Question agitated in Egypt, as to whether God has a Corporeal Form. Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, and the Books of Origen.

Chapter XI.—Question agitated in Egypt, as to whether God has a Corporeal Form. Thep. 406 ophilus, Bishop of Alexandria, and the Books of Origen.

A question was at this period agitated in Egypt, which had been propounded a short time previously, namely, whether it is right to believe that God is anthropomorphic. ¹⁵⁹⁹ Because they laid hold of the sacred words with simplicity and without any questioning, most of the monks of that part of the world were of this opinion; and supposed that God possessed eyes, a face, and hands, and other members of the bodily organization. But those who searched into the hidden meaning of the terms of Scripture held the opposite; and they maintained that those who denied the incorporeality of God were guilty of blasphemy. This later opinion was espoused by Theophilus, and preached by him in the church; and in the epistle ¹⁶⁰⁰ which, according to custom, he wrote respecting the celebration of the passover, he took occasion to state that God ought to be regarded as incorporeal, as alien to a human form. When it was signified to the Egyptian monks that Theophilus had broached these sentiments, they went to Alexandria, assembled the people together in one place, excited a tumult, and determined upon slaying the bishop as an impious man. Theophilus, however, presented himself to the insurgents forthwith, and said to them, “When I look upon you, it is as if I beheld the face of God.” This address sufficiently mollified the men; yielding their wrath, they replied, “Wherefore, then, if you really hold orthodox doctrines, do you not denounce the books of Origen; since those who read them are led into such opinions?” “Such has long been my intention,” replied he, “and I shall do as you advise; for I blame not less than you do, all those who follow the doctrines of Origen.” By these means he deluded the brethren, and broke up the sedition.

Footnotes

406:1599

Soc. vi. 7.

406:1600

This epistle is no longer extant; it is alluded to by Cassianus in his Collatio, x. 2; Opp. i. p. 821, 822.