Syriac Patrology, Volume 3: The Book of Steps

before the advent of Christ, God, having sent prophets from Himself, used to punish the wicked nations resisting Him; for that reason, He not only barred the prophets from perfectionSerm. VII, 1; IX, 1 sq.; XIII, 8., but also rendered them unjust, since no one is just who inflicts evil upon anotherSerm. IX, 3; XXII, 6-12.. Furthermore, Christ abrogated this enmity standing between God and men on account of the sin of Adam, according to the words of Saint PaulEph. II, 14; cf. Col. I, 20., by piercing its wall with the blood of His cross, reconciling those above and those belowSerm. II, VI, 4; IX, 1, 6, 12, 13, 15; XV, 12; XXII, 7..

This opinion of the Author is reduced to two disparate sources. What he teaches about the wall of enmity pierced by Christ, he undoubtedly drew from Saint Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians II, 14. However, since the Author—as will be shown in its proper place—not only diminishes the soteriological salvific momentum of the passion of Christ, but openly denies it, the reason taken from the Epistle to the Ephesians II, 14 to explain the reconciliation of God with men is found to be insufficient. The opinion of our Author—which is clearly blasphemous—that God rendered the prophets unjust by sending them to punish the nations that refused to confess Him, coheres rather with the false notion of justice that he teachesOn this, see below n. 36.. It is entirely Gnostic, as he endeavored to reconcile it with the goodness of God in such a way that he restricted vindictive justice as a divine attribute to the Old Testament, as if God, formerly "just"—that is, punishing His enemies—had become good after the advent of Christ. Therefore, the attribute of justice, formerly ascribed by the Gnostics to the Demiurge creator of the material world, our Author attributes to one and the same divine subject, teaching that the justice of God prevailed before Christ, and goodness after Christ in the divine governanceFlorinus already seems to have been ensnared in such dogmatic difficulties, as the inscription of the letter sent to him by Saint Irenaeus indicates: "On Monarchy, or on the fact that God is not the creator of evils" (cited in Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. V, XX, 1). Compare the words of Philastrius (Haer. LXXIX), who, having rejected the opinion of the Colluthians, who contended that the Lord is not the creator of evils, argues against the error of some other opinion that the Lord is the creator of evils, perhaps Florinus, as Fabricius thinks..

3. Now the doctrine of the Book of Steps concerning the Triune God and divine hypostases must be considered. — The Author not only makes mention of three divine persons, but also knows the name of the Trinity. The just, he says, adore the Lord and His Son and His Holy SpiritSerm. XIII, 3.. — One must pray for all men, that they may live and glorify the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, the perfect Trinity tlitayuta meshallemta perfect trinitySerm. XVI, 10.. — Glory to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit, to the undivided Trinity tlitayuta dela pelga trinity without division, forever and everSerm. XX, 15.. — The name of Jesus is that name through which the Trinity willed to heal the sorrows and wounds of AdamSerm. XXIX, 19..

At first glance, the cited passages persuade us that the Author's doctrine concerning the mystery of the Holy Trinity was very highly developed, especially if you consider that Aphraates, even in the year 345 when he wrote the last Demonstration "On the Cluster," did not know the name "Trinity" (tlitayuta) in that technical sense by which it signifies the triune GodMarginal note 1: Aphraates, Demonstrations II, 134: "Those three glorious and honorable names which have been commanded over your head: Father and Son and Holy Spirit," when you received the sign of your salvation. He could have said much more aptly: "You have the true Holy Trinity..." But neither here nor elsewhere will you find the word tlitayuta in the sense of the triune God in the writings of Aphraates.. Indeed, the Author seems to cite a profession of faith, saying that God, whom he calls the first-born of all creation, had been and existed from the moment His Father had been, from eternity and into eternitySerm. XXX, 4., which words positively propose the doctrine of the Church, the contrary of which was condemned at the Council of Nicaea by the definition: But those who say: there was a time when He was not, and before He was begotten He was not... these the catholic and apostolic church anathematizesDenzinger, Enchiridion symbolorum..

Nevertheless, the whole question is not as straightforward as it appears at first glance. For although the cited doxologies carry a clearly orthodox appearance, the Author sometimes seems to expound the doctrine of the Church concerning the mystery of the Holy Trinity in a Sabellian manner. For the prophets, he says, and all the just could be saved and perfected through the living and holy Spirit, who is the Lord (marya d'itya ruha hayta wqadishta)Serm. IX, 1.. Therefore, the Lord (marya) is, in the mind of the Author, the same as the Holy SpiritCf. Serm. XXVIII, 5: "Holy Spirit who is the Lord." Note that ruha (spirit) is everywhere feminine! Among later Syrians, when ruha designates the third person of the Holy Trinity, it is masculine, undoubtedly so that they might urge the personal subsistence of the Holy Spirit.. However, in the place cited above, where he dealt with the name of Jesus through which the Trinity willed the wounds of Adam to be healed, he adds: For this (viz., the name of Jesus) is the tree of life of the garden of Eden, by which (understand: by which tree) men revive from death, which tree is the lifegiving SpiritSerm. XXIX, 19.; therefore, the name of Jesus = tree of life = Holy Spirit. That the matter is actually so is shown from Sermon XXVI, where the Lord (marya, i.e., the first divine person) promises His incarnation and promises that He will give a new law to men and demonstrate perfection to themSerm. XXVI.. Furthermore, the Author sometimes applies citations taken from the Old Testament, where there is talk of the Lord (marya), to the Lord Jesus without hesitationCf. Serm. XX, 10 sq..