Didymus the Blind

Many of those with heretical views divide the Godhead, saying that the demiurge is one God and the Father of Christ another. From this they go on to divide the Scripture and say that the old covenant is of the demiurge and the new covenant of the Father of Christ. In accordance with their blasphemous view, they say that these gods are in opposition to each other, and their scriptures as well; that those who seek refuge in the Lord are enemies of the demiurge and better people obtain the latter; that people of the demiurge have been accused by Christ and his teaching. The present Scripture passage exposes their impiety by bringing in the apostles. After their release from the plot of the high priests and elders, they went to their friends, that is, to those who shared their faith. Together with them they sent up a hymn of thanks to the Creator of heaven and earth, mentioning that he spoke through the mouth of David (in the Holy Spirit, naturally) what is the second psalm, which begins, “Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain?” After all this it is clear that the demiurge and the Father of the Savior is the same God and that both covenants are given by him.

Those heretics who introduce [different] natures [into the argument that some are evil by nature] claim that those people who are called, because of their depravity, “dogs” and “pigs,” are unable to have a share of salvation, and that it is to these that the Savior forbade the giving of what is holy, the divine pearls. They also say that these people, who are called ravenous wolves and foxes along with the names of all the other brute animals, are evil by nature. Their claim is to be refuted from the vision in this passage that none of them is evil by nature but by his intentions. For when God wanted to teach Peter that no one must be rejected as impure and polluting, he sent down from heaven to earth by its four corners a certain vessel similar to a linen cloth, in which were all the species of brute animals, from which Peter was ordered to sacrifice and eat. And, since he still observed the Jewish laws and thought that what he was seeing was physical, he refused to eat, saying that he had never eaten anything impure and unclean. When he had spoken these words, he heard the divine oracle: “What God has purified do not call unclean.” Drawing from this the conclusion that these things were said about the character of people, he said that God had shown him that no one is unclean by his nature. He therefore went without objection to the house of Cornelius, who desired to receive the fruit of the gospel teaching together with all his family. Thus it has been shown that four-footed animals, reptiles and birds, in reference to the different characters of human beings, are acceptable to God. And therefore, not because of an opposing nature has it been forbidden to throw pearls or what is holy to dogs and pigs, but because of the extremely evil character that can be left behind until no dog or pig exists anymore. Thus the Syrophoenician woman was made from a dog into a human being, so that Jesus also granted her the bread of the children.“He fell into a trance,” Scripture says, “and saw the heavens opened.” Those who love to be the disciples of delirious women—those from Phrygia—claiming to be prophets, inspired by the Holy Spirit, do not understand their own utterances at the moment of prophecy. They believe they have proof for their error from this passage of Scripture that Peter fell into a trance. But let the foolish and truly insane know that this word means many different things. For it indicates both the awe at something wondrous, and the action of going out of the tangible world to the spiritual, as well as the delirium of senses, which cannot be applied to Peter or the prophets, but the other meanings of this word can be. For without a doubt, Peter, in a trance, followed along so as to proclaim what he saw and heard and what the signs, which he received, revealed. And you can certainly say the same about all the prophets who followed along with and saw the things that they reported to have seen. Indeed they were wise and learned from the same mouth what they proffered, for the Lord openly commanded them, after his resurrection, to instruct all the nations in his doctrine. So why did the apostles in Jerusalem, after hearing what had been done at the house of Cornelius, argue with Peter?
Clearly Peter, the all-holy leader of the apostles, needed the divine revelation concerning the nations. He did not know that there is no distinction between circumcised and uncircumcised with respect to the faith. Furthermore, he did not clearly know that the Lord called for the nations to be made into disciples apart from the visible worship according to the law until he revealed the mystery of God’s unspoken will and revelation. And through the figure shown by the linen cloth and through the granting of the grace of the Holy Spirit in like manner to the nations according to faith, he made the case that in Christ there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile.

If a teacher, in educating those who are able to profit, harms none of these students, even in this does he imitate Paul. He will say that he is clean of the blood of all his students, meaning that by his teaching he has not slaughtered any through error, as if he had poured out the vital force of his soul, which is allegorically called blood. In addition to this he declares openly that he has set out and announced to them the entire counsel of God. But understood simply the entire counsel of God is incomprehensible to creatures, “for who knows the mind of the Lord?” So we must find out what meaning this passage bears. Now, since we have here the phrase “I announced to you,” it means something different, namely, that [Paul] calls that “entire counsel” what it was possible for humans to say and hear. This interpretation is in agreement with his sentiment that “we know in part,” and this very knowledge is, in relation to the coming age, partial in itself, be it of any sort and of the greatest fullness. It is possible that “the entire counsel of God” means the plan concerning the giving of the law and the prophets and the gospel.

“Take care for yourselves and for the entire flock,” and the following. Since it is not according to nature but according to an appropriation of the power that comes from the Spirit that a person is ordained to the episcopacy by the Holy Spirit for our sake, it is possible for one holding such a position to fall from it, without due care. For if someone were established as a shepherd of the church because of the state of his being, that person would hold whatever office without possibility of change. But it not only says that bishops must pay heed to themselves but also to the flock that the Savior acquired by his blood. And just as he will not fall if he is attentive to himself by taking care for both the requisite virtues and his faith—that is, he will neither start speaking the perverse things of heresies nor follow selfish ambition by attempting to lure Christ’s disciples away in order to imitate himself and follow him—so also he must take care for the flock by turning away from it the wolves who are falsely called apostles and who, being ravenous, live on the ruin of the flock.… Now he turns away these wolves, if he, established by the Holy Spirit to oversee the church, is a good shepherd. A hired man, not being a shepherd, flees when a wolf comes to scatter and kill the sheep. Furthermore, a hired man is no shepherd, since he takes charge of the community for profit and pay, and not come what may. So it is to be realized that the Holy Spirit establishes shepherds and bishops for the church just as God establishes in the church “first apostles,” and the following.