posse conentur: quos non solum Christianae religionis doctores, sed etiam gentilium Plato, Aristoteles, atque alii rerum veritate conmoti concordi sententia damnaverunt, dicentes confusionem rerum potius de tali persuasione generari. Nam sicut genus humanum ad varios actus nascendi necessitate premerentur, cur aut laudem mereantur boni aut mali legum percipiant ultionem? Et quamvis ipsi non fuerint caelesti sapientiae dediti, veritatis tamen testimonio errores eorum merito perculerunt. Sanctus Isidorus Hispalensis, Etymologiae, Liber III, Caput LXXI Source: Migne PL 82.182c-184a

But by whatever type of superstition the stars were named by men, they were established by God in the beginning of the world, and He ordained that their particular motion distinguish the seasons. Therefore observation of the constellations, or horoscopes, or other superstitions that are attached to the study of the stars, that is, for the knowledge of fate, are without doubt contrary to our faith and should be ignored by Christians, indeed as if it were that they had never been written about. Yet some lured by the beauty and brightness of the constellations, with minds so blinded, have raced into error about the stars, so that through noxious computations, which is called astrology, they try to foresee events. And not only those learned in the Christian religion but even the pagan Plato and Aristotle and others, in harmony of thought, were moved by the truth of things to condemn this, saying that such an idea caused a confusion of things. For if the human species is compelled to various acts by the necessities of birth, then why should the good merit praise and why should the wicked receive the punishment of the laws? Thus though those pagan wise men were not devoted to heavenly matters, they rightly threw down these errors by their testimony of truth. Saint Isidore of Seville, The Etymologies, Book 3, Chapter 71

The Lessons Of Humility

Principium autem disciplinae humilitas est, cuius cum multa sint documenta, haec tria praecipue ad lectorem pertinent: primum, ut nullam scientiam, nullam scripturam vilem teneat, secundum, ut a nemine discere erubescat, tertium, ut cum scientiam adeptus fuerit, ceteros non contemnat. multos hoc decipit, quod ante tempus, sapientes videri volunt. hinc namque in quendam elationis tumorem prorumpunt, ut iam et simulare incipiant quod non sunt et quod sunt erubescere, eoque longius a sapientia recedunt quo non esse sapientes, sed putari putant. eiusmodi multos novi, qui, cum primis adhuc elementis indigeant, non nisi summis interesse dignantur, et ex hoc solummodo se magnos fieri putant, si magnorum et sapientium vel scripta legerint vel audierint verba. 'nos,' inquiunt, 'vidimus illos. nos ab illis legimus. saepe nobis loqui illi solebant. illi summi, illi famosi, cognovertunt nos.' sed utinam me nemo agnoscat et ego cuncta noverim! Platonem vidisse, non intellexisse gloriamini. puto indignum vobis est deinceps ut me audiatis. non ego sum Plato, nec Platonem videre merui. sufficit vobis: ipsum philosophiae fontem potastis, sed utinam adhuc sitiretis! rex post aurea pocula de vase bibit testeo. quid erubescitis? Platonem audistis, audiatis et Chrysippum. in proverbio dicitur: Quod tu non nosti, fortassis novit Ofellus. nemo est cui omnia scire datum sit, neque quisquam rursum cui aliquid speciale a natura accepisse non contigerit. prudens igitur lector omnes libenter audit, omnia legit, non scripturam, non personam, non doctrinam spernit. indifferenter ab omnibus quod sibi deesse videt quaerit, nec quantum sciat, sed quantum ignoret, considerat. hinc illud Platonicum aiunt: Malo aliena verecunde discere, quam mea impudenter ingerere. cur enim discere erubescis, et nescire non verecundaris? pudor iste maior est illo. aut quid summa affectas cum tu iaceas in imo? considera potius quid vires tuae ferre valeant. aptissime incedit, qui incedit ordinate. quidam dum magnum saltum facere volunt, praecipitium incidunt. noli ergo nimis festinare. hoc modo citius ad sapientiam pertinges. ab omnibus libenter disce quod tu nescis, quia humilitas commune tibi facere potest quod natura cuique proprium fecit. sapientior omnibus eris, si ab omnibus discere volueris. Hugonis De Sancto Victore, Didascalicon, Lib III, Cap XIV

The beginning of study is humility, of which there are many teachings, these three pertaining most acutely to the student: first, that he hold no knowledge and no writing as worthless; second, that he blush to learn from no man; third, that when he has achieved knowledge that he not despise others. Many are deceived by wishing to appear wise before their time. Because of this they burst out in a certain bloated importance and begin to pretend to be what they are not and to be ashamed of what they are and so they depart further from wisdom the more they think they are thought wise. I have known many like this who although they still lacked the fundamentals of learning yet took interest only in the greatest things, and they thought themselves great if they had merely read the books or heard the words of the great. 'We,' they would say, 'are acquainted with them. We have read them. Often we have conversed with them. Those great ones, those famous ones, they know us.' I would that no one knew me and I knew all things! You glory in having looked at, not in having understood, Plato. Indeed, then, I think it unworthy of you to listen to me. I am not Plato, I have not deserved to meet him. But it's all good for you! You have drunk at the very fount of philosophy. But would that you still were thirsty! ' After a goblet of gold the king drinks from an earthenware cup!' Why do you blush? You have heard Plato! May you hear Chrysippus, too! It is said in the proverb, "What you do not know, perhaps the farmer Ofellus knows." It is given to no one to know all things, and, on the other hand, there is no one who has not received a special talent from nature. Thus the prudent student gladly hears all, reads all, and does not despise any book, or person, or teaching. From all indifferently he seeks what he sees he lacks, not considering how much he knows, but of how much he is ignorant. For this reason men repeat Plato's saying: 'I would prefer to learn with modesty what another says than shamelessly impose myself.' Why do you blush to learn and yet have no shame over your ignorance? The latter is more disgraceful than the former. Why affect the heights when you are lying in the depths? Better that you ponder what your powers will allow you to accomplish. He advances best who advances in good order. Some who wish to make a great leap fall headlong. So do not be too hasty and in this way you will come more quickly to wisdom. Gladly learn from all what you do not know, for humility is able to make you share in that talent which nature has given to another. You will be wiser than all if you are willing to learn from all. Hugh of St Victor, Didascalion, Book 3, Chapter 14

A Little Literary Criticism

Έκεῖνο γὰρ πάντως συνεϊδε σου ἡ ἀρχίνοια, ὃτι καὶ τῶν ἐξωθεν φιλοσόφων οἱ τοὺς διαλόγους συγγάψαντες, Ἀριστοτέλης μὲν καὶ Θεόφραστος, εὐθυς αὐτῶν ἤψαντο τῶν πραγμάτων, διὰ τὸ συνειδέναι ἐαυτοϊς τῶν Πλατωνικῶν χαρίτων τὴν ἔνδειαν· Πλάτων δέ τῇ ἐχουσίᾳ τοῦ λόγου ὁμοῦ μὲν τοῖς δόγμαστων, ὁμοῦ δὲ καὶ παρακωμῳδεῖ τὰ πρόσωπα, Θρασυμάχου μὲν τὸ θρασὺ καὶ ἰταμὸν διαβάλλων, Ἰππιου δὲ τὸ κοῦφον τῆς διανοίας καὶ χαϋνον, καὶ Πρωταγόρου τὸ ἀλαζονικον καὶ ὑπέρογκον. Ὁπου δὲ ἀόριστα πρόσωπα ἐπεισάγει τοῖς διαλόγοις, τῆς μὲν εὐκρινείας ἒνεκεν τῶν πραγμάτων κέχρηται τοῖς προσδιαλεγομένος οὐδεν δὲ ἒτερον ἐα τῶν προσώπων ἐπεισκυκλεῖ ταῖς ὑποθέσεσεν· ὅπερ ἐποίησεν έν τοῖς Νόμοις. Δεῖ οὖν καὶ ἡμάς τοὺς οὐ κατὰ φιλοτιμίαν ἐρχομένους ἐπὶ τὸ γράφειν, ἀλλ᾽ ὑποθήκας καταλιμπάνειν ὼφελίμων λόγων τῇ ἀδελφότητι προελομένους, ἐὰν μέν τι πάαι προκεκηρυγμένον ἐπι αὐθαδείᾳ τρόπου πρόσωπου ὑποβαλλώμεθα, τινὰ καὶ ἀπὸ προσώπου ποιοτητος παραπλέκειν τῷ λόγῳ, εἴπερ ὅλως ἐπιβάλλει ἡμῖν διαβάλλειν ἀνθρώπους, τῶν πραγμάτων ἀφεμένους. Ἐὰν δὲ ἀόριστον ῇ το διαλεγόμενον, αἰ πρός τὰ πρόσωπα διαστασεις τὴν μὲν συνάφειαν διακόπτουσι, πρὸς οὐδὲν δὲ πέρας χρήσιμον ἀπαντῶσι. Ταῦτα εἴπον ἵνα δειχθῇ, ὅτι οὐκ εἰς κόλακος χεῖρας ἀπέστειλάς σου τοὺς πόνους, ἀλλὰ ἀδελφῷ τῷ γνησιωτατῷ ἐκοινώνησας τῶν καμάτων. Ἐῖπον δὲ οὐ πρὸς ἐπανόρθωθιν τῶν γεγραμμένων, ἀλλὰ πρὸς φυλακὴν τῶν μελλόντων. Ἅγιος Βασίλειος Καισαρείας, Ἐπιστολη Διοδώρῳ, πρεσβυτέρῳ Ἀντιοχείας Source: Migne PG 32.572c-573a

I know that a man of your high intelligence is well aware that the philosophers apart from us composed dialogues, Aristotle and Theophrastus going straight to the heart of the matter, because they were aware of not being endowed with the graces of Plato. But Plato with his talent forwriting, at the same time disputes opinions and makes fun of his characters, criticising the rashness and recklessness of Thrasymachus, the lightness and silliness of mind of Hippias, and the bluster and pride of Protagoras. 1 But when he introduces unknown characters into his dialogues he uses them to make the point clearly and does not admit anything else pertaining to their characters; he does this in the Laws. It is well for us who do not write from vain ambition but from the obligation to give counsel, if we introduce a character well known for willfulness, to include in the piece something that pertains to the character, yet of course we are bound not to slander men. But if the subject is general, digressions directed against individuals break the flow and tend to no useful purpose. This I have said to show that you did not send your work into the hands of a flatterer, but have shared your labour with an understanding brother. And I have spoken not for the correction of what has been written, but as a precaution for the future. Saint Basil of Caesarea, from Letter 135, To Diodoros a Presbyter of Antioch 1 In The Republic, The Greater And Lesser Hippias, and the Protagoras