Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume IV/Against the Heathen/Introduction

Introduction to the

Treatise

————————————

treatise and that

which follows it form in reality two parts of a single work. Jerome

(De Script. Eccl.) refers to them as ‘Adversus Gentes

Libri Duo.’ They are, however, more commonly distinguished by the

titles given them in the present volume. Both books, indeed, are mainly

directed against the Gentiles, but in the present treatise the

refutation is carried out with more special reference to the beliefs

and worship of the heathen. The two books belong to the earlier years

of Athanasius. The Arian controversy which broke out (319 ) probably before his twenty-second year has left no trace upon them (not even c. Gent. 46. 8, see note there). How long before the limit thus fixed the work was composed it is impossible to say with certainty. The hint (c. Gent. 9. 5) that the time for the deification of emperors by decree of the Senate might have come to an end points to the conversion of Constantine as a terminus a quo. And the full maturity of power which marks out the de Incarnatione as a masterpiece of Christian theology inclines us to put the composition as late as we can. Hence the date usually adopted, viz. in or shortly before 318 , the twenty-first year (probably) of Athanasius’ age.

The position of the book in relation to the

general history of the theology of Athanasius and of the Church has

been pointed out in the Prolegomena. It remains to sketch its argument, and tabulate its arrangement: a somewhat more extended summary is prefixed to each section.

His aim is to vindicate (§1) the Dignity and

reasonableness of the Christian Faith. The main vindication of the

Faith is seen in its practical results. But, that these may produce

their proper effect, a removal of error from the mind is needed. Hence

the necessity of refuting idolatry, which is deduced from the same

cause as evil in general, namely, the departure of man from his

original exemplar, the Logos (§§2–5). By the misuse of

his power of conscious choice, man fell (6–8) into the

degradation and illusions (9–15) of idolatry. He then examines

the popular and learned pleas on behalf of idolatry (16–26), and

thus arrives at the central problem of the conception of God. That God

is not Nature is shewn (27–29) by the mutual dependence of the

various constituents of the Universe: no one of these, therefore, can

be God: nor can their totality; for God is not compounded of parts on

which He depends, but is Himself the cause of existence to all. Such a

God as this, the soul of man (30–33) can and, if purified from

sin, will (34) recognise; if her imperfections hinder this, the

spectacle of Reason and Order in the Universe (35–46) will assist

her to recognise the handiwork of God, and the presence of the Logos, and through him the Father. The reclamation and restoration of sinful and degraded man can only be effected (47) by a return to the Logos. This opens the question dealt with in the second book, de Incarnatione.

Such is the general drift of the c. Gentes, and its high interest is beyond question. At the same time it may be admitted that to modern readers much of it fails to commend itself. In the two-fold work before us Athanasius ‘looks before and after.’ The second portion, on the Incarnation, waxes rather than wanes in its significance for modern theology. It is more modern to us than the theology of any generation since then. But the c. Gentes, with its retrospect upon a past utterly dead to the human spirit, its arguments addressed to a range of ideas widely remote from our own, its inadequate view of the genesis and history of heathen religions, its antiquated physics (36, 44, and the φυσικὸς λόγος of 39), its occasional glaring fallacies of argument (16 sub fin., 33. 1), is apt to disappoint the modern student who reads it for the first time. This may explain its not having been translated before now. But while the defects of the book are evident at a glance, it grows upon the reader with repeated study. The moral elevation of its tone,—the firm grasp of central Christian truths,—the sure insight in dealing with such problems as evil and sin,—the relation of God to Nature,—the ethical contrast of Christian theism and heathen polytheism,—the grave humour of such passages as 16. 5; 10. 4 fin.; II. 2 fin., &c.,—and beyond all this a certain largeness of mind and simple unostentatious fervour of conviction, stamp the book as a great one, and as the worthy complement of its more renowned companion.