CONTRA FATUM

“There is one true and perfect power which is above all things and governs the whole universe. But it rules not by violence and tyrannical dictatorship, which inforces the obedience of its subjects through fear and compulsion." ( Graff, St. Gregory of Nyssa, the Lord’s Prayer, the Beatitudes (Paulist Press; 1953), p. 51) “Μία τῶν πάντων ὑπέρκειται ἡ ἀληθὴς ἐξουσία καὶ δύναμις, ἡ τοῦ παντὸς ἀναδεδεγμένη τὸ κράτος, καὶ βασιλεύουσα οὐ βιαίᾳ τινὶ καὶ τυραννικῇ δυναστείᾳ, φόβοις καὶ ἀνάγκαις ὑποζεύξασα τῇ ὑποταγῇ τὸ ὑπήκοον.” (De or. Dom. III, PG 256)

"It was impossible for Christians to follow the Mosaic law in killing their enemies or those who acted illegaly and were judged to be deserving of death [...] if you took away from the Jews of that time, who had their own political life and country, the power to go out against their enemies and to fight for their traditional customs, and to take life [...] the inevitable consequence would have been their complete and utter destruction [...] But the providence which long ago gave the law, but now has given the gospel of Jesus Christ, did not wish that the practices of the Jews should continue, and so destroyed their city and temple[...]" (Con. Cel. VII,26)

"If a revolt had been the cause of the Christians existing as a separate group (and they originated from the Jews for whom it was lawful to take up arms in defence of their families and to serve in the wars), the lawgiver of the Christians would not have forbidden entirely the taking of human life. He taught that it was never right for his disciples to go so far against a man, even if he should be very wicked; for he did not consider it compatible with his inspired legislation to allow the taking of human life in any form at all." (Con. Cel. III,7)

Jesus with a sword in his mouth. Not in his hand. When we discuss the atonement there are two issues which seem quite unrelated. The one is the traditional discussion within protestantism on whether the atonement is limited or unlimited (i.e. did Jesus die for the salvation of all human beings, or only the elect?). The other is the question whether Jesus died as a payment to an angry God (protestantism) on the one hand, or whether he was God's ransom paid to death (not God) out of love, thereby defeating death, on the other (classical, pre-medieval Christianity).

"Our warfare does not make the living dead, but rather makes the dead to live, because it is conducted in the spirit of meekness and humility. I persecute by word, not by acts. I persecute heresy, not heretics. I would rather be persecuted, than persecute, just as Christ was victorious as Crucified, and not as crucifier."

"After we had thus freely sold ourselves to the deceiver, He who of His goodness sought to restore us to liberty could not, because He was just too, for this end have recourse to measures of arbitrary violence. It was necessary therefore that a ransom should be paid, which should exceed in value that which was to be ransomed; and hence it was necessary that the Son of God should surrender Himself to the power of death. God's justice then impelled Him to choose a method of exchange, as His wisdom was seen in executing it.” (Great Catechism)