HOMILY VI.] HOMILIES ON PHILIPPIANS. 207 arrange the heresies themselves in order. Would you have them in the order of their impiety, or of their dates? In -the order of time, for it is difficult to judge of the order of their impiety. First then let Sabellius l the Libyan come for ward. What does he assert? that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, are mere names given to one Person. Marcion 2 of Pontus says, that God the Creator of all things is not good, nor the Father of the good Christ, but another right eous one,3 and that he did not take flesh for us. Marcellus, 4 and Photinus, 5 and Sophronius assert, that the Word is an energy, and that it was this energy that dwelt in Him who was of the seed of David, and not a personal substance. Arius confesses indeed the Son, but only in word ; he says that He is a creature, and much inferior to the Father. And others say that He has not a soul. Seest thou the chariots stand ing? See then their fall, how he overthrows them all together, and with a single stroke. How? " Have the same mind in- you," he says, " which was in Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God, counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God." And Paul 6 of Samosata has fallen, and Marcellus, and Sabellius. For he says, " Being in the form of God." If " in the form " how sayest thou, O wicked one, that He took His origin from Mary, and was not before ? and how dost thou say that He was an energy? For it is written, " The form of God took the form of a servant." " The form of a servant," is it the energy of a servant, or the nature of a servant? By all means, I fancy, the nature of a servant. Thus too the form of God, is the nature of God, and therefore not an energy. Behold also Marcellus of Galatia, Sophronius and Photinus have fallen. Behold Sabellius too. It is written, " He counted it not a prize to be on an equality with God." Now equality is not predicated, where there is but one person, for that which is equal hath somewhat to which it is equal. Seest thou not the substance of two Persons, and not empty names without things? Hearest thou not the eternal pre-existence of the Only- begotten ? Lastly, What shall we say against Arius, 7 who asserts the Son is of a different substance ? Tell me now, what means, " He took the form of a servant " ? It means, He became man. Where fore " being in the form of God," He was God. For one " form " and another " form " is named ; 1 See Euseb. vii. 6. His heresy had been held before by Praxeas; he was himself later than Marcion. 2 Euseb. iv. n. Tertullian wrote a treatise against him. Tert. adv. Marc. i. 6. Theod. ii. 6, 8. Socr. it. 19, 20. Theodoret. v. n. Euseb. vii. 27-30. See St. Ath. Disc. i. c. xi. 4. [For the various heretics here ...-ntioned, see in Smith s Diet. Christian Biog., or in the Schafl- Herzog Encyc. of Religious Knowledge. J. A. B.J if the one be true, the other is also. "The form of a servant " means, Man by nature, wherefore " the form of God " means, God by nature. And he not only bears record of this, but of His equality too, as John also doth, that he is no way inferior to the Father, for he saith, " He thought it not a thing to seize,8 to be equal with God." Now what is their wise reasoning? Nay, say they, he proves the very contrary ; for he says, that, " being in the form of God, He seized not equality with God." How ifHe were God, how was He able "to seize upon it"? and is not this without meaning? Who would say that one, being a man, seized not on being a man ? for how would any one seize on that which he is? No, say they, but he means that being a little God, He seized not upon being equal to the great God, Who was greater than He. Is there a great and a little God ? And do ye bring in the doctrines of the Greeks upon those of the Church? With them there is a great and a, lit tle God. If it be so with you, I know not. For you will find it nowhere in the Scriptures : there you will find a greatGod throughout, a little one nowhere. If He were little, how would he also be God? If man is not little and great, but one nature, and if that which is not of this one nature is not man, how can there be a little God and a great one? He who is not of that nature is not God. For He is everywhere called great in Scripture ; " Great is the Lord, and highly to be praised." (Ps. xlviii. i.) This is said of the Son also, for it always calls Him Lord. "Thou art great, and doest wondrous things. Thou art God alone." (Ps. Ixxxvi. 10.) And again, " Great is our Lord, and great is His power, and of His greatness there is no end." (Ps. cxlv. 3.) But the Son, he says, is little. But it is thou that sayest this, for the Scripture says the con trary : as of the Father, so it speaks of the Son ; for listen to Paul, saying, " Looking for the blessed hope, and appearing of the glory of our great God." (Tit. ii. 13.) But can he have said " appearing " of the Father? Nay, that he may the more convince you, he has added with reference to the appearing " of the great God." Is it then not said of the Father? By no means. For the sequel suffers it not which says, "The appearing of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ." 1J See, the Son is great also. How then speakest thou of small and great ? Listen to the Prophet too, calling him " The Messenger 10 ofgreat counsel." (Isa. ix. 6.) "The Messenger of great counsel," is He not great [Rev. Ver. " a prize," a thing seized, or a thing to be seized. - [Chrys. s whole argument shows that he understands thi* pas sage as here translated, after Rev. Ver. Comp. Ellicott on Titus. I A R 1 > See also Jer. xxxii. 18. Some copies of LXX. omit the hitter part of Isa. ix. 6, probably because it was not understood.