Athanasius of Alexandria

Thus fathers often call their sons their servants, yet without denying the genuineness of their nature. In fact, they often affectionately call their own servants children, yet without losing sight of the fact they did purchase them originally. For they use the one appellation from their authority as fathers, but in the other they speak from affection. Thus Sara called Abraham lord, although she was not a servant but a wife. And while the Apostle joined Onesimus the servant to Philemon the master as a brother, Bathsheba called her son a servant even though she was his mother when she said to his father, “Your servant Solomon.” Afterwards also Nathan the Prophet came in and repeated her words to David, “Solomon your servant.” Nor did they mind calling the son a servant, for while David heard it, he recognized the nature of what they were referring to, and even while they said it, they did not forget genuineness [of his sonship], praying that the one they called a “servant” might be made his father’s heir; for to David he was his son by nature.So then, when we read this we interpret it fairly without considering Solomon a servant because we hear him called this. Instead we understand him to be a natural and genuine son. In the same way, if the saints, when referring to the Savior who is confessed to be in truth the Son and the Word by nature, say, “Who was faithful to him that made him,” or if he says of himself, “The Lord created me,” and, “I am your servant and the Son of your handmaid,” and the like, no one should on this account deny that he is proper to the father and from him. Rather, as in the case of Solomon and David, let them think properly about the Father and the Son. For if, though they hear Solomon called a servant, they acknowledge him to be a son, are they not deserving of many deaths, who, instead of preserving the same explanation in the instance of the Lord, whenever they hear “Offspring,” and “Word,” and “Wisdom,” forcibly misinterpret and deny the generation, natural and genuine, of the Son from the Father; but on hearing words and terms proper to a work, immediately condescend to the notion of his being by nature a work and deny the Word—doing this even though it is possible, from his having been made man, to refer all these terms to his humanity? And are they not also proven to be “an abomination to the Lord,” when they use “differing weights” with them, using one set of measurements here and another there in order to blaspheme the Lord? But perhaps they grant that the word “servant” is to be understood in a certain way, but lay stress upon the phrase “who made” as some great support of their heresy. But this argument of theirs also is but a broken reed. For if they are aware of the style of Scripture, they must at once condemn themselves. For as Solomon, though a son, is called a servant, so, to repeat what was said above, although parents refer to the sons springing from themselves as “made” and “created” and “becoming”—in none of these do they deny their nature.

For if it is a bad thing to flee, it is much worse to persecute. The one party hides himself to escape death, the other persecutes with a desire to kill. It is written in the Scriptures that we ought to flee; but he that seeks to destroy transgresses the law and also is himself the occasion of the other’s flight. If then they [the Arians] reproach me with my flight, let them be more ashamed of their own persecution. Let them cease to conspire, and those who flee will immediately cease to do so. But they, instead of giving up their wickedness, are employing every means to obtain possession of my person, not perceiving that the flight of those who are persecuted is a strong argument against those who persecute. For no one flees from the gentle and the humane, but from the cruel and the evil-minded.“Every one that was in distress and every one that was in debt” fled from Saul and took refuge with David. But this is the reason why these men [those persecuting Athanasius] desire to cut off those who are in concealment, that there may be no evidence forthcoming of their own wickedness. But in this their minds seem to be blinded with their usual error. For the more the flight of their enemies becomes known, so much the more notorious will be the destruction or the banishment which their treachery has brought upon them. So whether they kill them outright, their death will be the more loudly noised abroad against them, or whether they drive them into banishment, they will but be sending forth everywhere monuments of their own iniquity.

For we ought to walk by the standard of the saints and the fathers, and imitate them, and to be sure that if we depart from them we put ourselves also out of their fellowship. Whom then do they wish you to imitate? The one who hesitated, and while wishing to follow, delayed the decision and took counsel because of his family? Or blessed Paul, who, the moment the stewardship was entrusted to him, “did not immediately consult with flesh and blood”? For although he said, “I am not worthy to be called an apostle,” yet, knowing what he had received and fully aware of the giver, he wrote, “For woe is me if I do not preach the gospel.” But, as it was “woe to me” if he did not preach, so, in teaching and preaching the gospel, he had his converts as his joy and crown. This explains why the saint was zealous to preach as far as Illyricum and did not shrink from proceeding to Rome or even going as far as the Spains, in order that the more he labored, he might receive so much the greater reward for his labor. He boasted then that he had fought the good fight and was confident that he should receive the great crown.

It is encouraging to the faithful but distressing to the heretical to see these heresies overthrown. Moreover, their further question, “whether the Unoriginated be one or two,” shows how false are their views, how treacherous and full of guile. It is not for the Father’s honor that they say this but for the dishonor of the Word. Accordingly, if any one should answer, unaware of their craft, that “the Unoriginated is one,” they immediately spurt out their own venom, saying, “ ‘Therefore the Son is among things originated,’ and well have we said, ‘He was not before his generation.’ ” This in turn elicits all sorts of disturbances and confusions, separating the Son from the Father and reckoning the Framer of all among his works. Now first they may be convicted on this score, that, while blaming the Nicene bishops for their use of phrases not in Scripture, though these are not injurious but subversive of their irreligion, they themselves went off upon the same fault, that is, using words not in Scripture, and those that show contempt for the Lord, being “without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions.”